| Children in Need 18:47 - Nov 17 with 20945 views | gtsb1966 |
Does anyone listen to radio 2 in the mornings. They had appeals from children who benefit from this event. You couldn't help but listen with a lump in your throat. Life can be so cruel. Their enthusiasm and determination was a lesson to us all. Made me realise I've got nothing to complain about. |  | | |  |
| Here he is ! on 07:01 - Nov 18 with 2994 views | Benters |
| Children in Need on 06:54 - Nov 18 by factual_blue |
Don't worry Benters, he hasn't stolen your crown as Queen of the Trolls. |
Bodgers wingman! |  |
| |
| Children in Need on 07:27 - Nov 18 with 2980 views | m14_blue |
| Children in Need on 23:19 - Nov 17 by bournemouthblue |
That £3 million Lewis Hamilton saved was put to a good cause wasn't it?
Just because you can get away with it, doesn't make it any more morally reprehensible
We need a culture of giving something back rather than pure capitalist greed, we really have lost the plot in this country |
Exactly this.
Multi, multi millionaires avoiding tax on their private jets, tax that should have been used to help the most vulnerable in our society, is morally repugnant. I don't understand why there's always a queue of people desperate to defend them when the issue comes up.
Is might not currently be illegal, that's why no one's suggesting they should go to jail, but it's disgusting. |  | | |
| Children in Need on 07:33 - Nov 18 with 2976 views | Ely_Blue |
| Children in Need on 07:27 - Nov 18 by m14_blue |
Exactly this.
Multi, multi millionaires avoiding tax on their private jets, tax that should have been used to help the most vulnerable in our society, is morally repugnant. I don't understand why there's always a queue of people desperate to defend them when the issue comes up.
Is might not currently be illegal, that's why no one's suggesting they should go to jail, but it's disgusting. |
Ok I’ll put this to you, everything is proportionate right? If you earn more you pay more tax on your earnings than anyone else (50%+?). Does your employer offer you any kind of salary sacrifice scheme to pay for childcare vouchers, cycle to work or season ticket loans for train travel? If you take advantage of these you are also legally avoiding tax and national insurance, now these are small scale “legal”loopholes too, sure they are not on the same grand scale as Lewis Hamilton and his multi million pound tax avoidance but as I said at the start it’s all relevant depending on how much you earn. To a family earning £50k a year the above savings can be quite a bit per year if you take advantage of them all. So do you lump all of these people in with the multi millionaires? After all they are taking part in the same “disgusting”things that you say are “morally repugnant”aren’t they?
Would love to hear your thoughts! |  |
| |
| Children in Need on 07:56 - Nov 18 with 2971 views | m14_blue |
| Children in Need on 07:33 - Nov 18 by Ely_Blue |
Ok I’ll put this to you, everything is proportionate right? If you earn more you pay more tax on your earnings than anyone else (50%+?). Does your employer offer you any kind of salary sacrifice scheme to pay for childcare vouchers, cycle to work or season ticket loans for train travel? If you take advantage of these you are also legally avoiding tax and national insurance, now these are small scale “legal”loopholes too, sure they are not on the same grand scale as Lewis Hamilton and his multi million pound tax avoidance but as I said at the start it’s all relevant depending on how much you earn. To a family earning £50k a year the above savings can be quite a bit per year if you take advantage of them all. So do you lump all of these people in with the multi millionaires? After all they are taking part in the same “disgusting”things that you say are “morally repugnant”aren’t they?
Would love to hear your thoughts! |
No, I don't lump these people in with the multi millionaires avoiding tax on their private jets. I would have thought that was fairly obvious.
I understand there are all sorts of problems and complications in how to legislate against this but that's not the point I'm making.
It's morally indefensible. | | | |
| Children in Need on 08:12 - Nov 18 with 2955 views | gtsb1966 |
£50,000,000 raised so far and rising. Fantastic. | | | |
| Children in Need on 08:17 - Nov 18 with 2949 views | TLA |
| Children in Need on 22:05 - Nov 17 by Ely_Blue |
Why are they tax dodgers? If the law allows for tax avoidance legally can you blame them for taking advantage? Please don’t tell me if you were able to legally avoid paying tax of some sort that you would say “oh no thank you I don’t want to keep £x extra per year, hey mr chancellor please take my money from me”.
People who complain about tax avoidance are just jealous that they can’t do this themselves |
I've been given lots of advice on how to legally reduce the amount of tax I pay but choose not to, as does my business partner.
I don't always agree with how 'Mr Chancellor' spends my tax, but I should pay it and I do.
