I object!

[patman post]

I'm glad you posted this. The woman has not even got in yet and lizard and reptile are being thrown at her by the misogynists.
The name calling just shows the mindset of the posters, rather than denigrating a woman who has had a pretty decent career in politics.

I still think the moniker Thick Lizzie is appropriate...

There are ready-made musical offerings from her (almost) namesake — Waiting For An Alibi (album), and Don't Believe A Word (single)...

[srb7677]

We can take this to the nth degree. For example you go and buy 4 John Smiths at a fiver and I go and buy a bottle of Moët at £50, I'll pay a lot more tax. Same principle with a Ford Mondeo and a Mercedes S class. You can't pick and choose which spending you want to use. Your point about NI is correct but the 10 percent drop is more than compensated for by the additional 25% income tax hike so no, I don't agree with your analogy.

My overall point is that you cannot single out one particular tax and ignore all others when assesssing how high a proportion of tax any particular group pays. You completely ignored my figures re council tax for example simply because it is so regressive. You cannot pick and choose which tax to use when citing how much anyone pays. All taxes have to be included for a balanced picture.

[Nick]

I never claimed to pay a higher proportion in tax overall.

I stated that taking all taxes together the proportion paid by the wealthy is not too different from the proportion paid by everyone else. That's because some taxes bear more disproportionately on lower earners, eg NI, where most people pay 13.25% but above a certain threshold higher earners pay only 3.25% And council tax where the highest band pays only three times the amount of the lowest band, even if they earn 300 times more.

I pay approximately 8% of my take home income in council tax. Even taking the single person's reduction into account.. Someone not enjoying this reduction and in the highest band might pay 4 times what I pay. But if they take home 40 times as much, eg about 640k, they'll only pay 0.8%. If they take home 6.4 million, they'll only pay 0.08%. I pay a much higher proportion of my income in council tax than a millionaire does.

Also someone on about 42k pays about 9% of their total income in NI. Someone on about 1 million only pays a little over 3% of theirs in NI.

So whilst you highlight the disproportionately large proportions the rich pay in income tax, you conveniently ignore those taxes where the rich pay a disproportionately low proportion of their incomes.

We can take this to the nth degree. For example you go and buy 4 John Smiths at a fiver and I go and buy a bottle of Moët at £50, I'll pay a lot more tax. Same principle with a Ford Mondeo and a Mercedes S class. You can't pick and choose which spending you want to use. Your point about NI is correct but the 10 percent drop is more than compensated for by the additional 25% income tax hike so no, I don't agree with your analogy. 

[Borchester]

Many a true word!
It was Mrs P who put me on to this...

Prince Vladimir of Kiev was the youngest son of Grand Prince Sviatsolav Igorevich. Vladimir was by no means a poor young man, but his two older brothers, Oleg and Yaropolk, stood in the way of what he really wanted: the crown.

While his brothers fought a bitter civil war following their father's death, Vladimir fled to Norway in 977, where he amassed an army of soldiers. Only a few months after his arrival, he sent his troops to Kiev, where Yaropolk, who had murdered Oleg, now sat on the throne. En route to the capital, Vladimir and his men left a trail of death and misery, but the young prince was saving his most violent deed for last.
Upon entering the palace in Kiev, Vladimir had his brother murdered and then took his newly widowed sister-in-law hostage. Though he had achieved his goal, Vladimir delivered a final, brutal blow: He raped his sister-in-law and forced her to become one of his concubines.

Such savagery is not usually associated with a patron saint of not one but two nations, but that's the status of brutal Prince Vladimir — patron saint of Ukraine and Russia, known today as the Holy Great Prince Vladimir, equal of the apostles.

Today Vladimir's youthful transgressions are seen as a testament to Christ's ability to convert sinners into saints. But the former womanizing murderer remains a provocative figure in Ukrainian-Russian relations, as both countries claim him as their compatriot. The 1,000th anniversary of his death, in 2015, added another dimension to the Ukrainian-Russian conflict, with the former claiming that Russia's planned celebration of St. Vladimir's death was an attempt to steal their history.

https://www.ozy.com/true-and-stories/how-an-insatiable-prince-became-a-patron-saint/83317/

Those were the days.

Was there not also a Russian/Kievian/foreign princess at about the same time who murdered everyone in sight and
ended up as a saint as well?

I like tales of blood and snot myself,  but once you started heading north you start to wonder if anyone ever read a book.

[srb7677]

I want you to explain to me under what circumstance do you pay a higher proportion in tax?

I never claimed to pay a higher proportion in tax overall.

I stated that taking all taxes together the proportion paid by the wealthy is not too different from the proportion paid by everyone else. That's because some taxes bear more disproportionately on lower earners, eg NI, where most people pay 13.25% but above a certain threshold higher earners pay only 3.25% And council tax where the highest band pays only three times the amount of the lowest band, even if they earn 300 times more. 

