| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums 14:48 - Jul 23 with 3171 views | NthQldITFC |
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/art
'It added that in its own poll, the majority of millionaires wanted a higher tax on themselves.
"There are a few people left with outdated economic thinking and few others desperate to hold onto every penny they can... Those that can't see past the end of their own self interest have no place in designing a Britain for the future," the letter said.'
It's often the money-obsessed who are trying to claw their way up who have an anti-social, visceral aversion to fair, beneficial taxation.
Sh!t response from Badenoch. |  |
| |  |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 00:30 - Jul 24 with 587 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 19:12 - Jul 23 by nrb1985 |
What's so imaginative about your position of simply wanting people to pay more tax? |
It’s more of a case of the likes of Lineker that have spent their career ensuring tax efficiency and say the rich need to pay more tax. He’s had the privilege of earning more in a year than many will earn in a lifetime but took HMRC to court. I could set myself up as a ‘consultant’ and pay half as much tax but it’s not the right thing to do.
Welcome to TWTD where writing a nice letter is better than paying actual tax. I probably do 8 flights a year but like King Charles maybe I’ll set myself up as an environmental campaigner words are far more important than actions. [Post edited 24 Jul 0:44]
|  | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 00:40 - Jul 24 with 568 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 00:24 - Jul 24 by Libero |
You might want to read the latest news story… |
Link please - if he’s paying over 50pc effective then fair play. If so not its weird to bring a court case against paying more tax? | | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 00:48 - Jul 24 with 542 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 00:30 - Jul 24 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
It’s more of a case of the likes of Lineker that have spent their career ensuring tax efficiency and say the rich need to pay more tax. He’s had the privilege of earning more in a year than many will earn in a lifetime but took HMRC to court. I could set myself up as a ‘consultant’ and pay half as much tax but it’s not the right thing to do.
Welcome to TWTD where writing a nice letter is better than paying actual tax. I probably do 8 flights a year but like King Charles maybe I’ll set myself up as an environmental campaigner words are far more important than actions. [Post edited 24 Jul 0:44]
|
Reuser clearly happy with millionaires paying a lower tax rate. I wonder how much he cost tax payers in HMRC defending the tax case.
Money which could have gone to a pay rise to my wife in the NHS that the state had to pay to a millionaire. Unbelievable. | | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 02:27 - Jul 24 with 496 views | Libero |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 00:40 - Jul 24 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Link please - if he’s paying over 50pc effective then fair play. If so not its weird to bring a court case against paying more tax? |
…it’s literally the first thing on the thread? |  | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 07:48 - Jul 24 with 395 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 22:58 - Jul 23 by Libero |
I had a peep to see what was being said- quelle surprise, indeed.
As I say, when people have a poor opinion of Lineker, it's a great barometer.
As for the link, anyone unaware of the actual story- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/art |
If a famous sports presenter shared a video which featured an image of a person of colour portrayed as a monkey, then I think you’d be less forgiving of them than you are with Gary Lineker.
Lest we forget that Lineker has recently taken to sharing content from MAGA loon, Jew hater and Putin apologist Tucker Carlson.
When posters ignore or excuse people sharing Nazi grade antisemitic tropes, I find it to be a great barometer of someone. [Post edited 24 Jul 8:03]
|  |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:34 - Jul 24 with 347 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 17:53 - Jul 23 by chicoazul |
The solution is always the same; more tax. More more ever more. These people have no imagination they only understand growing the governments income. We pay more tax than ever in modern history. But muh covid! Muh financial crash 2008!
Old thinking again and again and again. |
You realise we have an ever changing demographic which requires more tax to look after older and sicker people. Especially if the effects of the demographic change are not mitigated by immigration.... | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:40 - Jul 24 with 340 views | positivity |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 00:30 - Jul 24 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
It’s more of a case of the likes of Lineker that have spent their career ensuring tax efficiency and say the rich need to pay more tax. He’s had the privilege of earning more in a year than many will earn in a lifetime but took HMRC to court. I could set myself up as a ‘consultant’ and pay half as much tax but it’s not the right thing to do.
Welcome to TWTD where writing a nice letter is better than paying actual tax. I probably do 8 flights a year but like King Charles maybe I’ll set myself up as an environmental campaigner words are far more important than actions. [Post edited 24 Jul 0:44]
|
if you were the chancellor trying to pay for the defence of the nation and the ever-increasing pension/social /health care budget of an ageing population would you rather
a) receive a voluntary, unpredictable donation from a handful of millionaires?
b) receive regular, predictable tax from all billionaires and many millionaires who are well able to pay it?
people are getting far too fixated on the personalities rather than the policies.
we have to pay our way, and those of us with the broadest shoulders need to step up [Post edited 24 Jul 9:40]
| |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:43 - Jul 24 with 333 views | nrb1985 |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:34 - Jul 24 by redrickstuhaart |
You realise we have an ever changing demographic which requires more tax to look after older and sicker people. Especially if the effects of the demographic change are not mitigated by immigration.... |
Yes, we all realise that which is why lots of people now advocate for a French style insurance system.
Of course the Politicians can't say that part out loud because we must not upset the boomers must we... | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:54 - Jul 24 with 297 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:40 - Jul 24 by positivity |
if you were the chancellor trying to pay for the defence of the nation and the ever-increasing pension/social /health care budget of an ageing population would you rather
a) receive a voluntary, unpredictable donation from a handful of millionaires?
b) receive regular, predictable tax from all billionaires and many millionaires who are well able to pay it?
people are getting far too fixated on the personalities rather than the policies.
we have to pay our way, and those of us with the broadest shoulders need to step up [Post edited 24 Jul 9:40]
|
Indeed. Running our nation is getting more expensive. Medicine and tech is more expensive than it used to be. The population is getting older and has more issues.
