Paradise papers

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Paradise papers

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 5 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Stuk Top half 06 Nov 17 5.50pm
Originally posted by Kermit8 From the same advert earlier "Hours; Monday to Friday, 6.30am start until 'finish' each day (normally a 7.5 hour working day)" I make that around 37 hours. That's the stated hours, I said realistic. But less breaks and you're probably already close to 30. Optimistic as ever
Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk

Top half 06 Nov 17 5.50pm

Originally posted by Kermit8

From the same advert earlier

"Hours;

Monday to Friday, 6.30am start until 'finish' each day (normally a 7.5 hour working day)"

I make that around 37 hours.

That's the stated hours, I said realistic. But less breaks and you're probably already close to 30.

Optimistic as ever

Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk Top half 06 Nov 17 5.50pm
Originally posted by jamiemartin721 Our old bin men, because we lived near a traffic light, wouldn't collect the bin if the lights were green. Its odd that I'm excited about the fact our bin men collect our rubbish, on a weekly basis, and are helpful. That's how far the 'outsourcing' of the bin services have got us. Used to be a hard work, that paid well (as I used to know a few 'tougher kids' who worked on the bins when I left school. Now it seems its not so much work, for f**k all money. Correct. It was a sought after job, that you could barely apply for if you wanted to. Optimistic as ever
Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk

Top half 06 Nov 17 5.50pm

Originally posted by jamiemartin721

Our old bin men, because we lived near a traffic light, wouldn't collect the bin if the lights were green.

Its odd that I'm excited about the fact our bin men collect our rubbish, on a weekly basis, and are helpful. That's how far the 'outsourcing' of the bin services have got us.

Used to be a hard work, that paid well (as I used to know a few 'tougher kids' who worked on the bins when I left school. Now it seems its not so much work, for f**k all money.

Correct. It was a sought after job, that you could barely apply for if you wanted to.

Optimistic as ever

Alert a moderator to this post

johnfirewall 06 Nov 17 6.34pm
The duchy invested in a fund (Cayman domiciled) which invested in a private equity firm which later bought Bright Home. Good grief. Tax payable on repatriation of funds. The end.
Alert a moderator to this post

johnfirewall

06 Nov 17 6.34pm

The duchy invested in a fund (Cayman domiciled) which invested in a private equity firm which later bought Bright Home. Good grief.

Tax payable on repatriation of funds. The end.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mr Palaceman 06 Nov 17 6.54pm
Originally posted by Kermit8 A fair few though would have had a disproportionate advantage in life from birth so commensurate with that they should be paying more. Plus, someone on £150k a year is not going to have to downgrade and miss much lifestyle wise if they are paying 40% rather than say 30%. The tax system should really strongly benefit the less well off and not endow the already wealthy with more dosh as your proposal would do. I fundamentally disagree, so working hard to generate money for your future and the future of your family and contributing a fair percentage to the benefit of your country is a disproportionate advantage, and so deserves a disproportionate tax rate? No, sorry but it is not fair and on top of that hinders those who can generate wealth for the benefit of everyone. I work hard and pay all my tax and I still do. You work hard for the government to then take nearly half. I am taxed on what I earn, what I buy, where I park, the car I drive the water I drink the food I eat, the children I have, I could go on.. Then, when I retire, they're going to try and find some way of reducing the pension I have worked all my life for and you say that if I leave my children in a better position than my parents left me, that's a disproportionate advantage. No that's me working hard for my families future. To say that if I earn £150,000 then have £70,000 taken away doesn't impact much on lifestyle is ridiculous in my view.. If I pay 40% then so should you and everyone else. I regards to the less well off, you have a decent threshold to protect the less fortunate or less able from paying ANY tax and as a country, urge the payment of decent wages and good working conditions by those huge companies who still pay next to nothing for the benefit of all. That's fair. You say the tax system should not ENDOW the already wealthy with more dosh. The tax system does not endow anyone anything, it takes money unfairly from those who work hard to get ahead by their own hard work, while huge companies exploit individuals and pay next to nothing. No offshore accounts for me but until we have fairer system, I don't blame anyone for tax avoidance, evasion is a different matter It should be remembered that we pay tax by consent and that needs to be fair or people just won't pay, as happens now.. "You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead" Stan Laurel
Alert a moderator to this post

Mr Palaceman

06 Nov 17 6.54pm

Originally posted by Kermit8

A fair few though would have had a disproportionate advantage in life from birth so commensurate with that they should be paying more. Plus, someone on £150k a year is not going to have to downgrade and miss much lifestyle wise if they are paying 40% rather than say 30%.

