|
|
Post by everso on May 18, 2009 12:20:40 GMT
Doesn't anybody find it just a little bit convenient that this falls directly after bankers awarding themselves millions on top of excessive salaries and expenses for making a total balls-up of gambling our money entrusted to them for their personal benefit? Who hasn't boasted of fiddling expenses, nicking stuff from work, pushing allowances to the extreme of their letter and to Hell with their 'spirit'? So MPs are supposed to [represent us, not to to be moral superiors. But how convenient that theycan be 'caught' pushing expenses just like everybody else when the real Lords of the Land have just been caught out behaving as Lords of the Land always have without a damn in the world for anybody or anything except what they can rip off? Even the politicians admit that they are not in control, these unelected arrogant plutocrats answerable to nobody and to whom our 'representatives' represent us and get kicked in the face run the real show. Not really. The question of politicians fiddling expenses was going on long before that all came to a head. What I find hard to believe is that you haven't dragged feminists into your argument.  |
|
|
|
Post by bonbonlarue on May 18, 2009 16:45:38 GMT
30 odd years ago in Handsworth Ms Short was well known in local pubs and bought lots and lots of beer. Not for the likes of us of course, it was quite clear whose vote she wanted. And boy, how they laughed as she left...free beer! You don't get that in Delhi. But they obviously voted too.  Indeed...but didn't MY vote deserve a beer? |
|
|
|
Post by everso on May 18, 2009 17:18:20 GMT
With regard to Mr. Speaker:  (Except we're not still in love with him and we DO want to see him go) Love that Moody Blues song! |
|
|
|
Post by Patrick on May 18, 2009 22:28:01 GMT
With regard to Mr. Speaker: (Except we're not still in love with him and we DO want to see him go) Love that Moody Blues song! Funnily enough I was just thinking earlier on (If I had the stuff to put it together) of taking footage of Mr Martin and putting a certain song over the top. Can I remember what song I was going to use now? Can I Diddly!   |
|
|
|
Post by Patrick on May 18, 2009 22:52:07 GMT
Good Channel 4 "Dispatches" tonight. Funny feeling it's been on before - 'cos all these financial meltdown ones look the same these days!
I'm surprised some begrudged lowly banking worker hasn't been round trying to do these big bosses in! Like the ex RBS worker whose pension will now end up being around £14 a week after 27 odd years service!
|
|
|
|
Post by Flatypus on May 19, 2009 1:34:05 GMT
What I find hard to believe is that you haven't dragged feminists into your argument. Well there have been a few blatting on that if women ran the world then none of this would happen but O Woops, some of the dodgy personnel are women just the same as men, so of course they can't be real feminist martyrs, just female patriarchs like every woman who imagines herself not the grovelling inferior to dominant males that feminists demand. I hadn't expected to need to meet the Tin-hat, Illuminati, Alien Reptiles Shapeshifters, Feminist Patriarchal Conspiracy Explanation for All Things in one word. |
|
|
|
Post by swl on May 19, 2009 8:56:51 GMT
Nothing sinister about this at all, it's been building steadily since MPs voted against reforming the John Lewis list last year. Once the trickle of stories started, it was impossible to stop. Spoke to an insider yesterday who told me both the Labour and Tory spin offices in Millbank are going frantic trying to stop stories getting out. They've drafted in virtually everyone with any press contacts to join the effort in jumping on journalists, but there's just so much stuff coming out that they can't catch it all. Added to that is they have to balance jumping on journalists with being nice to them in order to get positive coverage of their Euro Election campaigns.
And of course, all the parties have suffered as funding has dried up. Partly due to the recession and partly because donors don't want to be seen giving money to people who are blatantly on the take.
Interesting times.
|
|
|
|
Post by Patrick on May 19, 2009 10:22:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Patrick on May 21, 2009 17:47:43 GMT
How wonderful to hear today that James Purnell is one of the cheats! Perhaps we could also call him a "Benefit Cheat"! Surely his position is untenable after this! Trouble is of course that it looks like a bit of a grey area.....
"A spokesman for Purnell said: "When he bought his constituency home [in Manchester in 2002], the sale of his London flat fell through, but it was sold within the period that HM Revenue and Customs continue to treat it as not being liable for CGT.
"No one pays CGT when they sell the only house they own and James was not liable for capital gains tax on his London flat. This would have been true for any taxpayer; there was no special treatment.
"To be absolutely clear that he was paying the right tax, James sought advice at the time that the rules were the same for an MP as for any other taxpayer and he has since contacted the HMRC to ask them to double-check his calculations. HMRC have confirmed that there is no CGT to pay."
Homeowners have a three-year window after moving into a new home during which they do not have to pay capital gains tax on the sale of the old property."
Which is a pity 'cos I think the man's a slimey little git. With the sort of face you long to hit!
|
|
|
|
Post by everso on May 21, 2009 18:02:31 GMT
How wonderful to hear today that James Purnell is one of the cheats! Perhaps we could also call him a "Benefit Cheat"! Surely his position is untenable after this! Trouble is of course that it looks like a bit of a grey area..... "A spokesman for Purnell said: "When he bought his constituency home [in Manchester in 2002], the sale of his London flat fell through, but it was sold within the period that HM Revenue and Customs continue to treat it as not being liable for CGT.
"No one pays CGT when they sell the only house they own and James was not liable for capital gains tax on his London flat. This would have been true for any taxpayer; there was no special treatment.
"To be absolutely clear that he was paying the right tax, James sought advice at the time that the rules were the same for an MP as for any other taxpayer and he has since contacted the HMRC to ask them to double-check his calculations. HMRC have confirmed that there is no CGT to pay."
Homeowners have a three-year window after moving into a new home during which they do not have to pay capital gains tax on the sale of the old property."Which is a pity 'cos I think the man's a slimey little git. With the sort of face you long to hit! How unfluffy of you Shazza! But correct, just the same. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 21, 2009 22:04:39 GMT
Doesn't anybody find it just a little bit convenient that this falls directly after bankers awarding themselves millions on top of excessive salaries and expenses for making a total balls-up of gambling our money entrusted to them for their personal benefit? Who hasn't boasted of fiddling expenses, nicking stuff from work, pushing allowances to the extreme of their letter and to Hell with their 'spirit'? So MPs are supposed to [represent us, not to to be moral superiors. But how convenient that theycan be 'caught' pushing expenses just like everybody else when the real Lords of the Land have just been caught out behaving as Lords of the Land always have without a damn in the world for anybody or anything except what they can rip off? Even the politicians admit that they are not in control, these unelected arrogant plutocrats answerable to nobody and to whom our 'representatives' represent us and get kicked in the face run the real show. Not really. The question of politicians fiddling expenses was going on long before that all came to a head. What I find hard to believe is that you haven't dragged feminists into your argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Flatypus on May 21, 2009 22:59:43 GMT
Thanks for reviving that RF. That it was all going on without question before the Banking Business but the Media suddenly made An Issue of it immediately thereafter makes it look even more suspicious n'est-che pon?
I have no need to drag feminists into it of course, since I can always rely on them to drag themselves in.
|
|
|
|
Post by everso on May 22, 2009 19:09:38 GMT
Thanks for reviving that RF. That it was all going on without question before the Banking Business but the Media suddenly made An Issue of it immediately thereafter makes it look even more suspicious n'est-che pon? I have no need to drag feminists into it of course, since I can always rely on them to drag themselves in. |
|
|
|
Post by swl on May 22, 2009 22:16:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Flatypus on May 22, 2009 23:23:43 GMT
I have even stronger suspicions of diversionary tactics since hearing that the man who released the first leak heads a private intelligence agency - much the same sort of euphemism in terms of information and disinformation manipulation as private security agency is for no questions asked mercenaries
|
|
|
|
Post by swl on May 24, 2009 13:00:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by markindurham on Jun 1, 2009 8:33:07 GMT
Ah, but he didn't trouser it, did he? It's allegedly gone to UKIP coffers, hasn't it? |
|
|
|
Post by swl on Jun 1, 2009 9:09:26 GMT
Once he's acted dishonestly by diverting the money in the first place, are we supposed to believe a word he says?
That money is taken from things like staff allowances - money that could have given someone a job. That job is created to help the people of the constituency - ie I intend to employ someone whose job it is to go round charities and small businesses and actually do the paperwork for EU funding for them. I spoke to one charity who were aware of EU funding but were daunted at the paperwork involved to get it.
So Farage hasn't simply taken EU gravy, he's stolen from his constituents in order to produce party political propaganda.
|
|
