Are the Unions damaging Labour's chance of election in 2015?

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:You chose a way of deriving income (gambling) that deliberately allowed you to avoid paying any tax.

With an education half as impressive as you make out you have, getting a job is far from impossible, so don't make out like you're some hard-up serf continually screwed by 'the man' and condemned to a life of welfare dependency and turnip eating.

IF, you are to be believed, then your weekly income was more than I was getting as a grad when I first started work in 2007 and I paid tax and NI on that.

Uunder UK taxation laws gambling profits are not subject to tax. It is physically impossible for me to pay tax on my gambling profits even if I wanted to as it is illegal for the tax man to collect any tax on gambling profits. I do make donations to charity however (nspcc).

You keep talking about me not paying income tax on my gambling profits and that is just highlighting your limited knowledge of taxation laws. Income tax is a tax on income derived from employment, going to the casino and putting £100 on number 18 on roulette and winning is not a form of employment and thus is not subject to income tax. You attacking me constantly for not paying income tax on my gambling profits is as silly as you saying I should pay capital gains tax on gambling profits or corporation tax because all of those taxes have no relevance to gambling profits.

Perhaps you are in favour of taxing gambling profits but that would mean everyone who wins £10 on a scratch card has to pay tax on it or an old granny winning £40 at bingo has to pay tax on it or a few lads heading to the casino to play blackjack on a saturday night and get lucky and win £100 have to pay tax on it.

If you are going to tax gambling profits because the gambler has managed to increase their capital then you need to also offer tax breaks for gambling losses because the gambler has reduced their capital.

But like I said it is physically impossible in the Uk to pay tax on any gambling profits and once again the fact you keep talking about me avoiding tax on gambling just shows your lack of knowledge of taxation laws. You can't avoid a tax that does not exist.

My tax law knowledge is fine thank-you. None of the pretentious diatribe above disputes what I'm saying - which is that you consciously chose a means of income that allowed you to avoid paying income tax and NI which are the single greatest tax contributions any one else makes.

So, as always, you're either ignorantly missing the point or simply choosing to skirt around it because you know you're in the wrong. But please, continue to lecture us all on how you think the government should spend the taxes we've all bust a gut to earn by working hard all day whilst you're sat on your backside in your dressing gown with a cup of tea clicking on internet gambling websites.

I consciously chose to be a gambler so that I could avoid paying tax haha you half talk nonsense.

You consciously chose to work in a low to medium pay job so as to avoid paying the 45% rate of income tax, you consciously chose not to die so that you avoid paying inheritance tax, what I am saying is complete nonsense but makes as much sense as what you are saying.

Tophat your personal insults are rather boring and they add nothing to the debate. You have a limited knowledge of uk taxation laws and it is evident in your posts. You seem all too happy to throw insults round and it is very sad that you are a man of 30 who feels the need to insult strangers over an internet forum. I will just put you on the foe list if it continues because it is all rather tedious.

1. You don't know what I do or what I earn.
2. Nothing you've said shows I lack knowledge of UK tax law.
3. Nothing you've said actually counters my points.

According to you you are a fully qualified lawyer (to add to your long list of other keyboard warrior attributes) yet you decide to earn a few hundred quid a week (your comment, not my assumption) doing internet gambling rather than pursue a career.

I think someone creating fictitious internet personalities and coming on to lecture people on morality is much sadder than laughing at someone incapable of constructing a basic sustainable argument.

Haven't you got an episode of Loose Women to watch or something??

1)I don't really care what you earn because it is irrelevant to the debate but I can only assume your pay is rather low, hence why you are always so angry on this forum.

2)You keep saying I don't pay tax because i don't pay income tax on my gambling profits. Probably about 50% of everything I earn goes to tax. VAT, Council tax, road tax, VAT on my fuel bills, Green taxes on my fuel bills, Fuel duty tax. Just highlights your lack of understanding of UK taxation laws.

3)You have not made any valid points, you keep trying to attack me for not paying tax on my gambling profits even though gambling profits are exempt from taxation. It just highlights your lack of knowledge.

