Re: parlimentary grilling

After posting yesterday I had a shufty, it appears she voted in favour of the tax changes she didn't want.

But then she's loyal to the party rather than constituent so she'd vote anyway she's told without a first thought.

A net connection will also help in his other time killing diversion.

He'll be red raw at the end of 60 days...

Re: Another PR stunt by MPs

Tax shouldn't come down to Morals, they're pretty abstract and most people disagree without even getting close to the realms of the state and Godwinism.

Re: @Tony

@Stuart

"But what is legal and what is right aren't always the same things."

Yep, one is subjective and the other isn't.

Re: Hmm...

Invoking the BNP, I'm guessing you feel your argument is a little weak and hope that some emotional rhetoric reinforces it.

Re: Who voted these buffoons in?

Most of the elected are drawn from party lists and the general public, usually, don't get a say in the ordering of those lists.

The system is rigged so party politicians always win.

Re: Is it me?

Might be because I've seen a few shops in my time.

Re: Is it me?

You need to have a look at the pixels.

What a stupid, stupid idea.

Companies don't pay vat they also don't pay corporation tax (even when they don't jump through hoops to avoid it)

The only person who pays corporation tax (for the entire chain) is the end customer (or the staff at the company in the chain which then effects how much they buy).

Whether it'll be possible to scrap corporation tax and for all companies in the chain to adjust their prices 'fairly' probably wouldn't happen. But then if a company in the supply chain starts gouging it's customers then a competitor could jump in.

Re: Apple Share Price ....

So are you going to get some free money from your prediction?

Wow, phone fangirlz & boyz are super serious.

Remember choosing a phone is not just a relatively cheap commitment you can dispose of after a few months it's for life.

God help you when you have to get a mortgage.

Re: What's that, then?

I hadn't heard of it before it was popular.

Re: Margaret Hodge = Hypocrite of the highest order

"You also don't know what goes on within them and if she has tried to get them to pay more tax."

I do know she has put the majority of her share holding in a tax efficient trust to once again avoid tax.

"Also, the expenses scandal had absolutely nothing to do with tax avoidance"

Apart from the MP's who repeatedly flipped houses to avoid paying capital gains tax. And even the ones who didn't avoid tax they sought to immorally abuse the rules to take taxpayers money.

Re: Margaret Hodge = Hypocrite of the highest order

"She is arguing for a strengthening of the law, which will directly cost her, because it's the right thing to do."

She can argue for changing the law without taking advantage of a law she feels is wrong.

I will not be lectured on tax by a bunch of thieving scum which, as the expenses episode demonstrated, do everything they can to avoid paying tax or maximizing their take.

Re: And the problem is....?

"Until the economic crash, caused by the financial industry, government expenditure was in step with revenue.

And debt was being paid-off."

So why were we running a deficit prior to the recession? About the only time we weren't running a deficit (and "paying off debt") was a few years in Labour's first term when they were trying to prove they had the economic nous to run the economy without it all ending in tears.

Not that the financial industry gets a free pass in the ongoing shit storm but splitting up the regulatory authority into three wise monkeys didn't help things but at least it gave the politicians some nice early PR about a "Tripartite Regulatory Authority ensuring the banks don't take unnecessary risks".

Along with the Tories who were promising to match Labour's fiscal incompetence in the hope that the public would be stupid enough to elect them.

Basically we've pay a fortune for 650 idiots to tells us lies whilst they get rich. And fools decide to treat the management of the nation like supporting a football team where everything is either the fault or not the fault of the idiots in power. But thats party politics.

Re: MP stands for Media Prozzy, right?

It's only bollocks if you can't distinguish between paying somebody for their labour and paying a company for a service, and then treating them differently.

Re: MP stands for Media Prozzy, right?

"It's referring to a piece..."

Actually it wasn't but having now had a glance they both come from the same premise. But I'm not sure I'd agree in your summation of the comments as most of the objections seemed to be insults. I'd also not agree with what you think is good business practice but I'm guess that's just hyperbole to help you reinforce what you think is a weak argument otherwise you'd let it stand on its own merits. And you set that stall out early by dropping the "shill" bomb.

Anyhow I'm sure you'll be eager to list amazons sources of income that have nothing to do with customers anywhere, and in your rush you must have forgot to put them in your post.

And finally I'm not advocating not paying tax but moving it to something like VAT, obviously there are problems with that but we're not starting from a problem free zone. One being the realignment of profits along the supply chain, another is VAT evasion, but that's something the government has cracked / cracking down on.

Re: MP stands for Media Prozzy, right?

"Eh?"

Put simply if a company takes £1.00 from a customer, after VAT is deducted they've got 80p turnover, this is split amongst their costs, like wages, rent, source materials, distribution and anything left is profit which is then taxed unless the company can find a way to reduce it...

And even if a company in that chain doesn't deal directly with the end customer no new money is introduced. People who object to this like to bring up business loans, but these are just borrowed against future turnover.

But I'm quite happy for somebody to point out where even the pitiful £1.8 million amazon paid in corporation tax came from if not the customers, and then any company that supplies amazon where does the money come from for them.

Re: So cancel corporation tax

Make perfect sense, seeing as only people pay corporation tax anyhow.

Re: ANY salesman will try to sell you something that his company sells

"(They must lose loads to shoplifting as well. I bought a small thing, declined a carrier bag, had my receipt emailed to me, and just walked out the shop with no obvious proof whatsoever I had actually paid.)"

And cant you handle the sale yourself via the apple store app nowadays?

Not that I would, I look guilty even if I haven't done anything

but pick up accessories play a level of pvz then leave like a panda.

Re: Not a fan

"2) Yes indeed, and I may choose an iPhone5 to replace my 3GS. I detest the Android model, so reject it as an option."

Then

"Which one? There are a lot to choose from."

& "Which android model? They don't all look the same! Something that can't be said for iclone."

& "Maybe he has an irrational fear of choice? Would certainly explain it."

Did IQs drop sharply around here? Obviously the OP is not talking about the various models of the phone, but the model of OS distinct from hardware.

And I'm not commenting on whether the OP is right on that or not, but one thing I feel about people who vehemently defend their choice of purchase, whether thats Apple or Android (or any other product for that matter), they've obviously got doubts they made the correct choice.

Re: Niche legacy hardware?

If "Mr Designer" can afford the £2k+ for the none base model but can't afford the dvd drive knowing that a portion of their client base has in the past brought in optical media for use then maybe they should re-evaluate their spending.

They've probably spent more on entertaining / advertising to get the client through the door in the first place.

Unless we want to spend the day designing more and more elaborate scenarios to find reasons why /why not a person would spend less than the cost of a decent bottle of wine during a client jolly to keep in a drawer.