If an Election were called right now?

[Cricko]

Simple question to gauge the thoughts of Zoners..who would you vote for if an election were called now?

Anonymous poll.

 

[MK Shrimper]

Not sure i'd bother sadly.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

I believe everyone should vote, use it or lose it etc.
But none are particularly worthy and I would have to vote for the party I least disliked rather than one I was in favour of.

 

[BrettieAngell]

Spoil my vote.

 

[Hotman]

Looks like I'm the only Tory.

A socialist party isn't suitable for the current economic climate, and a one-trick party isn't suitable for any economic climate.

So it's between Lib Dems and Tories. And I remember as a teenager, thinking how ridiculous it was that the Lib Dems chase the student 'protest' vote. Nothing has changed since.

 

[Cricko]

Looks like I'm the only Tory.

A socialist party isn't suitable for the current economic climate, and a one-trick party isn't suitable for any economic climate.

So it's between Lib Dems and Tories. And I remember as a teenager, thinking how ridiculous it was that the Lib Dems chase the student 'protest' vote. Nothing has changed since.

The Cons will never get back in again until they ditch the current PM, his policies and his bunch of heartless cronies.. IDS being the main protagonist.

 

[Dick Bate's Protege]

Looks like I'm the only Tory.

A socialist party isn't suitable for the current economic climate, and a one-trick party isn't suitable for any economic climate.

So it's between Lib Dems and Tories. And I remember as a teenager, thinking how ridiculous it was that the Lib Dems chase the student 'protest' vote. Nothing has changed since.

Like you, I'd vote Tory. As tempting as voting UKIP might be, if I did that it would only strengthen Labour's chances IMO.

Having said that I'll vote UKIP in next years European elections.

 

[OldBlueLady]

Tories need to ditch the bleeding hearts, they'd still be my 1st choice but UKIP are definitely going to take some of their vote next time.

 

[Cricko]

The rich get richer at the cost of the poorer getting poorer.

 

[Hotman]

Cricko, the '1%' shoulder by far the larger share of tax due, and contribute to charity far more than the 99%.

If the 1% carry on being arse raped, they might stand up and not take it any more, and move somewhere where the burden is lower.

 

[Cricko]

Cricko, the '1%' shoulder by far the larger share of tax due, and contribute to charity far more than the 99%.

If the 1% carry on being arse raped, they might stand up and not take it any more, and move somewhere where the burden is lower.

****ing hell you mean it is now down to 1% ..that is a worry on its own..no doubt the day will come when 1 person owns the world.

That 1% includes I take it the likes of the American companies such as Google. Amazon, etc etc who are special needs.

What gives this right of this 1% to lord it over the 99%..money that is all.

 

[chapperzUK]

****ing hell you mean it is now down to 1% ..that is a worry on its own..no doubt the day will come when 1 person owns the world.

That 1% includes I take it the likes of the American companies such as Google. Amazon, etc etc who are special needs.

What gives this right of this 1% to lord it over the 99%..money that is all.

Is that the same Google that paid £10m in corporation tax between 2006 and 2011?

 

[Cricko]

Is that the same Google that paid £10m in corporation tax between 2006 and 2011?

Lol that much on how many Billions!

 

[Hotman]

****ing hell you mean it is now down to 1% ..that is a worry on its own..no doubt the day will come when 1 person owns the world.

That 1% includes I take it the likes of the American companies such as Google. Amazon, etc etc who are special needs.

What gives this right of this 1% to lord it over the 99%..money that is all.

I used 1% (in quotes) as it was the headline used by those protesters a couple of years ago.

Obviously the percentage changes depending on where you set the bar for 'rich'.

I wouldn't say Google or Amazon 'lord it' over anyone else - they provide a service for which they are remunerated. Out of which they make substantial tax and philanthropical contributions.

There are always bad eggs, but then we get into the benefit cheats vs tax dodgers argument...

 

[Hotman]

Lol that much on how many Billions!

They reported losses each year between 2006 - 2011.

Tax is determined on profit / loss, not turnover.

The fact that they paid a Bermudan company for use of the code is:

a) legal;
b) only unfair on US as the code was (I presume) developed there.

 

[Cricko]

They reported losses each year between 2006 - 2011.

Tax is determined on profit / loss, not turnover.

The fact that they paid a Bermudan company for use of the code is:

a) legal;
b) only unfair on US as the code was (I presume) developed there.

Karl you are not that naive to suggest that Googles accountants are not **** hot and find every way possible to save taxes...legit ( I use that word loosely) they will manipulate whatever they need to not have to pay back into the system that provides them their income in the first place.

 

[chapperzUK]

Lol that much on how many Billions!

They pay UK corporation tax on activity in the UK. They may have made billions overall, I bet the majority of that was not in the UK.

I do find it funny when people criticise these companies for avoiding tax, yet if they were given a chance to pay as little tax as possible they would do the same.

 

[Hotman]

I agree on both points:

• They have **** hot accountants (on the face of it)
• The Americans must be livid that their tax isn't being paid.

how does it affect us?

 

[Cricko]

They pay UK corporation tax on activity in the UK. They may have made billions overall, I bet the majority of that was not in the UK.

I do find it funny when people criticise these companies for avoiding tax, yet if they were given a chance to pay as little tax as possible they would do the same.

"And Google's UK unit paid just £6m to the Treasury in 2011 on UK turnover of £395m".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-20560359

 

[Hotman]

And another point - let's say we become a tax haven and foreign companies transfer their funds to us. Would we be moaning about the principle then?