I said that I earn roughly £400 profit a week through poker which is about £20,000 a year, not bad for sitting on my arse watching loose women all day :)and it is probably more than you earn and you probably work a 9/5.

Fact is that I gamble and I make a profit, there is no taxation on gambling profits and so I pay no tax on those profits because it is physically impossible for me to do so. But I do pay taxes as highlighted above

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:You chose a way of deriving income (gambling) that deliberately allowed you to avoid paying any tax.

With an education half as impressive as you make out you have, getting a job is far from impossible, so don't make out like you're some hard-up serf continually screwed by 'the man' and condemned to a life of welfare dependency and turnip eating.

IF, you are to be believed, then your weekly income was more than I was getting as a grad when I first started work in 2007 and I paid tax and NI on that.

Uunder UK taxation laws gambling profits are not subject to tax. It is physically impossible for me to pay tax on my gambling profits even if I wanted to as it is illegal for the tax man to collect any tax on gambling profits. I do make donations to charity however (nspcc).

You keep talking about me not paying income tax on my gambling profits and that is just highlighting your limited knowledge of taxation laws. Income tax is a tax on income derived from employment, going to the casino and putting £100 on number 18 on roulette and winning is not a form of employment and thus is not subject to income tax. You attacking me constantly for not paying income tax on my gambling profits is as silly as you saying I should pay capital gains tax on gambling profits or corporation tax because all of those taxes have no relevance to gambling profits.

Perhaps you are in favour of taxing gambling profits but that would mean everyone who wins £10 on a scratch card has to pay tax on it or an old granny winning £40 at bingo has to pay tax on it or a few lads heading to the casino to play blackjack on a saturday night and get lucky and win £100 have to pay tax on it.

If you are going to tax gambling profits because the gambler has managed to increase their capital then you need to also offer tax breaks for gambling losses because the gambler has reduced their capital.

But like I said it is physically impossible in the Uk to pay tax on any gambling profits and once again the fact you keep talking about me avoiding tax on gambling just shows your lack of knowledge of taxation laws. You can't avoid a tax that does not exist.

My tax law knowledge is fine thank-you.  None of the pretentious diatribe above disputes what I'm saying - which is that you consciously chose a means of income that allowed you to avoid paying income tax and NI which are the single greatest tax contributions any one else makes.

So, as always, you're either ignorantly missing the point or simply choosing to skirt around it because you know you're in the wrong.  But please, continue to lecture us all on how you think the government should spend the taxes we've all bust a gut to earn by working hard all day whilst you're sat on your backside in your dressing gown with a cup of tea clicking on internet gambling websites.

I consciously chose to be a gambler so that I could avoid paying tax haha you half talk nonsense.

You consciously chose to work in a low to medium pay job so as to avoid paying the 45% rate of income tax, you consciously chose not to die so that you avoid paying inheritance tax, what I am saying is complete nonsense but makes as much sense as what you are saying.

Tophat your personal insults are rather boring and they add nothing to the debate. You have a limited knowledge of uk taxation laws and it is evident in your posts. You seem all too happy to throw insults round and it is very sad that you are a man of 30 who feels the need to insult strangers over an internet forum. I will just put you on the foe list if it continues because it is all rather tedious.

1. You don't know what I do or what I earn.
2. Nothing you've said shows I lack knowledge of UK tax law.
3. Nothing you've said actually counters my points.

According to you you are a fully qualified lawyer (to add to your long list of other keyboard warrior attributes) yet you decide to earn a few hundred quid a week (your comment, not my assumption) doing internet gambling rather than pursue a career.

I think someone creating fictitious internet personalities and coming on to lecture people on morality is much sadder than laughing at someone incapable of constructing a basic sustainable argument.

Haven't you got an episode of Loose Women to watch or something??

1)I don't really care what you earn because it is irrelevant to the debate but I can only assume your pay is rather low, hence why you are always so angry on this forum.

2)You keep saying I don't pay tax because i don't pay income tax on my gambling profits. Probably about 50% of everything I earn goes to tax. VAT, Council tax, road tax, VAT on my fuel bills, Green taxes on my fuel bills, Fuel duty tax. Just highlights your lack of understanding of UK taxation laws.