I don't expect everyone to feel the same but I genuinely live by my own set of values. I won't ever be rich when measured by what's in my bank but, to me, money is not the only path to happiness. |  | | |
| Children in Need on 09:31 - Nov 18 with 2918 views | Ely_Blue |
| Children in Need on 07:56 - Nov 18 by m14_blue |
No, I don't lump these people in with the multi millionaires avoiding tax on their private jets. I would have thought that was fairly obvious.
I understand there are all sorts of problems and complications in how to legislate against this but that's not the point I'm making.
It's morally indefensible. |
Sorry it’s not “fairly obvious” as I said everything is relevant to what you are able to earn, does saving tax on childcare etc allow you to enjoy a nice holiday or weekend away that you wouldn’t be able to afford? That would be the working persons version of a private jet? All at the expense of paying less tax!
If it’s morally wrong for one then it’s morally wrong for all, it’s just the level of money that is different | |
| |
| Children in Need on 09:45 - Nov 18 with 2907 views | m14_blue |
| Children in Need on 09:31 - Nov 18 by Ely_Blue |
Sorry it’s not “fairly obvious” as I said everything is relevant to what you are able to earn, does saving tax on childcare etc allow you to enjoy a nice holiday or weekend away that you wouldn’t be able to afford? That would be the working persons version of a private jet? All at the expense of paying less tax!
If it’s morally wrong for one then it’s morally wrong for all, it’s just the level of money that is different |
Ok, we'll have to agree to disagree.
I think context is all important. However, if you're saying that all tax avoidance is morally wrong then I wouldn't really argue with that, I'm certainly not here to defend the lower level cases either. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Children in Need on 09:50 - Nov 18 with 2901 views | gordon |
| Children in Need on 09:31 - Nov 18 by Ely_Blue |
Sorry it’s not “fairly obvious” as I said everything is relevant to what you are able to earn, does saving tax on childcare etc allow you to enjoy a nice holiday or weekend away that you wouldn’t be able to afford? That would be the working persons version of a private jet? All at the expense of paying less tax!
If it’s morally wrong for one then it’s morally wrong for all, it’s just the level of money that is different |
You're fundamentally wrong here.
When the government introduces a policy like the bike to work scheme, or tax-free childcare, it's because parliament, who we elect, has decided that a segment of society ought to or deserves to pay less tax on something, and it will benefit society if they receive these tax breaks.
In the case of Lewis Hamilton's private jet, the tax system is designed to recoup 20% VAT on private jets. Lewis Hamilton is trying to avoid paying this using a network of offshore companies in the Isle of Man, Guernsey and the Virgin Islands, which is being investigated for legality by HMRC.
In Lewis Hamilton's case, there is no suggestion that the tax system is designed to allow him to pay 0% VAT in private jets, or that society will benefit if he does so.
So the two examples are entirely different, and you're arguments on this are about as strong as overcooked spaghetti, I'm afraid. [Post edited 18 Nov 2017 9:51]
|  | | |
| Children in Need on 09:54 - Nov 18 with 2897 views | Herbivore |
| Children in Need on 07:33 - Nov 18 by Ely_Blue |
Ok I’ll put this to you, everything is proportionate right? If you earn more you pay more tax on your earnings than anyone else (50%+?). Does your employer offer you any kind of salary sacrifice scheme to pay for childcare vouchers, cycle to work or season ticket loans for train travel? If you take advantage of these you are also legally avoiding tax and national insurance, now these are small scale “legal”loopholes too, sure they are not on the same grand scale as Lewis Hamilton and his multi million pound tax avoidance but as I said at the start it’s all relevant depending on how much you earn. To a family earning £50k a year the above savings can be quite a bit per year if you take advantage of them all. So do you lump all of these people in with the multi millionaires? After all they are taking part in the same “disgusting”things that you say are “morally repugnant”aren’t they?
Would love to hear your thoughts! |
Purchasing something for work purposes - which all of the schemes you mention are examples of - always has been legitimately tax deductible. If you need a rail season ticket to get to work and that can be deducted from your salary you're saving a relatively small amount in terms of tax and avoiding tax is not the primary motivation, spreading the cost of work travel interest-free is the motivation. I can't believe you think these kind of schemes are comparable to the complex tax avoidance practiced by the wealthy which had no aim or benefit other than reducing tax liability. You're comparing apples and oranges. Just own that you would happily be an immoral scumbag if you had the resources to do so rather than tarring everyone with the same brush. |  |
| |
| Children in Need on 10:59 - Nov 18 with 2870 views | Ryorry |
| Children in Need on 08:17 - Nov 18 by TLA |
I've been given lots of advice on how to legally reduce the amount of tax I pay but choose not to, as does my business partner.