The tax system should really strongly benefit the less well off and not endow the already wealthy with more dosh as your proposal would do.

I fundamentally disagree, so working hard to generate money for your future and the future of your family and contributing a fair percentage to the benefit of your country is a disproportionate advantage, and so deserves a disproportionate tax rate? No, sorry but it is not fair and on top of that hinders those who can generate wealth for the benefit of everyone.

I work hard and pay all my tax and I still do.

You work hard for the government to then take nearly half. I am taxed on what I earn, what I buy, where I park, the car I drive the water I drink the food I eat, the children I have, I could go on.. Then, when I retire, they're going to try and find some way of reducing the pension I have worked all my life for and you say that if I leave my children in a better position than my parents left me, that's a disproportionate advantage. No that's me working hard for my families future.

To say that if I earn £150,000 then have £70,000 taken away doesn't impact much on lifestyle is ridiculous in my view.. If I pay 40% then so should you and everyone else. I regards to the less well off, you have a decent threshold to protect the less fortunate or less able from paying ANY tax and as a country, urge the payment of decent wages and good working conditions by those huge companies who still pay next to nothing for the benefit of all. That's fair.

You say the tax system should not ENDOW the already wealthy with more dosh. The tax system does not endow anyone anything, it takes money unfairly from those who work hard to get ahead by their own hard work, while huge companies exploit individuals and pay next to nothing. No offshore accounts for me but until we have fairer system, I don't blame anyone for tax avoidance, evasion is a different matter

It should be remembered that we pay tax by consent and that needs to be fair or people just won't pay, as happens now..

"You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead"

Stan Laurel

Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle 06 Nov 17 7.29pm
Originally posted by Kermit8 someone on £150k a year is not going to have to downgrade and miss much lifestyle wise if they are paying 40% rather than say 30%. That's probably not true as spending rises in accordance with income and the person earning £150,000 is likely to have a large mortgage and school fees to pay
Alert a moderator to this post

Midlands Eagle

06 Nov 17 7.29pm

Send a Private Message to Midlands Eagle

Originally posted by Kermit8

someone on £150k a year is not going to have to downgrade and miss much lifestyle wise if they are paying 40% rather than say 30%.

That's probably not true as spending rises in accordance with income and the person earning £150,000 is likely to have a large mortgage and school fees to pay

Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8 Hevon 06 Nov 17 7.45pm
Originally posted by Midlands Eagle That's probably not true as spending rises in accordance with income and the person earning £150,000 is likely to have a large mortgage and school fees to pay Well in that case I would suggest that if that someone's built up life dissolved because they now had to take home only 8k a month rather than 9k - your making my heart bleed here - then they had already pushed themselves too dangerously close to the edge financially. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 06 Nov 17 7.45pm

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

That's probably not true as spending rises in accordance with income and the person earning £150,000 is likely to have a large mortgage and school fees to pay

Well in that case I would suggest that if that someone's built up life dissolved because they now had to take home only 8k a month rather than 9k - your making my heart bleed here - then they had already pushed themselves too dangerously close to the edge financially.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8 Hevon 06 Nov 17 7.49pm
Originally posted by Mr Palaceman I fundamentally disagree, so working hard to generate money for your future and the future of your family and contributing a fair percentage to the benefit of your country is a disproportionate advantage, and so deserves a disproportionate tax rate? No, sorry but it is not fair and on top of that hinders those who can generate wealth for the benefit of everyone. I work hard and pay all my tax and I still do. You work hard for the government to then take nearly half. I am taxed on what I earn, what I buy, where I park, the car I drive the water I drink the food I eat, the children I have, I could go on.. Then, when I retire, they're going to try and find some way of reducing the pension I have worked all my life for and you say that if I leave my children in a better position than my parents left me, that's a disproportionate advantage. No that's me working hard for my families future. To say that if I earn £150,000 then have £70,000 taken away doesn't impact much on lifestyle is ridiculous in my view.. If I pay 40% then so should you and everyone else. I regards to the less well off, you have a decent threshold to protect the less fortunate or less able from paying ANY tax and as a country, urge the payment of decent wages and good working conditions by those huge companies who still pay next to nothing for the benefit of all. That's fair. You say the tax system should not ENDOW the already wealthy with more dosh. The tax system does not endow anyone anything, it takes money unfairly from those who work hard to get ahead by their own hard work, while huge companies exploit individuals and pay next to nothing. No offshore accounts for me but until we have fairer system, I don't blame anyone for tax avoidance, evasion is a different matter It should be remembered that we pay tax by consent and that needs to be fair or people just won't pay, as happens now.. You really want to take 40% off shopworkers £15k a year or Nurses £22k a year because another worker earns £150k and has to? No offence - but that is really fvcked up. Big chest and massive boobs [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Kermit8

Hevon 06 Nov 17 7.49pm

Originally posted by Mr Palaceman

I work hard and pay all my tax and I still do.