I pay approximately 8% of my take home income in council tax. Even taking the single person's reduction into account.. Someone not enjoying this reduction and in the highest band might pay 4 times what I pay. But if they take home 40 times as much, eg about 640k, they'll only pay 0.8%. If they take home 6.4 million, they'll only pay 0.08%. I pay a much higher proportion of my income in council tax than a millionaire does.

Also someone on about 42k pays about 9% of their total income in NI. Someone on about 1 million only pays a little over 3% of theirs in NI.

So whilst you highlight the disproportionately large proportions the rich pay in income tax, you conveniently ignore those taxes where the rich pay a disproportionately low proportion of their incomes.

[patman post]

More chance of Vlad becoming a saint.

Many a true word!
It was Mrs P who put me on to this...

Prince Vladimir of Kiev was the youngest son of Grand Prince Sviatsolav Igorevich. Vladimir was by no means a poor young man, but his two older brothers, Oleg and Yaropolk, stood in the way of what he really wanted: the crown.

While his brothers fought a bitter civil war following their father's death, Vladimir fled to Norway in 977, where he amassed an army of soldiers. Only a few months after his arrival, he sent his troops to Kiev, where Yaropolk, who had murdered Oleg, now sat on the throne. En route to the capital, Vladimir and his men left a trail of death and misery, but the young prince was saving his most violent deed for last.
Upon entering the palace in Kiev, Vladimir had his brother murdered and then took his newly widowed sister-in-law hostage. Though he had achieved his goal, Vladimir delivered a final, brutal blow: He raped his sister-in-law and forced her to become one of his concubines.

Such savagery is not usually associated with a patron saint of not one but two nations, but that's the status of brutal Prince Vladimir — patron saint of Ukraine and Russia, known today as the Holy Great Prince Vladimir, equal of the apostles.

Today Vladimir's youthful transgressions are seen as a testament to Christ's ability to convert sinners into saints. But the former womanizing murderer remains a provocative figure in Ukrainian-Russian relations, as both countries claim him as their compatriot. The 1,000th anniversary of his death, in 2015, added another dimension to the Ukrainian-Russian conflict, with the former claiming that Russia's planned celebration of St. Vladimir's death was an attempt to steal their history.

https://www.ozy.com/true-and-stories/how-an-insatiable-prince-became-a-patron-saint/83317/

[Nick]

Your quote of me proves the very thing I was stating. That I was talking about proportions and not total amounts.

It does not say what you accused me of saying, ie that I personally pay a greater total proportion.

Massive facepalm moment.

If you are going to constantly shift goalposts and wilfully misunderstand me, actually quoting something I said which merely says what I have been saying all along as if it is some kind of refutation, , it is pointless to continue since you cannot even understand simple English.

Besides, we have been endlessly around this same circle at least twice before and never gotten anywhere, so in order to retain the will to live, I am going to cease doing so for a third time. Past experience tells me there is no point and nothing to be gained.

The last word is yours.

I want you to explain to me under what circumstance do you pay a higher proportion in tax?

[srb7677]

The problem is that we aren't confrontational enough

I must admit that it would be rather entertaining to hear things like this in parliament....

"Is the right honourable gentleman opposite not aware that he is widely regarded as a bellend in the nation at large?"

[Borchester]

You hit a basic point — ie, we have become a more confrontational and abusive society over the last couple of decades. This is since the millennium; since online forums; and certainly since the Brexit campaigns.

The current Tory leadership campaign has been dragged towards the gutter by Team Truss, despite Sunak's early on-air aside to Truss of: "Why are we doing this to ourselves?"

The Truss U turns, denials, claims of misquotes — even of herself, by herself — have illustrated that she's like a wound-up doomsday machine ploughing on to the ultimate goal of donning the Thatcher Mantle.

Nevertheless, despite my disquiet of the May leadership, and my absolute disbelief at the continued blatant dishonesty and outright lies and mangling of the truth by Johnson — I still believe in Conservatism and hope Truss proves to be an outstanding party leader and prime minister.

If she fails, and Labour wins the next election, the Tories could — and would deservedly — face a decade out of power...

F@@@ off.

The problem is that we aren't confrontational enough, A few high words on a public forum and half the nation goes into a fit of the vapours.

And if the Conservatives go down next time it will be because it is relying on the support of a bunch of Tory Remainers whose idea of a foreign policy is to give Brussels a blow job.

[srb7677]

Whats this then?

Your quote of me proves the very thing I was stating. That I was talking about proportions and not total amounts.

It does not say what you accused me of saying, ie that I personally pay a greater total proportion.

Massive facepalm moment.

If you are going to constantly shift goalposts and wilfully misunderstand me, actually quoting something I said which merely says what I have been saying all along as if it is some kind of refutation, , it is pointless to continue since you cannot even understand simple English.

Besides, we have been endlessly around this same circle at least twice before and never gotten anywhere, so in order to retain the will to live, I am going to cease doing so for a third time. Past experience tells me there is no point and nothing to be gained.