3)You have not made any valid points, you keep trying to attack me for not paying tax on my gambling profits even though gambling profits are exempt from taxation. It just highlights your lack of knowledge.

I said that I earn roughly £400 profit a week through poker which is about £20,000 a year, not bad for sitting on my arse watching loose women all day :)and it is probably more than you earn and you probably work a 9/5.

Fact is that I gamble and I make a profit, there is no taxation on gambling profits and so I pay no tax on those profits because it is physically impossible for me to do so.  But I do pay taxes as highlighted above

I would call this a laughable riposte, but I’ll refrain for fear of being accused of hurling insults and being a ‘keyboard warrior’ again.

1. You’re right, it’s not relevant, which is why I never bring it up.  You do though, continually. Hang-up? Ironic that you can lambaste me for insults though when coming up with such crude playground taunting yourself.

2. It is now you that is highlighting your tax ignorance, you may want to look this kind of thing up before getting all excitable and boasty.

3. Still, wonderfully, missing/avoiding the point.  I’m not accusing you of ‘not paying tax on your gambling profits’, I know it’s not liable for tax, this was established (quite literally) years ago.  The point you’re missing/avoiding, which I’ll repeat again since you appear to be struggling (again), is that rather than using your prestigious and eminent legal qualifications to pursue a career that would involve actual hard work, commitment and, importantly, paying tax on your income, you said “sod that, I’ll just lounge around gambling tax free – quids in! Yipee!!”.

sodhat wrote:I don't want to get involved in the debate...at all. But using someones wage as an insult is in laughably poor taste. The "I earn more than you" argument is tedious.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:You chose a way of deriving income (gambling) that deliberately allowed you to avoid paying any tax.

With an education half as impressive as you make out you have, getting a job is far from impossible, so don't make out like you're some hard-up serf continually screwed by 'the man' and condemned to a life of welfare dependency and turnip eating.

IF, you are to be believed, then your weekly income was more than I was getting as a grad when I first started work in 2007 and I paid tax and NI on that.

Uunder UK taxation laws gambling profits are not subject to tax. It is physically impossible for me to pay tax on my gambling profits even if I wanted to as it is illegal for the tax man to collect any tax on gambling profits. I do make donations to charity however (nspcc).

You keep talking about me not paying income tax on my gambling profits and that is just highlighting your limited knowledge of taxation laws. Income tax is a tax on income derived from employment, going to the casino and putting £100 on number 18 on roulette and winning is not a form of employment and thus is not subject to income tax. You attacking me constantly for not paying income tax on my gambling profits is as silly as you saying I should pay capital gains tax on gambling profits or corporation tax because all of those taxes have no relevance to gambling profits.

Perhaps you are in favour of taxing gambling profits but that would mean everyone who wins £10 on a scratch card has to pay tax on it or an old granny winning £40 at bingo has to pay tax on it or a few lads heading to the casino to play blackjack on a saturday night and get lucky and win £100 have to pay tax on it.

If you are going to tax gambling profits because the gambler has managed to increase their capital then you need to also offer tax breaks for gambling losses because the gambler has reduced their capital.

But like I said it is physically impossible in the Uk to pay tax on any gambling profits and once again the fact you keep talking about me avoiding tax on gambling just shows your lack of knowledge of taxation laws. You can't avoid a tax that does not exist.

My tax law knowledge is fine thank-you.  None of the pretentious diatribe above disputes what I'm saying - which is that you consciously chose a means of income that allowed you to avoid paying income tax and NI which are the single greatest tax contributions any one else makes.

So, as always, you're either ignorantly missing the point or simply choosing to skirt around it because you know you're in the wrong.  But please, continue to lecture us all on how you think the government should spend the taxes we've all bust a gut to earn by working hard all day whilst you're sat on your backside in your dressing gown with a cup of tea clicking on internet gambling websites.

I consciously chose to be a gambler so that I could avoid paying tax haha you half talk nonsense.

