If an Election were called right now?

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

Surely that would suggest a Con/UKIP pact, especially given how close the two parties are in certain areas?

If we had proportional representation, but with first past the post I suspect UKIP will just water down the Tory vote leaving more Labour wins and saving some Libs who otherwise would have lost seats due to their popularity drop.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

If I meant income tax, I'd have said income tax.

You seem to be quite evasive in your answer here.

If you think I'm daft enough to discuss my personal tax affairs on a public forum then you're mistaken.

 

[Another Surrey Shrimper]

I'm afraid it is almost never shareholders. This is only possible in a "closed economy" i.e. one where shareholders can't easily move their money somewhere else.

So the cost of corporation tax is borne by either customers in the form of higher costs or employees in lower wages. All of the academic literature finds that increases in corporation tax are borne by employees through lower wages or fewer jobs. Worth remembering when calling for companies to pay more tax. There is a negative impact on GDP and workers take the pain.

Surely all forms of tax and employee benefits and even wage levels have the same effect. It's not a very free market if small and medium sized companies have a higher tax burden than large companies.

 

[South Bank Hank]

As a Business English teacher[,] I'm well aware of the difference between tax-avoidance and tax-evasion,thank you.

The point is that companies like Google,Apple,Starbucks etc[.,] while fulfilling their legal obligatons to pay tax[,] are flouting the spirit of tax laws on a global scale and not paying their fair share of taxes internationally.

I'm not sure I see why a Business English teacher would know the technical differences when they're barely able to demonstrate a grasp of even basic English. I'm genuinely concerned for your classes.

 

[superblue24]

I'm not sure I see why a Business English teacher would know the technical differences when they're barely able to demonstrate a grasp of even basic English. I'm genuinely concerned for your classes.

...and his knowledge of "Business" is even worse!

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

I'm not sure I see why a Business English teacher would know the technical differences when they're barely able to demonstrate a grasp of even basic English. I'm genuinely concerned for your classes.

...and his knowledge of "Business" is even worse!

Good job I'm not a fan of prescriptive grammar then. :facepalm:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/boo...ternet-english-debasing-language-steven-poole :link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
(Attacking the messenger while ignoring the message is a tactic as old as the hills.Grow up boys).

 

[South Bank Hank]

Good job I'm not a fan of prescriptive grammar then. :facepalm:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/boo...ternet-english-debasing-language-steven-poole :link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
(Attacking the messenger while ignoring the message is a tactic as old as the hills.Grow up boys).

Actually, if you'd called me on personal abuse, I'd have thought about apologising however YOU offered your skills as a Business English teacher as evidence of your understanding of the argument.

As for addressing your other points, I've already done so earlier in the thread.

My post remains valid.

 

[superblue24]

Good job I'm not a fan of prescriptive grammar then. :facepalm:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/boo...ternet-english-debasing-language-steven-poole :link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
(Attacking the messenger while ignoring the message is a tactic as old as the hills.Grow up boys).

Your posts on this issue are impossible to argue as they have no point to them! What exactly are you trying to say and how is it relevant to this thread title? You're demanding changes in tax laws which we (as a country) hold no direct control over as the governance sits with the EU, so you can't be criticising the government(?) You are also oblivious (as ever) to the facts presented by Neil which you have failed to respond to with any plausible counter argument. This hardly surprises me as his well informed, coherent posts clearly leave you bamboozled on here with no other option but to change the subject, make an irrelevant comment, parade your qualifications in some self gratifying display, or post a guardian link....just so you can have the last word.

You are Shrimperzones answer to David Brent and arguing with you is just tiresome and irritating (I assume Neil has even given up this evening for the same reasons). I find it more enjoyable these days to undermine your posts as much as I can.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Actually, if you'd called me on personal abuse, I'd have thought about apologising however YOU offered your skills as a Business English teacher as evidence of your understanding of the argument.

Actually, I said as a Business English teacher, I knew the difference between tax-avoidance, (which is legal) and tax-evasion, (which is illegal).I made no comment whatsoever on my ability or "skills" as a teacher.

I did also call you (as you put it) on personal abuse (check the links).

As for addressing your other points, I've already done so earlier in the thread.

My post remains valid

.

In your own mind (where doubtless you're a legend), perhaps.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Your posts on this issue are impossible to argue as they have no point to them!

No more (and certaintly no less) than any of yours!

[

QUOTE]What exactly are you trying to say and how is it relevant to this thread title?

I picked Neil F.up on a point he made about people (like me) who criticise companies like Google for their grotesque tax-avoidance policies.

You are also oblivious (as ever) to the facts presented by Neil which you have failed to respond to with any plausible counter argument.

[/B][/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

Neil always makes a good argument for his (Tory)views.You don't.You prefer personal abuse. (It's a lot less taxing on your feeble intellect I imagine).

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Who will win the next election?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/29/andy-coulson-boris-johson-pm-david-cameron

"A new poll claimed most voters think the Tories are more divided now than under John Major in the 1990s. Asked whether Cameron is presiding over a more divided party than his Tory predecessor, 56% agreed and 23% disagreed, according to a poll by ComRes for The Independent. Just 29% of those questioned thought Cameron has the leadership qualities to win outright in 2015["/B]

 

[OldBlueLady]

Who will win the next election?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/may/29/andy-coulson-boris-johson-pm-david-cameron

"A new poll claimed most voters think the Tories are more divided now than under John Major in the 1990s. Asked whether Cameron is presiding over a more divided party than his Tory predecessor, 56% agreed and 23% disagreed, according to a poll by ComRes for The Independent. Just 29% of those questioned thought Cameron has the leadership qualities to win outright in 2015["/B]

And I bet there is a Daily Mail poll somewhere showing exactly the same about Millipede. Anyone else finding this all a bit tiresome?

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

And I bet there is a Daily Mail poll somewhere showing exactly the same about Millipede. Anyone else finding this all a bit tiresome?

If there is please provide the link.At least it would be on topic.:winking:

 

[Crabby Shrimper]

And I bet there is a Daily Mail poll somewhere showing exactly the same about Millipede. Anyone else finding this all a bit tiresome?

Not as tiring as his complaining about personal abuse, before then personally abusing someone!

I sense a re-use of the block button coming on

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Not as tiring as his complaining about personal abuse, before then personally abusing someone!

I sense a re-use of the block button coming on

It's called (justifiable) retaliation.I'm sure you're aware that in football terms,attack is very often the best means of defense.

 

[superblue24]

I picked Neil F.up on a point he made about people (like me) who criticise companies like Google for their grotesque tax-avoidance policies.

[/B]

[/QUOTE]

Neil always makes a good argument for his (Tory)views.You don't.You prefer personal abuse. (It's a lot less taxing on your feeble intellect I imagine).[/QUOTE]

Wrong again. I have in the past presented valid points, but you choose to ignore them and spin the topic in a different direction to suit your stance. You use links to a middle-right newspaper as if it's some kind of factual bible of life. You indulge in yourself at every opportunity and refuse to concede anything which makes it impossible to hold any kind of debate as it's "your way or the highway".

Debating anything with you is about as appealing as talking to my garden wall, so yes, I resort to picking holes in your posts when you come on here parading your stupidity.

 

[Cricko]

Here endeth the lesson...It would be nice if we could have a debate without all this childish behaviour in every thread.*sigh*