The last word is yours.

[Nick]

More chance of Vlad becoming a saint.

You might just be surprised. 

[cromwell]

You hit a basic point — ie, we have become a more confrontational and abusive society over the last couple of decades. This is since the millennium; since online forums; and certainly since the Brexit campaigns.

The current Tory leadership campaign has been dragged towards the gutter by Team Truss, despite Sunak's early on-air aside to Truss of: "Why are we doing this to ourselves?"

The Truss U turns, denials, claims of misquotes — even of herself, by herself — have illustrated that she's like a wound-up doomsday machine ploughing on to the ultimate goal of donning the Thatcher Mantle.

Nevertheless, despite my disquiet of the May leadership, and my absolute disbelief at the continued blatant dishonesty and outright lies and mangling of the truth by Johnson — I still believe in Conservatism and hope Truss proves to be an outstanding party leader and prime minister.

If she fails, and Labour wins the next election, the Tories could — and would deservedly — face a decade out of power...

 
More chance of Vlad becoming a saint.

[patman post]

Reading through posts today I have become fully aware of the name calling of Liz Truss. Suddenly she is every kind of reptile and that's possibly the kindest reference. Why?

Sunak is the better choice - why? I doubt both but why is it ok to call Truss such names? You don't like her? Then don't vote for her, but why is the abuse before she even takes office ok? If the fear is that she is Maggie Mark 2, so what? Someone needs to take this country by the throat and give it some tough love before it completely implodes. If she manages that I'll give her credit.
Sunak is a people pleaser but mostly for himself. He has already said he won't lend his services to a Truss Government and that shows how much he cares about this country. If he has such political talent and cares he should be willing to serve in any role. I should think he is already booking interviews in the USA, for his next job.

I don't like it but whoever gets the job of leader of the Conservatives and the next PM they should be given the chance to prove their worth. Some are so desperate that she might actually prove herself - they are running scared.

You hit a basic point — ie, we have become a more confrontational and abusive society over the last couple of decades. This is since the millennium; since online forums; and certainly since the Brexit campaigns.

The current Tory leadership campaign has been dragged towards the gutter by Team Truss, despite Sunak's early on-air aside to Truss of: "Why are we doing this to ourselves?"

The Truss U turns, denials, claims of misquotes — even of herself, by herself — have illustrated that she's like a wound-up doomsday machine ploughing on to the ultimate goal of donning the Thatcher Mantle.

Nevertheless, despite my disquiet of the May leadership, and my absolute disbelief at the continued blatant dishonesty and outright lies and mangling of the truth by Johnson — I still believe in Conservatism and hope Truss proves to be an outstanding party leader and prime minister.

If she fails, and Labour wins the next election, the Tories could — and would deservedly — face a decade out of power...

[T00ts]

The figures I mentioned are inclusive Tax and NIC's so your point is voided and now you're moving the goalposts to who struggles the most, which has never been disputed.
My sympathies are with the rich, correct, because on the whole they have worked harder to get rich, are still working harder and or smarter than the poor. You constantly mention the long hours you do when in reality you don't, and I understand you don't for a reason but that doesn't make them long.

I've now been in India for almost 3 months, baring 6 days at home, doing 70+ hrs every week. My next project I have to oversee will be in St Petersburg Russia, I earn the right to keep as much of my tax as I can without you telling me I must constantly level up.

BTW, when have I said I think the rich should have more? NEVER! I have said, they should not pay anymore tax as you advocate to keep the great unwashed on the dole. Just to be clear I'll layout below what I believe

1. If you can work you should work, if you choose not to you get benefits that just about keep you going and no more
2. If you are working, you work to the level you choose to live your life, if you want more you work harder or work smarter.
3. If you can't work or can't work a full time job you get a level of state aid, but you will be vetted and constantly checked. Any one found pulling the wool over the DWP's eyes will be made to repay double what they stole from the state.
4. 20% income tax and 10% NI across the board. This will encourage the people who set their hours to be just under the 40% tax bracket to work more.
5. Anyone who is unemployed will be put to good use: Picking up litter, cutting the grass of common areas, scrubbing off graffiti etc. Anyone who refuses will have their benefits cut until they comply.
6. Anyone committing sexual crimes or violent crimes for a second time will be made infertile. Pedophiles likewise.

My initial thought was one of horror but over the years we have developed a society which is actually quite spineless and we have constantly wrapped people up in cotton wool to the extent that for many it removes incentives. With incentives come self respect to some extent but also respect for others. 

We have a duty as a society to protect those disadvantaged, not those who won't bother. I feel the above plan needs a bit of tweaking but it makes sense if we are to succeed as a nation and society.  We need a change of mindset.

[Nick]

I never claimed to. You are inventing things to criticise as you always do

Whats this then?

You ought to know damned well I am talking about proportions of incomes and not total amounts.