You consciously chose to work in a low to medium pay job so as to avoid paying the 45% rate of income tax, you consciously chose not to die so that you avoid paying inheritance tax, what I am saying is complete nonsense but makes as much sense as what you are saying.

Tophat your personal insults are rather boring and they add nothing to the debate. You have a limited knowledge of uk taxation laws and it is evident in your posts. You seem all too happy to throw insults round and it is very sad that you are a man of 30 who feels the need to insult strangers over an internet forum. I will just put you on the foe list if it continues because it is all rather tedious.

1. You don't know what I do or what I earn.
2. Nothing you've said shows I lack knowledge of UK tax law.
3. Nothing you've said actually counters my points.

According to you you are a fully qualified lawyer (to add to your long list of other keyboard warrior attributes) yet you decide to earn a few hundred quid a week (your comment, not my assumption) doing internet gambling rather than pursue a career.

I think someone creating fictitious internet personalities and coming on to lecture people on morality is much sadder than laughing at someone incapable of constructing a basic sustainable argument.

Haven't you got an episode of Loose Women to watch or something??

1)I don't really care what you earn because it is irrelevant to the debate but I can only assume your pay is rather low, hence why you are always so angry on this forum.

2)You keep saying I don't pay tax because i don't pay income tax on my gambling profits. Probably about 50% of everything I earn goes to tax. VAT, Council tax, road tax, VAT on my fuel bills, Green taxes on my fuel bills, Fuel duty tax. Just highlights your lack of understanding of UK taxation laws.

3)You have not made any valid points, you keep trying to attack me for not paying tax on my gambling profits even though gambling profits are exempt from taxation. It just highlights your lack of knowledge.

I said that I earn roughly £400 profit a week through poker which is about £20,000 a year, not bad for sitting on my arse watching loose women all day :)and it is probably more than you earn and you probably work a 9/5.

Fact is that I gamble and I make a profit, there is no taxation on gambling profits and so I pay no tax on those profits because it is physically impossible for me to do so.  But I do pay taxes as highlighted above

I would call this a laughable riposte, but I’ll refrain for fear of being accused of hurling insults and being a ‘keyboard warrior’ again.

1. You’re right, it’s not relevant, which is why I never bring it up.  You do though, continually. Hang-up? Ironic that you can lambaste me for insults though when coming up with such crude playground taunting yourself.

2. It is now you that is highlighting your tax ignorance, you may want to look this kind of thing up before getting all excitable and boasty.

3. Still, wonderfully, missing/avoiding the point.  I’m not accusing you of ‘not paying tax on your gambling profits’, I know it’s not liable for tax, this was established (quite literally) years ago.  The point you’re missing/avoiding, which I’ll repeat again since you appear to be struggling (again), is that rather than using your prestigious and eminent legal qualifications to pursue a career that would involve actual hard work, commitment and, importantly, paying tax on your income, you said “sod that, I’ll just lounge around gambling tax free – quids in! Yipee!!”.

Did I? I don' remember ever thinking I want to gamble because it is tax free but thank you for telling me what I was thinking. WHy are you on 606 right now? surely the amount of time you spend on here could be spent working a 2nd job so that you can pay more income tax. You have decided to avoid getting a 2nd job so that you can avoid paying income tax!!! ( a nonsense argument but one which makes as much sense as yours).


And like I said before I pay tax on my income, just not inome tax but I pay VAT tax, Green tax, fuel duty, council tax and road tax. All of those taxes are paid for by my income

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:You chose a way of deriving income (gambling) that deliberately allowed you to avoid paying any tax.

With an education half as impressive as you make out you have, getting a job is far from impossible, so don't make out like you're some hard-up serf continually screwed by 'the man' and condemned to a life of welfare dependency and turnip eating.

IF, you are to be believed, then your weekly income was more than I was getting as a grad when I first started work in 2007 and I paid tax and NI on that.

Uunder UK taxation laws gambling profits are not subject to tax. It is physically impossible for me to pay tax on my gambling profits even if I wanted to as it is illegal for the tax man to collect any tax on gambling profits. I do make donations to charity however (nspcc).

You keep talking about me not paying income tax on my gambling profits and that is just highlighting your limited knowledge of taxation laws. Income tax is a tax on income derived from employment, going to the casino and putting £100 on number 18 on roulette and winning is not a form of employment and thus is not subject to income tax. You attacking me constantly for not paying income tax on my gambling profits is as silly as you saying I should pay capital gains tax on gambling profits or corporation tax because all of those taxes have no relevance to gambling profits.

Perhaps you are in favour of taxing gambling profits but that would mean everyone who wins £10 on a scratch card has to pay tax on it or an old granny winning £40 at bingo has to pay tax on it or a few lads heading to the casino to play blackjack on a saturday night and get lucky and win £100 have to pay tax on it.

If you are going to tax gambling profits because the gambler has managed to increase their capital then you need to also offer tax breaks for gambling losses because the gambler has reduced their capital.

But like I said it is physically impossible in the Uk to pay tax on any gambling profits and once again the fact you keep talking about me avoiding tax on gambling just shows your lack of knowledge of taxation laws. You can't avoid a tax that does not exist.

My tax law knowledge is fine thank-you.  None of the pretentious diatribe above disputes what I'm saying - which is that you consciously chose a means of income that allowed you to avoid paying income tax and NI which are the single greatest tax contributions any one else makes.

So, as always, you're either ignorantly missing the point or simply choosing to skirt around it because you know you're in the wrong.  But please, continue to lecture us all on how you think the government should spend the taxes we've all bust a gut to earn by working hard all day whilst you're sat on your backside in your dressing gown with a cup of tea clicking on internet gambling websites.

I consciously chose to be a gambler so that I could avoid paying tax haha you half talk nonsense.

You consciously chose to work in a low to medium pay job so as to avoid paying the 45% rate of income tax, you consciously chose not to die so that you avoid paying inheritance tax, what I am saying is complete nonsense but makes as much sense as what you are saying.

Tophat your personal insults are rather boring and they add nothing to the debate. You have a limited knowledge of uk taxation laws and it is evident in your posts. You seem all too happy to throw insults round and it is very sad that you are a man of 30 who feels the need to insult strangers over an internet forum. I will just put you on the foe list if it continues because it is all rather tedious.

1. You don't know what I do or what I earn.
2. Nothing you've said shows I lack knowledge of UK tax law.
3. Nothing you've said actually counters my points.

According to you you are a fully qualified lawyer (to add to your long list of other keyboard warrior attributes) yet you decide to earn a few hundred quid a week (your comment, not my assumption) doing internet gambling rather than pursue a career.

I think someone creating fictitious internet personalities and coming on to lecture people on morality is much sadder than laughing at someone incapable of constructing a basic sustainable argument.

Haven't you got an episode of Loose Women to watch or something??

1)I don't really care what you earn because it is irrelevant to the debate but I can only assume your pay is rather low, hence why you are always so angry on this forum.

2)You keep saying I don't pay tax because i don't pay income tax on my gambling profits. Probably about 50% of everything I earn goes to tax. VAT, Council tax, road tax, VAT on my fuel bills, Green taxes on my fuel bills, Fuel duty tax. Just highlights your lack of understanding of UK taxation laws.

3)You have not made any valid points, you keep trying to attack me for not paying tax on my gambling profits even though gambling profits are exempt from taxation. It just highlights your lack of knowledge.

I said that I earn roughly £400 profit a week through poker which is about £20,000 a year, not bad for sitting on my arse watching loose women all day :)and it is probably more than you earn and you probably work a 9/5.

Fact is that I gamble and I make a profit, there is no taxation on gambling profits and so I pay no tax on those profits because it is physically impossible for me to do so.  But I do pay taxes as highlighted above

I would call this a laughable riposte, but I’ll refrain for fear of being accused of hurling insults and being a ‘keyboard warrior’ again.

1. You’re right, it’s not relevant, which is why I never bring it up.  You do though, continually. Hang-up? Ironic that you can lambaste me for insults though when coming up with such crude playground taunting yourself.

