Jeremy Corbyn, thoughts?

[MARYROSE02]

you are taking taking it completely out of context to make it sound wrong, fact of the matter is that person isn't violating anyone's privacy so that factor would even come into play

 

What, you mean that people who suffer a burglary in their home, regardless of whether anything is taken, do NOT feel a sense of being 'violated?'

 

And you continue to argue that 'little' crimes are excused by bigger ones, which is a fallacy, because 'two wrongs do not make a right.' So what if a rogue businessman syphons off ten million dollars from his tax. If the 7-11 outisde my flat is robbed for $50, it does not mean that that crime should go unpunished.

[MARYROSE02]

No the op was quite a success according to the jungle drums.

 

We alll supposedly have our male and female sides?!

[flag of convenience]

We alll supposedly have our male and female sides?!

 

We do and to our personal advantage to embrace both sides.

[flag of convenience]

What, you mean that people who suffer a burglary in their home, regardless of whether anything is taken, do NOT feel a sense of being 'violated?'

 

And you continue to argue that 'little' crimes are excused by bigger ones, which is a fallacy, because 'two wrongs do not make a right.' So what if a rogue businessman syphons off ten million dollars from his tax. If the 7-11 outisde my flat is robbed for $50, it does not mean that that crime should go unpunished.

The difference being one is a personal violation, while impacts on the individual is hardly widely felt. The other due to the enormity of the amount impacts society.

[MARYROSE02]

The difference being one is a personal violation, while impacts on the individual is hardly widely felt. The other due to the enormity of the amount impacts society.

 

But it's the personal crime that affects us most because we are individuals first? On the other hand, put all the little crimes together, and what have you got? Do we care about one person not buying a ticket for the train? (I so love reading about someone copping a $200 fine for dodging a $5 fare!)

[newjez]

But it's the personal crime that affects us most because we are individuals first? On the other hand, put all the little crimes together, and what have you got? Do we care about one person not buying a ticket for the train? (I so love reading about someone copping a $200 fine for dodging a $5 fare!)

Have you thought about getting a cape and wearing your underparts on the outside?

 

Really, life is too short.

[akiralx]

Coming back to Corbyn, it's clear that the right-wing UK press are determined to get him, by inventing every type of smear imaginable.

 

For example, The Independent has strangely turned on him, claiming yesterday that he controversially wanted to reintroduce Clause Four to the Labour Party constitution, which would of course be problematic.

 

In fact he said nothing of the sort, merely stating, as he has in the past, that he is in favour of public ownership of the railways and maybe some other utilities - which the majority of the UK public are apparently in favour of, to the irritation of the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph and others.

 

What is clear is that if Corbyn is elected Labour leader any policy he puts forward will be presented in a pejorative way via the distorting lens of the UK media.

[Thom]

 

In fact he said nothing of the sort, merely stating, as he has in the past, that he is in favour of public ownership of the railways and maybe some other utilities - which the majority of the UK public are apparently in favour of, to the irritation of the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph and others.

 

 

 

No one who experienced, or as I did, worked for, the nationalised railways would want a return to them

[akiralx]

No one who experienced, or as I did, worked for, the nationalised railways would want a return to them

 

Well, the UK public are in favour 3:1 (60%-20%), so it seems a popular idea. Even Conservative voters are not opposed. The belief is that a national railway system should be answerable to taxpayers not shareholders. Stations, signalling and tracks already are in public ownership of course. Publicly-owned railways work perfectly well in France and Germany, no reason why they shouldn't in the UK.

[flag of convenience]

But it's the personal crime that affects us most because we are individuals first? On the other hand, put all the little crimes together, and what have you got? Do we care about one person not buying a ticket for the train? (I so love reading about someone copping a $200 fine for dodging a $5 fare!)