I don't always agree with how 'Mr Chancellor' spends my tax, but I should pay it and I do.
I don't expect everyone to feel the same but I genuinely live by my own set of values. I won't ever be rich when measured by what's in my bank but, to me, money is not the only path to happiness. |
Quite, well said and well done.
When I posted here some months ago that I would be willing to pay an extra 1 or 2p on a tax that went directly to help fund the NHS and/or social services home care for disabled or elderly people, I think most of those who replied (80% at least, can't recall exactly) said they would be too. |  |
| |
| Children in Need on 11:06 - Nov 18 with 2867 views | Ryorry |
| Children in Need on 06:22 - Nov 18 by TLA |
Good point Ryorry.
I think there is a good discussion to be had about Children in Need, just like there is with food banks and lots of other charitable causes. It just seems like the discussions on here degenerate into stuff that detracts from the point being made.
I liked the meme that someone posted ages ago, raising the point that we could give the billions spent on Trident to support vulnerable children and then have a telethon to raise money for nuclear weapons. I know life isn't that simple but it makes an interesting discussion point.
However, things turn sour between people so quickly. It surprises me because everyone I've met or talked to away from the board seem brilliant and I love chatting to people 1-1 who all have very different outlooks.
Different views are fine if there's a bit of respect. |
Quite (again!). Maybe it's just t'internet?
Love the idea about spending on CIN and then leaving Trident to a telethon - my suggestion for the first bit of film for that would be Dr Strangelove!
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/dr_strangelove/quotes/ | |
| |
| Children in Need on 13:31 - Nov 18 with 2826 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Children in Need on 10:59 - Nov 18 by Ryorry |
Quite, well said and well done.
When I posted here some months ago that I would be willing to pay an extra 1 or 2p on a tax that went directly to help fund the NHS and/or social services home care for disabled or elderly people, I think most of those who replied (80% at least, can't recall exactly) said they would be too. |
All very admirable Ryorry, and I don't doubt your sincerity, but I think if you asked most people would they be prepared to pay an extra penny or two if it went towards the NHS or social care. But their words are generally hollow when this is put into practice.
A prime example being the revolt against the Chancellor last year when he tried to bring self employed NI contributions into line with employed people with the express intention of funding social care. |  |
| |
| Children in Need on 14:11 - Nov 18 with 2820 views | BlueBadger |
| Children in Need on 04:53 - Nov 18 by Benters |
I see... King of the Trolls doing his best work again! |
You were much more fun when you were trying to be TB rather than you are now you've decided to try sucking up to all these nazi-excusing snowflakes*.
You could occasionally take a bit of piss taking then.
*GTSB not included here, in case of confusion. [Post edited 18 Nov 2017 15:57]
|  |
| |
| Children in Need on 14:16 - Nov 18 with 2804 views | Benters |
| Children in Need on 14:11 - Nov 18 by BlueBadger |
You were much more fun when you were trying to be TB rather than you are now you've decided to try sucking up to all these nazi-excusing snowflakes*.
You could occasionally take a bit of piss taking then.
*GTSB not included here, in case of confusion. [Post edited 18 Nov 2017 15:57]
|
Great stuff. | |
| |
| Children in Need on 19:00 - Nov 18 with 2773 views | gordon |
| Children in Need on 13:31 - Nov 18 by GlasgowBlue |
All very admirable Ryorry, and I don't doubt your sincerity, but I think if you asked most people would they be prepared to pay an extra penny or two if it went towards the NHS or social care. But their words are generally hollow when this is put into practice.
A prime example being the revolt against the Chancellor last year when he tried to bring self employed NI contributions into line with employed people with the express intention of funding social care. |
The revolt against the Chancellor was basically from Conservative MPs and sections of the Press though wasn't it, it wasn't voted down by the country. | | | |
| Children in Need on 19:47 - Nov 18 with 2758 views | Melford |
Never saw Jimmy Savile on Children In Need, even though he was a main TV presenter, whose show made Children's dreams come true.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/jimmy-savile/9641109/Jimmy-Savile-w
Banned him from Children In Need because he was a wrong 'un, but did nothing else about it. Spineless, the same people were bleating how bad he was after he'd snuffed it, but did nothing to expose him when he was alive. |  |
| |
| Children in Need on 21:26 - Nov 18 with 2727 views | stickymockwell |
Did you see the VT of the girl called Vanessa last night. She was the girl in GOS who loved to sing. I cried so hard I couldn't look at my wife. The bravery of some children is beyond me. I'd love to get involved in community projects for kids when my own are older. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