2. It is now you that is highlighting your tax ignorance, you may want to look this kind of thing up before getting all excitable and boasty.

3. Still, wonderfully, missing/avoiding the point.  I’m not accusing you of ‘not paying tax on your gambling profits’, I know it’s not liable for tax, this was established (quite literally) years ago.  The point you’re missing/avoiding, which I’ll repeat again since you appear to be struggling (again), is that rather than using your prestigious and eminent legal qualifications to pursue a career that would involve actual hard work, commitment and, importantly, paying tax on your income, you said “sod that, I’ll just lounge around gambling tax free – quids in! Yipee!!”.

Did I? I don' remember ever thinking I want to gamble because it is tax free but thank you for telling me what I was thinking. WHy are you on 606 right now? surely the amount of time you spend on here could be spent working a 2nd job so that you can pay more income tax. You have decided to avoid getting a 2nd job so that you can avoid paying income tax!!! ( a nonsense argument but one which makes as much sense as yours).


And like I said before I pay tax on my income, just not inome tax but I pay VAT tax, Green tax, fuel duty, council tax and road tax. All of those taxes are paid for by my income

Why aren't you a high-flying lawyer then? If you're half as special as you make out you should be cleaning up.  Hundreds, if not thousands, of lawyers are hired every year so it's not like theirs a huge jobs shortage, it's just extremely competitive.

TopHat24/7 wrote:I don't. I just pick you up on your BS.  If you didn't try lecture everyone all the time I'd be more disinterested.

sodhat wrote:I don't want to get involved in the debate...at all. But using someones wage as an insult is in laughably poor taste. The "I earn more than you" argument is tedious.

Mind the windows Tino. wrote:

sodhat wrote:I don't want to get involved in the debate...at all. But using someones wage as an insult is in laughably poor taste. The "I earn more than you" argument is tedious.

What if we use the 'my dads harder than your dad' one?

sodhat wrote:So you're northern, and with a Scottish dad?

How are you not in a park in Liverpool sniffing glue and chugging Super Tennants?

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:I don't. I just pick you up on your BS.  If you didn't try lecture everyone all the time I'd be more disinterested.

Whatever, you are just an angry man who looks to start internet fights lol You got proven wrong about gambling and tax and yet you still want to continue the argument, just give up.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:I don't. I just pick you up on your BS.  If you didn't try lecture everyone all the time I'd be more disinterested.

Whatever, you are just an angry man who looks to start internet fights lol You got proven wrong about gambling and tax and yet you still want to continue the argument, just give up.

Explain where I was proven wrong about gambling tax? Quote where I said gambling profits were taxable?

Go on, this should be easier, you're obviously very sure you're right on this point.

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Clearly formerly 'Red' Ed is concerned as he's taken steps to distance himself from both their antics and the Unions themselves, surely all this negativity will have to bite at some point? This could be the last thing Labour's already dwindling opinion poll leads need - could 2014 be the year of the turning point re public opinion or the main two parties??

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Clearly formerly 'Red' Ed is concerned as he's taken steps to distance himself from both their antics and the Unions themselves, surely all this negativity will have to bite at some point? This could be the last thing Labour's already dwindling opinion poll leads need - could 2014 be the year of the turning point re public opinion or the main two parties??

Do you remember when the Tories were saying Labour's stance on the referendum would cost them the election...

Same sort of thing this really........

Nothing at all............Only to people with nothing else to worry about.

What say you, CS ?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Clearly formerly 'Red' Ed is concerned as he's taken steps to distance himself from both their antics and the Unions themselves, surely all this negativity will have to bite at some point? This could be the last thing Labour's already dwindling opinion poll leads need - could 2014 be the year of the turning point re public opinion or the main two parties??

Do you remember when the Tories were saying Labour's stance on the referendum would cost them the election...

Same sort of thing this really........

Nothing at all............Only to people with nothing else to worry about.

What say you, CS ?

Trussman wrote:On Voting intentions.........Europe and Unions comes way below...........