 

 

I recall the days in London when we seldom paid to ride the tube or buses for that matter. So no good coming to me on that one. (many I know didn't either) Fares were ridiculous and the Can Pay, Won't Pay policy of leading Left figures of the time. No makes little difference in comparison to what is being skimmed off or worse by the big hitters depriving society of funding.

[flag of convenience]

Well, the UK public are in favour 3:1 (60%-20%), so it seems a popular idea. Even Conservative voters are not opposed. The belief is that a national railway system should be answerable to taxpayers not shareholders. Stations, signalling and tracks already are in public ownership of course. Publicly-owned railways work perfectly well in France and Germany, no reason why they shouldn't in the UK.

 

Darn expensive in Germany though. Still fully agree they should be answerable to tax payers and customers above share holders who probably seldom if ever use them.

[flag of convenience]

No one who experienced, or as I did, worked for, the nationalised railways would want a return to them

 

I did experience and far preferable than present system. Not only chaotic in pricing but in cutting routes as well.

[caramac]

I thought many of the companies which now run the railways are actually the publicly owned companies of other European countries? Arriva is a subsidiary of Deutsche Bahn, for instance. Seems madness that profits made here go into their public system..

[Guest51810]

Ours is arriva. Still crap although at least some of them have wifi. Oh the luxury :laugh:

[MARYROSE02]

Not every country has opted for public ownership of railways, Japan for instance.

 

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2011/10/why-tokyos-privately-owned-rail-systems-work-so-well/389/

[Skyba]

What, you mean that people who suffer a burglary in their home, regardless of whether anything is taken, do NOT feel a sense of being 'violated?'

 

And you continue to argue that 'little' crimes are excused by bigger ones, which is a fallacy, because 'two wrongs do not make a right.' So what if a rogue businessman syphons off ten million dollars from his tax. If the 7-11 outisde my flat is robbed for $50, it does not mean that that crime should go unpunished.

 

 

No I wasn't saying that, I was saying That avoiding tax is not violating someone's privacy. It's pointless discussing anything with you if you just make things up and make out I'm saying things I'm not to try and make your ridiculous claims sound reasonable.

 

 

nonody has said its right for anyone to tax dodge but if they aren't going to stop the big guy why should the little guy not try it on when they need the money and the amount they will dodge will make no difference but your buddy the share holder is taking enough to clear the national debt FFS. You right wing nutter will take any straw you can to justify the, let's use your wording, a burglary of the nation.

 

 

If you want to use you analogy the little guy dodging tax is like someone taking a pint of mil of your Doorstep, the likes of Starbucks is the equivalent of someone breaking into every house in an entire city and taking everyone prisoner while they take every single belonging in ever single house and when the police catch them they just as them to release the prisoners but they can go away with all their belongings and face no further action

[MARYROSE02]

No I wasn't saying that, I was saying That avoiding tax is not violating someone's privacy. It's pointless discussing anything with you if you just make things up and make out I'm saying things I'm not to try and make your ridiculous claims sound reasonable.

 

 

nonody has said its right for anyone to tax dodge but if they aren't going to stop the big guy why should the little guy not try it on when they need the money and the amount they will dodge will make no difference but your buddy the share holder is taking enough to clear the national debt FFS. You right wing nutter will take any straw you can to justify the, let's use your wording, a burglary of the nation.

 

 

If you want to use you analogy the little guy dodging tax is like someone taking a pint of mil of your Doorstep, the likes of Starbucks is the equivalent of someone breaking into every house in an entire city and taking everyone prisoner while they take every single belonging in ever single house and when the police catch them they just as them to release the prisoners but they can go away with all their belongings and face no further action

Look up the list of fallacious arguments with particular reference to:

1 Ad homonym which is "attacking the man" rather than addressing the argument as in " You right wing nutters'

 

And

 

2 Two Wrongs do not make a right

 

You keep excusing little crimes so obviously you think people who dodge their rail fares should not be punished.