To say that if I earn £150,000 then have £70,000 taken away doesn't impact much on lifestyle is ridiculous in my view.. If I pay 40% then so should you and everyone else. I regards to the less well off, you have a decent threshold to protect the less fortunate or less able from paying ANY tax and as a country, urge the payment of decent wages and good working conditions by those huge companies who still pay next to nothing for the benefit of all. That's fair.

It should be remembered that we pay tax by consent and that needs to be fair or people just won't pay, as happens now..

You really want to take 40% off shopworkers £15k a year or Nurses £22k a year because another worker earns £150k and has to?

No offence - but that is really fvcked up.

Big chest and massive boobs

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

silvertop Portishead 06 Nov 17 8.06pm
Originally posted by npn In everyday life I agree. In tax, that's a legislation thing. The only difference between ISAs and offshore tax havens is that ISAs are "designed to be taken advantage of" so you're second guessing not only the law, but the intention behind the law. Just close the loopholes ISAs are designed to encourage saving and investment in a country where we don't do enough of either. They enrich the holder and the country has a whole. Sticking money offshore deprives the revenue of cash, represents a loss to the economy and enriches a handful.
Alert a moderator to this post

silvertop

Portishead 06 Nov 17 8.06pm

Originally posted by npn

In everyday life I agree. In tax, that's a legislation thing. The only difference between ISAs and offshore tax havens is that ISAs are "designed to be taken advantage of" so you're second guessing not only the law, but the intention behind the law. Just close the loopholes

ISAs are designed to encourage saving and investment in a country where we don't do enough of either. They enrich the holder and the country has a whole.

Sticking money offshore deprives the revenue of cash, represents a loss to the economy and enriches a handful.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mr Palaceman 06 Nov 17 9.05pm
Originally posted by Kermit8 You really want to take 40% off shopworkers £15k a year or Nurses £22k a year because another worker earns £150k and has to? No offence - but that is really fvcked up. Of course not Kermit, in my world, nurses should be paid much more than 22k. Its a national shame that being nurse or a teacher for that matter is no longer a valued profession. It just makes sense to me that if you earn a million, you pay say £100,000 in tax, if you earn 2 million then it's £200,000 and if you earn £30,000 you pay £3000. That's fair. If you have the skills to earn, you can reap the benefits of your hard work. The more you work, then the country benefits from your hard work too and the thing is that who could argue about paying tax, it's the same for everyone AND those who earn more DO pay more but it's fair. I would even go do far as starting the rate at say 27%, then reduce it by half a percent every 2 or three years unit the rate was 10% for all. There would be a threshold for the lowest earners up to which point you wouldn't pay anything. If that was the situation who then could argue for tax avoidance and with EVERYONE paying tax revenues would be at an all time high, meaning the government could better focus on helping those who most need help in our society. I have heard JC saying that asking those better off to pay more is not unreasonable. I agree, if your asking, many would but forcing a disproportionate tax system on people is not fair and leads to tax avoidance on a massive scale as we have seen with these papers. The current system is unfair and costs the country money through lost revenue and it's because it is not the same for all. Clearly it is not the same for all. That's the problem. "You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead" Stan Laurel
Alert a moderator to this post

Mr Palaceman

06 Nov 17 9.05pm

Originally posted by Kermit8

You really want to take 40% off shopworkers £15k a year or Nurses £22k a year because another worker earns £150k and has to?

No offence - but that is really fvcked up.

Of course not Kermit, in my world, nurses should be paid much more than 22k. Its a national shame that being nurse or a teacher for that matter is no longer a valued profession.

It just makes sense to me that if you earn a million, you pay say £100,000 in tax, if you earn 2 million then it's £200,000 and if you earn £30,000 you pay £3000. That's fair. If you have the skills to earn, you can reap the benefits of your hard work. The more you work, then the country benefits from your hard work too and the thing is that who could argue about paying tax, it's the same for everyone AND those who earn more DO pay more but it's fair.

I would even go do far as starting the rate at say 27%, then reduce it by half a percent every 2 or three years unit the rate was 10% for all. There would be a threshold for the lowest earners up to which point you wouldn't pay anything.