Economy
Crime
Health,
Environment
Fairness
social security
Standard of living
Immigration.............On Voting intentions.........

Which means that the majority of the electorate ponder those things as a rule before anything else.......So by the time they get to Unions it's a non factor...

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:I don't. I just pick you up on your BS.  If you didn't try lecture everyone all the time I'd be more disinterested.

Whatever, you are just an angry man who looks to start internet fights lol You got proven wrong about gambling and tax and yet you still want to continue the argument, just give up.

Explain where I was proven wrong about gambling tax? Quote where I said gambling profits were taxable?

Go on, this should be easier, you're obviously very sure you're right on this point.

You're boring

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:I don't. I just pick you up on your BS.  If you didn't try lecture everyone all the time I'd be more disinterested.

Whatever, you are just an angry man who looks to start internet fights lol You got proven wrong about gambling and tax and yet you still want to continue the argument, just give up.

Explain where I was proven wrong about gambling tax? Quote where I said gambling profits were taxable?

Go on, this should be easier, you're obviously very sure you're right on this point.

You're boring

That'll be a no then........

ShahenshahG wrote:I think Tophat dislikes you because you spout easy political rants with no real independent and sensible evidence with the tone of moral authority reserved for the current pope. Sort of like a greek moneylenders version of secretfly without the intelligence, eloquence and ability to laugh at himself and his tendency to sometimes have a point.

The unions are probably not a millstone for ed but could be if more revelations come out nearer to the election - right now its impact is probably not an issue.

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:I think Tophat dislikes you because you spout easy political rants with no real independent and sensible evidence with the tone of moral authority reserved for the current pope. Sort of like a greek moneylenders version of secretfly without the intelligence, eloquence and ability to laugh at himself and his tendency to sometimes have a point.

The unions are probably not a millstone for ed but could be if more revelations come out nearer to the election - right now its impact is probably not an issue.

I thought it was because he was an arse.

ShahenshahG wrote:I think Tophat dislikes you because you spout easy political rants with no real independent and sensible evidence with the tone of moral authority reserved for the current pope. Sort of like a greek moneylenders version of secretfly without the intelligence, eloquence and ability to laugh at himself and his tendency to sometimes have a point.

The unions are probably not a millstone for ed but could be if more revelations come out nearer to the election - right now its impact is probably not an issue.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:I think Tophat dislikes you because you spout easy political rants with no real independent and sensible evidence with the tone of moral authority reserved for the current pope. Sort of like a greek moneylenders version of secretfly without the intelligence, eloquence and ability to laugh at himself and his tendency to sometimes have a point.

The unions are probably not a millstone for ed but could be if more revelations come out nearer to the election - right now its impact is probably not an issue.

If I am being really honest I don't actually remember who you are in the sense that I don't remember any of your comments or remember debating with you, but I am glad that you remember me  

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Clearly formerly 'Red' Ed is concerned as he's taken steps to distance himself from both their antics and the Unions themselves, surely all this negativity will have to bite at some point? This could be the last thing Labour's already dwindling opinion poll leads need - could 2014 be the year of the turning point re public opinion or the main two parties??

Do you remember when the Tories were saying Labour's stance on the referendum would cost them the election...

Same sort of thing this really........

Nothing at all............Only to people with nothing else to worry about.

What say you, CS ?

This sums up my thoughts

Trussman wrote:On Voting intentions.........Europe and Unions comes way below...........

Economy
Crime
Health,
Environment
Fairness
social security
Standard of living
Immigration.............On Voting intentions.........

Which means that the majority of the electorate ponder those things as a rule before anything else.......So by the time they get to Unions it's a non factor...

Duty281 wrote:Economy - Far better under Cameron than Brown. Fastest growing economy in the world alongside the USA, I believe.
Crime - Falling.
Health - Better than Labour.
Environment - Pass.
Europe - Labour will do nothing.
HS2 - Cameron is decisive, Labour are dithering.
Welfare - Tightened under the Conservatives.
Unemployment - Down.

Duty281 wrote:It needed to be cut. Mainly because of how lucrative benefit payments were, particularly with regards to unemployment benefit, and because of the amount of debt the Labour party ran up the last time they were in power.