[MARYROSE02]

Coming back to Corbyn, it's clear that the right-wing UK press are determined to get him, by inventing every type of smear imaginable.

 

For example, The Independent has strangely turned on him, claiming yesterday that he controversially wanted to reintroduce Clause Four to the Labour Party constitution, which would of course be problematic.

 

In fact he said nothing of the sort, merely stating, as he has in the past, that he is in favour of public ownership of the railways and maybe some other utilities - which the majority of the UK public are apparently in favour of, to the irritation of the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph and others.

 

What is clear is that if Corbyn is elected Labour leader any policy he puts forward will be presented in a pejorative way via the distorting lens of the UK media.

The Independent is NOT a right wing paper, and even if it was, so what, Labour voters do not read right wing papers.

[MARYROSE02]

I recall the days in London when we seldom paid to ride the tube or buses for that matter. So no good coming to me on that one. (many I know didn't either) Fares were ridiculous and the Can Pay, Won't Pay policy of leading Left figures of the time. No makes little difference in comparison to what is being skimmed off or worse by the big hitters depriving society of funding.

Why bother with fares and tickets?

[MARYROSE02]

No I wasn't saying that, I was saying That avoiding tax is not violating someone's privacy. It's pointless discussing anything with you if you just make things up and make out I'm saying things I'm not to try and make your ridiculous claims sound reasonable.

 

 

nonody has said its right for anyone to tax dodge but if they aren't going to stop the big guy why should the little guy not try it on when they need the money and the amount they will dodge will make no difference but your buddy the share holder is taking enough to clear the national debt FFS. You right wing nutter will take any straw you can to justify the, let's use your wording, a burglary of the nation.

 

 

If you want to use you analogy the little guy dodging tax is like someone taking a pint of mil of your Doorstep, the likes of Starbucks is the equivalent of someone breaking into every house in an entire city and taking everyone prisoner while they take every single belonging in ever single house and when the police catch them they just as them to release the prisoners but they can go away with all their belongings and face no further action

So when the little old lady or someone housebound finds their milk gone and they can't get to the shops to buy another, they should just think of the big bad businessmen stealing millions of pounds and they week realize how selfish they are to hate that milk burglar.

[Skyba]

So when the little old lady or someone housebound finds their milk gone and they can't get to the shops to buy another, they should just think of the big bad businessmen stealing millions of pounds and they week realize how selfish they are to hate that milk burglar.

 

 

 

You do love adding a thrd completely out of context dynamic to a metaphore just to try and justify the right.

 

You support a government who prefer to punish the small guy and allow the big guy to get away with murder. Nobody has excused the small guy but IF you have to choose one over the other surely it's better to persecute the wrong that is for greed over the wrong that's for life!!!

 

I am saying everyone should be treated equally, a crime at the top should be a crime at the bottom, you actually support a government who don't practice this yet you seem to try and justify that by saying well Dave over there robbed £2.50 so why should Dave over there worry about he £250bn he robbed??

[MARYROSE02]

You do love adding a thrd completely out of context dynamic to a metaphore just to try and justify the right.

 

You support a government who prefer to punish the small guy and allow the big guy to get away with murder. Nobody has excused the small guy but IF you have to choose one over the other surely it's better to persecute the wrong that is for greed over the wrong that's for life!!!

 

I am saying everyone should be treated equally, a crime at the top should be a crime at the bottom, you actually support a government who don't practice this yet you seem to try and justify that by saying well Dave over there robbed £2.50 so why should Dave over there worry about he £250bn he robbed??

So you are saying that under the present Govt "big" crimes always go unpunished? HMRC and the police are told by the Govt to ignore "big" crimes?

[Skyba]

So you are saying that under the present Govt "big" crimes always go unpunished? HMRC and the police are told by the Govt to ignore "big" crimes?

