Reynard Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/p...se-it-too.html Good to know that he didn't want the state getting their filthy hands on his family's wedge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 It's the Diane Abbot approach. Their principles aren't actually for the likes of them to adhere to. Mostly recommendations for the proles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 28, 2014 Author Share Posted October 28, 2014 It's the Diane Abbot approach. Their principles aren't actually for the likes of them to adhere to. Mostly recommendations for the proles. Typical pull up the drawbridge type Marxists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Typical pull up the drawbridge type Marxists. I particularly liked Abbot's attempts to climb back on the leftist express. "Well, since I made that decision Labour built five new secondary schools in Hackney, one of them with some of the best GCSE results in the country. I wouldn’t have to make the same choice today." Of courrrrrrse you wouldn't Diane. Of courrrrrse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 This article is a tremedous read. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/diane-abbott-i-sent-my-son-to-private-230293 If you don't laugh out loud at least 3 times, you aren't alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted October 28, 2014 Author Share Posted October 28, 2014 This article is a tremedous read. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/diane-abbott-i-sent-my-son-to-private-230293 If you don't laugh out loud at least 3 times, you aren't alive. Abbot is fantastic point and laugh material. And she's also an utter vile racist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Abbot is fantastic point and laugh material. And she's also an utter vile racist. Yep. A horrible individual. I'm pretty sure she'll be handing out a good wedge to her family when she goes too. Top work really. Takes a special kind of person to be able to convince gullible morons that they are some sort of champion of the underprivileged, whilst troughing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SodjesSixteenIncher Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 The Chuckle Brothers on fire today as per. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Not that I want to indulge the Chuckle Brothers, but not the first time Benn chose to turn a blind eye to his own principles. The staunch anti-apartheid campaigner neglecting to mention he'd happily signed deals with Rio Tinto Zinc while in government, who had raised no objection while a minister to his government using the Security Council veto to block resolutions condemning South Africa. Hypocrite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkoRaj Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 He's not really done anything wrong. It doesn't look good but then as if he cares now, he's dead. A financial adviser would have said 'sign here and your kids will pay less tax when you die'. The law is a joke in these circumstances. It drives me mad that some paperwork can mean a huge difference in tax liability. I think the limit for IHT should be lower and the rate higher. I don't really agree with wealth being passed on at all. The amount of money I see on a daily basis that isn't being spent, but just being hoarded to leave to their families who'll then not even spend it themselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tio Pepe Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 He's not really done anything wrong. It doesn't look good but then as if he cares now, he's dead. A financial adviser would have said 'sign here and your kids will pay less tax when you die'. The law is a joke in these circumstances. It drives me mad that some paperwork can mean a huge difference in tax liability. I think the limit for IHT should be lower and the rate higher. I don't really agree with wealth being passed on at all. The amount of money I see on a daily basis that isn't being spent, but just being hoarded to leave to their families who'll then not even spend it themselves That's you assuming the government will spend it more wisely and beneficially in a macro sense than the owner of the money. Unlikely. Governments are much more likely to waste it on stupid projects, wasters and lining their own pockets. My money is mine, your money is yours. Governments should take the bare minimum required and leave us to spend the fruits of our labours how we desire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 He's not really done anything wrong. Of course he hasn't. He's looked after his own immediate family situation, and ignored the alleged wider societal benefits there would be if his wedge was given to the govenment to spend on his behalf. Why this is amusing is that it's exactly what the "Foodbanks!!!!!" class cowboy point scorers on here would do also if they had a decent wedge. It's amazing how principles become more optional when it's your money being considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 That's you assuming the government will spend it more wisely and beneficially in a macro sense than the owner of the money. Unlikely. Governments are much more likely to waste it on stupid projects, wasters and lining their own pockets. My money is mine, your money is yours. Governments should take the bare minimum required and leave us to spend the fruits of our labours how we desire. Except it's quite clearly not their money, given it's an inheritance and not earned income. Thanks for playing anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkoRaj Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 That's you assuming the government will spend it more wisely and beneficially in a macro sense than the owner of the money. Unlikely. Governments are much more likely to waste it on stupid projects, wasters and lining their own pockets. My money is mine, your money is yours. Governments should take the bare minimum required and leave us to spend the fruits of our labours how we desire. I don't disagree with what you're saying. My argument is when people amass relative fortunes and the money sits in the bank not being spent. As you say it's up to them what they decide to do with it but it seems like a waste when there's people starving in the world (which I hate). My reasoning for the higher rates/lower limits is not so the government gets his hands on more cash, but to encourage people to spend the cash on things they like while they are alive (and thus it is invested into the economy for the good of everyone else) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tio Pepe Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 I don't disagree with what you're saying. My argument is when people amass relative fortunes and the money sits in the bank not being spent. As you say it's up to them what they decide to do with it but it seems like a waste when there's people starving in the world (which I hate). My reasoning for the higher rates/lower limits is not so the government gets his hands on more cash, but to encourage people to spend the cash on things they like while they are alive (and thus it is invested into the economy for the good of everyone else) But when money sits in the bank it gets lent out. The people borrowing the cash will be making purchases, investing in their business, etc. The cash is not idle. I agree about the starving. Governments should do more to alleviate that. Yes some of the money lent by banks goes to fund projects that ultimately help these areas but I find it extremely sad when people complain about the overseas aid budget of the UK government being increased whilst moaning that they themselves need more because they are poor (which sometimes means can't afford a holiday, an ipad or the most expensive trainers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tio Pepe Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Except it's quite clearly not their money, given it's an inheritance and not earned income. Thanks for playing anyway. I have one pound. I give that pound to you as a reward for being pompous and arrogant. It is not earned income but it is yours because I chose to transfer my ownership of it to you. Laws on possession and ownership might be useful reading before you continue "playing". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkoRaj Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 But when money sits in the bank it gets lent out. In theory. A huge cut of it therefore belongs to the bank who has shareholders to pay and casino banking arms to gamble their profits on. I agree about the starving. Governments should do more to alleviate that. Yes some of the money lent by banks goes to fund projects that ultimately help these areas but I find it extremely sad when people complain about the overseas aid budget of the UK government being increased whilst moaning that they themselves need more because they are poor (which sometimes means can't afford a holiday, an ipad or the most expensive trainers). People who complain about overseas aid are generally morons Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 People who complain about overseas aid are generally morons Agreed. The same type of scumbag who complains about "Scottish" money being spend in other areas of the UK who need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkoRaj Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 Agreed. The same type of scumbag who complains about "Scottish" money being spend in other areas of the UK who need it. Or British money being spent in other areas of Europe who need it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Nooka Posted October 28, 2014 Share Posted October 28, 2014 This article is a tremedous read. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/diane-abbott-i-sent-my-son-to-private-230293 If you don't laugh out loud at least 3 times, you aren't alive. Is Diane Abbott black? You think she would mention it now and again! Funny how her attempted justification for the hypocrisy seems to relate mostly to being black. "Look I know I'm a lying b*****d but I'm also black so you can't criticise me" "I'm a mum, they're my kids, I'm a parent" = Get Out of Jail Free Card Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.