I see Cameron also tried to make it so that benefit payments would be unavailable to immigrants until they had stayed for a minimum of 3 years in this country - a bloody good idea seeing how out of control it is - but the fascist EU blocked her Majesty's First Minister from making a law in his own land.

Duty281 wrote:£56.80 if you're 16-24, and over £70 if you're 25 or over.

And that is rather lucrative for doing very little.

onlytreblewinners wrote:If we want super rich people to come to this country and pay taxes here, then we want a competitive tax rate. To have it too high means the wealthy will go elsewhere. Corporation tax should also be kept as low as reasonably possible to encourage big businesses to set up bases here.

Jobseekers allowance was rising faster than wages. That is wrong, people who go out and work should be the ones who are better off. Previously, that wasn't the case, people should have just stayed at home rather than doing work because the taxing was wrong.

The bedroom tax is something I agree with completely, it's crazy the amount of opposition to it. But when there are so many families needing a bigger house and people are sitting on council housing with more bedrooms than people it's wrong. The government should not be subsidising for one person to live in a three bedroom house when they don't need it, or if they want a guest room.

Education cuts I don't agree with. But that's a separate issue.

At the moment I think the coalition, or more Cameron leading the Conservatives is the best way forward. The Labour government does not look good, there is no leadership, Miliband isn't what we need right now. A proper Tory government does also not fit in with my ideals, it's too right wing but I'm just focussing on welfare here.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Duty281 wrote:It needed to be cut. Mainly because of how lucrative benefit payments were, particularly with regards to unemployment benefit, and because of the amount of debt the Labour party ran up the last time they were in power.

I see Cameron also tried to make it so that benefit payments would be unavailable to immigrants until they had stayed for a minimum of 3 years in this country - a bloody good idea seeing how out of control it is - but the fascist EU blocked her Majesty's First Minister from making a law in his own land.

you know JSA unemployment benefit is £53 a week, how is that lucrative?

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Duty281 wrote:It needed to be cut. Mainly because of how lucrative benefit payments were, particularly with regards to unemployment benefit, and because of the amount of debt the Labour party ran up the last time they were in power.

I see Cameron also tried to make it so that benefit payments would be unavailable to immigrants until they had stayed for a minimum of 3 years in this country - a bloody good idea seeing how out of control it is - but the fascist EU blocked her Majesty's First Minister from making a law in his own land.

you know JSA unemployment benefit is £53 a week, how is that lucrative?

you know JSA isn't the only benefit available?

Rowley wrote:All people on benefits are feckless scroungers, all people who take drugs are thieving addicts, all bankers are fat cat tax dodgers, all immigrants only come over here to eat our swans. Do we have any other lazy stereotypes we want to throw into the pot. Such things really move the debate forward.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Because sarcasm is really progressive.......

Lumbering_Jack wrote:See a couple of mothers lost a court battle yesterday challenging the 500 a week cap on child benefit (I think it was that one). What world do these people live in. Unhappy at getting 500 quid a week for nothing. Lazy.

Lawyers acting for three mothers and one child from each family, all from the London area, said the "cruel and arbitrary" measure was "reminiscent of the days of the workhouse", and the women feared it would leave them destitute.

Rowley wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Because sarcasm is really progressive.......

I am particularly good at it though.

sodhat wrote:Do we have a vote for post of the year? Because I vote for sean's last one.

seanmichaels wrote:

sodhat wrote:Do we have a vote for post of the year? Because I vote for sean's last one.

Mate runs a construction recruitment company. He has some rather unsavoury amateur cage fighting types working in his office and one day they spent an entire morning discussing the above - in a serious manner.

sodhat wrote:

seanmichaels wrote:

sodhat wrote:Do we have a vote for post of the year? Because I vote for sean's last one.

Mate runs a construction recruitment company. He has some rather unsavoury amateur cage fighting types working in his office and one day they spent an entire morning discussing the above - in a serious manner.

Not wishing to hijack the thread with a proper topic, but what was the conclusion?