 

 

 

It's a FACT that HMRC know that they are owed enough in unpaid and dodged tax from the multi nationals and bankers bonus' to clear the national debt. The Tories refuse to close the tax loopholes that let mr Arcadia earn millions and pay 0% tax because the company is owned by Mrs Arcadia who lives perminantly in Jersey.

 

Vodafone owed £8bn in tax yet HMRC allowed them to pay £1.2bn because well they are a big company why should we get them to pay tax at the same rate as the people who need the money more???

 

Big corporations in this country get away financially crippling this country with unpaid tax and the Tories spend there days thinking of which benefit to cut next which actually only harms the economy. More cuts means less jobs which means more relying on benefits so they fix that issue by cutting the benefits leaving people with even less and when people can't spend the economy slows and down and down the spiral goes.

 

coincidence that today yet another count has come in post election that the unemployment rate has gone up again!! More likely story is the figures were falsified pre election to ensure the public stay on the side of cuts and pain..

 

Also lets mention the bargain basement sell off of the Royal Mail and RBS to the rich!!! The tax payer bails out RBS, RBS gives that bailout money to its bankers in bonus' instead of using it to get the economy moving and now the Tories sell it off at a £1bn loss over night!!!! Yes the Tories are so economically responsible!!! If a contract manager for a company went to his boss and said he'd sold off part of their company at only a £1bn loss over night you'd be picking the guys teeth up from the floor for months

[MARYROSE02]

It's a FACT that HMRC know that they are owed enough in unpaid and dodged tax from the multi nationals and bankers bonus' to clear the national debt. The Tories refuse to close the tax loopholes that let mr Arcadia earn millions and pay 0% tax because the company is owned by Mrs Arcadia who lives perminantly in Jersey.

 

Vodafone owed £8bn in tax yet HMRC allowed them to pay £1.2bn because well they are a big company why should we get them to pay tax at the same rate as the people who need the money more???

 

Big corporations in this country get away financially crippling this country with unpaid tax and the Tories spend there days thinking of which benefit to cut next which actually only harms the economy. More cuts means less jobs which means more relying on benefits so they fix that issue by cutting the benefits leaving people with even less and when people can't spend the economy slows and down and down the spiral goes.

 

coincidence that today yet another count has come in post election that the unemployment rate has gone up again!! More likely story is the figures were falsified pre election to ensure the public stay on the side of cuts and pain..

 

Also lets mention the bargain basement sell off of the Royal Mail and RBS to the rich!!! The tax payer bails out RBS, RBS gives that bailout money to its bankers in bonus' instead of using it to get the economy moving and now the Tories sell it off at a £1bn loss over night!!!! Yes the Tories are so economically responsible!!! If a contract manager for a company went to his boss and said he'd sold off part of their company at only a £1bn loss over night you'd be picking the guys teeth up from the floor for months

Some of that is true. I worked fior RM and hated seeing it sold off so cheaply though wasnt it a Lib Democrat minister who was responsible for RM? And there was nothing to stop little guys from buying shares. I imagine RM shareholders include pension funds so we'all have an interest in RM doing well.

 

I don't like the rorts any more than you do but many companies register themselves in tax havens like Jersey.

 

Are you saying that ALL big corporations evade their tax responsiblities and HMRC is instructed by the Tories to leave them alone and concentrate on working class tax dodgers?

 

We have Labour govts too. Why don't they put a stop to the evil big corporations and their rorts?

 

And you continue to justify little guy fiddles on the basis that if big guys get away with it, it's only right that little guys do too.

 

I don't recall any response to my adhominem charge either.

[grahamffc]

Corporations such as Vodafone, Starbucks, Amazon etc can threaten to leave the country resulting in not only HMRC getting zero corporation tax but also losing the VAT, personal income tax & NI their presence generates and thousands of people on the dole. They really hold all the cards and for the government to do anger them would be like cutting their nose off to spite their face. The principle might not be for be fair but I prefer it to the alternative which would be to increase taxes on those who cannot avoid it, ie 'normal' people.