If that was the situation who then could argue for tax avoidance and with EVERYONE paying tax revenues would be at an all time high, meaning the government could better focus on helping those who most need help in our society.

I have heard JC saying that asking those better off to pay more is not unreasonable. I agree, if your asking, many would but forcing a disproportionate tax system on people is not fair and leads to tax avoidance on a massive scale as we have seen with these papers.

The current system is unfair and costs the country money through lost revenue and it's because it is not the same for all. Clearly it is not the same for all. That's the problem.

"You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead"

Stan Laurel

Alert a moderator to this post

Mstrobez 07 Nov 17 4.58am
Nigel Farage, the guy who blames all our problems on immigrants & claims to be utterly and completely patriotic got caught up in something like this a while back. Apparently ultimately failed in his endeavour though (haha) and then came out with his usual spiel of how it was all an honest mistake. If there were ever something to make you realise that people are looking in the wrong direction at who's at fault for our countries problems, it's scandals like this. And yes, it's a scandal, it's fundamentally wrong. There is a complete difference between something being illegal and something being wrong and I think many people have a hard time differentiating the 2 in this self obsessed world. People who blame immigrants for everything despite the fact we've exploited the f*** out of them to get rich, then attempt to evade paying back into the country that gave them the opportunities and privellge in the first place. Patriotism my arse, they don't even wanna bank is this country. It's not the guy in the wheelchair, or the single Mum or the brown person down the road. It's all smoke screens and you'd hope revelations like this would actually make people see. The power and the control comes from the top, whilst we cut disabled people's benefits to amounts barely enough to live on and ex servicemen sleep on the streets, multi national corporations are responsible for a shortfall of an estimated £300-600billion in income a year. Incredible, makes my skin crawl. Edited by Mstrobez (07 Nov 2017 5.01am) We're the Arthur over ere!
Alert a moderator to this post

Mstrobez

07 Nov 17 4.58am

Nigel Farage, the guy who blames all our problems on immigrants & claims to be utterly and completely patriotic got caught up in something like this a while back. Apparently ultimately failed in his endeavour though (haha) and then came out with his usual spiel of how it was all an honest mistake.

If there were ever something to make you realise that people are looking in the wrong direction at who's at fault for our countries problems, it's scandals like this. And yes, it's a scandal, it's fundamentally wrong. There is a complete difference between something being illegal and something being wrong and I think many people have a hard time differentiating the 2 in this self obsessed world.

People who blame immigrants for everything despite the fact we've exploited the f*** out of them to get rich, then attempt to evade paying back into the country that gave them the opportunities and privellge in the first place. Patriotism my arse, they don't even wanna bank is this country.

It's not the guy in the wheelchair, or the single Mum or the brown person down the road. It's all smoke screens and you'd hope revelations like this would actually make people see. The power and the control comes from the top, whilst we cut disabled people's benefits to amounts barely enough to live on and ex servicemen sleep on the streets, multi national corporations are responsible for a shortfall of an estimated £300-600billion in income a year.

Incredible, makes my skin crawl.

Edited by Mstrobez (07 Nov 2017 5.01am)

We're the Arthur over ere!

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 07 Nov 17 7.27am
Originally posted by Mstrobez Nigel Farage, the guy who blames all our problems on immigrants & claims to be utterly and completely patriotic got caught up in something like this a while back. Edited by Mstrobez (07 Nov 2017 5.01am) It is a lie to say that immigrants are blamed for everything. It's a disfigurement of the argument made. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

07 Nov 17 7.27am

Originally posted by Mstrobez

Nigel Farage, the guy who blames all our problems on immigrants & claims to be utterly and completely patriotic got caught up in something like this a while back.

Edited by Mstrobez (07 Nov 2017 5.01am)

It is a lie to say that immigrants are blamed for everything.

It's a disfigurement of the argument made.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 07 Nov 17 7.31am
Originally posted by silvertop ISAs are designed to encourage saving and investment in a country where we don't do enough of either. They enrich the holder and the country has a whole. Sticking money offshore deprives the revenue of cash, represents a loss to the economy and enriches a handful. Yep. I do not want to be too critical of what people choose to do with their own money but offshoring isn't good. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

07 Nov 17 7.31am

Originally posted by silvertop

ISAs are designed to encourage saving and investment in a country where we don't do enough of either. They enrich the holder and the country has a whole.

Sticking money offshore deprives the revenue of cash, represents a loss to the economy and enriches a handful.

Yep.

I do not want to be too critical of what people choose to do with their own money but offshoring isn't good.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 5 of 14 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Paradise papers

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors