Maude simply fudged and demonstrated the lack of meaningful responses available to him by just raking over the past and scattergunning a bit of blame, and even then he didn't do it all that effectively. Bluster won't win this one. A bit of honesty will - and I think Cameron is noticing that and responding to it.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Last week's budget was all for non-doms. I read in The Guardian...
"In a paragraph in the middle of the treasury explanation of the budget, the chancellor said that he would raise the inheritance tax exemption for non-doms.
At the moment, a taxpayer domiciled in the UK can transfer their entire £325,000 inheritance tax allowance to their spouse if they are also based in Britain.
This figure is reduced to £55,000 if a UK taxpayer makes a transfer to a spouse who is not domiciled in the UK. Osborne said he would increase this figure, though he declined to set a figure."
Enough to make some Greene with envy?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Courtesy Independent.........
Change in the Polls....after being neck and neck for 18 months....after the Budget Labour is four points ahead......after
the``dinner for cash``scandal Labour is ten points ahead...............
Polls also show 70% of voters regard Conservative party the party for the Rich.............
Is the propaganda.........`what we inherited`....`we are all in it together`....finally wearing off?
The Poll shows that the donor scandal reinforces the perceptions from the 50p tax cut and budget for the Rich.........
Has there been a reversion to type?...........
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
now the polls are changing,
10 points ahead, blimey that wasn't expected
well well the start of the end for this cobbled together lot, and not before time.
post 79 SPOT ON !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 79...........# 80........thats Flashman for you..........
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
well bern
on your posting i agree with you
only those with rose tinted glasses would see otherwise
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
Latest one just in from Reg
Cartoon by Dave Brown of The Independent
**********************************************************
``Cameron`s...Dave and James....plumb the depths on the same day!``
************************************************************
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
a week howard?
surely you mean 2 years?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
the "granny bashing" budget and the "dinner for donors" fiasco were both within the same week.
the yellows seem to be distancing themselves from the p.r. blunders very well.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
cleggy seems to have learnt a little
although cables smugness doesnt help the lib dems
im sure cleggy cringes evertime cable is interviewed
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
Standard and Poor's have just cut Dave's credibility rating to trash status
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
you're on form tonight alex, be careful though or dave might set the school leopard on you.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
we have to hope tommorow will be a better day
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
Courtesy Independent..........
Cameron hired Adrian Beechcroft...£ 600,000 Donor...to produce a report to `hire and fire `employees without
recourse to claim unfair dismissal.........
Beechcroft owns Wonga.com....the short-term `high interest rate`loans company...a culture appearing to have
Cameron/Osborne backing.........they both wanted the report to become Policy..........but Vince Cable kicked it into the
long long grass...
Donor power would rule without the Coalition.........
Beechcroft report for hire and fire is full of the tory philosophy that the government should not interfere in anything.....
Top civil servants are worried about the involvement of tory donors in government policy making....they are not the
only ones
Cameron/Osborne accepted Beechcroft plan for ``no fault dismissal``...........
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
oh dear reg, this goes against barryw view of little government intererence.
and what a bad move that would have been i'm not normally in agreement with anything cable says, but im with him on this one.
already employees are weak and should be given more rights rather than weaken them
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
The problem that you Reg and Keith have is that logic and common sense are against you as well as experience.
Talk to any employer, think logically...
If you 'de-risk' employing someone you will encourage more people to be employed.
There are many risks in expanding a business and if you can at least reduce one of those risks it will help generate more jobs.
Protectionism aimed at employment clearly adds risks to that along with costs.
Our competitors in the Far East have far fewer employment risks than we have in the UK and even more so in Europe. If we want to grow the economy and bring down unemployment we have to respond and do what we can to encourage employment - that mean making it easier and less costly to sack employees among other measures.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
your correct barryw, other countries pay of 6p an hour secures there jobs
so you half right.
we need more security not less
there is an alternative to your biased right wing view barryw
by having secure employment employees then spend more in the economy
by not having security means not having that spending and people dont spend because of the insecurity
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
dave is playing a dangerous game taking donations from this venture capitalist chap, i think the yellows done him a favour here in blocking the plan.