We have three options. Mass immigration of younger economically active people or more tax, or cutting key services and seeing everything deteriorate.
A wealth tax of 2% on people with £10m plus is entirely reasonable if it is workable. Someone with £20m would pay £200k. Equally someone with £20m is likely earning well over £1m a year in growth / investments without having to do anything at all. | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:58 - Jul 24 with 292 views | positivity |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:43 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
Yes, we all realise that which is why lots of people now advocate for a French style insurance system.
Of course the Politicians can't say that part out loud because we must not upset the boomers must we... |
the right-wing will never want to upset the boomers as that's where their main voting bloc is. | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:59 - Jul 24 with 290 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:43 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
Yes, we all realise that which is why lots of people now advocate for a French style insurance system.
Of course the Politicians can't say that part out loud because we must not upset the boomers must we... |
We dont need a change of system. The increased costs do not naturally lead to the french insurance system.... | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:00 - Jul 24 with 288 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:58 - Jul 24 by positivity |
the right-wing will never want to upset the boomers as that's where their main voting bloc is. |
Not for much longer... But yes, thats certainly part of the problem. | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:07 - Jul 24 with 272 views | nrb1985 |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:59 - Jul 24 by redrickstuhaart |
We dont need a change of system. The increased costs do not naturally lead to the french insurance system.... |
Lots of people who are very well qualified to comment would disagree with you. | | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:09 - Jul 24 with 268 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:07 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
Lots of people who are very well qualified to comment would disagree with you. |
There may be other arguments for it. But the fact that its getting more expensive to run the country due to demographic change does not lead to that as a reasoned conclusion without far far more.
What is the best actual reason? | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:10 - Jul 24 with 266 views | positivity |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:07 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
Lots of people who are very well qualified to comment would disagree with you. |
and lots of people who are very well qualified to comment would agree with them! it's certainly not a natural consequence of the facts | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:10 - Jul 24 with 266 views | nrb1985 |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 09:58 - Jul 24 by positivity |
the right-wing will never want to upset the boomers as that's where their main voting bloc is. |
Starmer is hardly right wing and reversed winter fuel cuts because he was so terrified of the boomers. | | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:14 - Jul 24 with 246 views | nrb1985 |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:10 - Jul 24 by positivity |
and lots of people who are very well qualified to comment would agree with them! it's certainly not a natural consequence of the facts |
I don't disagree - it was your mate though who so definitively said we don't need a change of system.
I'm merely pointing out lots of qualified people do think we need a change of system. | | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:15 - Jul 24 with 244 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:14 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
I don't disagree - it was your mate though who so definitively said we don't need a change of system.
I'm merely pointing out lots of qualified people do think we need a change of system. |
Not the old "im just asking the question" line!
You are clearly advocating for it. Why? | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:21 - Jul 24 with 234 views | nrb1985 |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:15 - Jul 24 by redrickstuhaart |
Not the old "im just asking the question" line!
You are clearly advocating for it. Why? |
Because other countries that use an insurance model, many of which I've lived in, deliver far better outcomes.
Japan, Singapore, Switzerland and the UAE to name four. | | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:24 - Jul 24 with 223 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:21 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
Because other countries that use an insurance model, many of which I've lived in, deliver far better outcomes.
Japan, Singapore, Switzerland and the UAE to name four. |
How does a private model use the money better? And avoid selectiveness? | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:26 - Jul 24 with 208 views | positivity |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:10 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
Starmer is hardly right wing and reversed winter fuel cuts because he was so terrified of the boomers. |
however badenoch and farage would never have introduced a policy which isn't pandering to the richer boomers | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:32 - Jul 24 with 176 views | positivity |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:21 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
Because other countries that use an insurance model, many of which I've lived in, deliver far better outcomes.
Japan, Singapore, Switzerland and the UAE to name four. |
those 4 aren't remotely comparable in terms of size, resources, tax systems and acceptance of immigration.
moving to a private insurance system, when people have been paying into the system all their lives would be a massive upheaval, that the country would not cope with. | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:33 - Jul 24 with 172 views | nrb1985 |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:24 - Jul 24 by redrickstuhaart |
How does a private model use the money better? And avoid selectiveness? |
I have no idea without doing a deep dive on that. And each country will be different.
But those on an insurance system, for the most part, deliver better patient outcomes vs. the UK. That's a not really a debate.
Central point is really removing the burden for healthcare from Governments that have to think in 5 year election cycles - increasingly though that's more like 2 year cycles now... [Post edited 24 Jul 10:33]
| | | |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:37 - Jul 24 with 145 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:33 - Jul 24 by nrb1985 |
I have no idea without doing a deep dive on that. And each country will be different.
But those on an insurance system, for the most part, deliver better patient outcomes vs. the UK. That's a not really a debate.
Central point is really removing the burden for healthcare from Governments that have to think in 5 year election cycles - increasingly though that's more like 2 year cycles now... [Post edited 24 Jul 10:33]
|
If you have no idea, why advocate for it?
I dont accept that there is no debate on outcomes. We pay significantly less than the french per capita, so would expect lesser outcomes for that reason. Correlation is not causation. | |
| |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:48 - Jul 24 with 121 views | positivity |
| Well said, the boy Line-acher and chums on 10:37 - Jul 24 by redrickstuhaart |
If you have no idea, why advocate for it?
I dont accept that there is no debate on outcomes. We pay significantly less than the french per capita, so would expect lesser outcomes for that reason. Correlation is not causation. |
plus french spending on admin is nearly 3 times ours, so it's not more efficient.
there is no perfect system, but the plain fact is that the more money you put in, the more you get out | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
