st albans fox

None of this is particularly arguable. I don’t see it changing to any great degree though

Whilst this was undoubtedly true in times past, I think it becomes increasingly less true nowadays. not the very rich anyway. Lots of small business owners may be underpaying their staff and living a very decent lifestyle. But they’re not the wealthy that most speak of. The mega businesses who pay very average wages don’t belong to individuals any more. (In the vast majority of cases).

we are where we are Your opinion is valid but not caring about wealthy people leaving the country is imo ‘cutting your nose off to spite your face’ (or whatever the saying is) whatever the govt do, they won’t address taxing the ultra wealthy because it just won’t stick. Really wealthy people find ways around the rules. Those British nationals leaving on the basis of their tax position are doing so out of fear rather than reality. The non doms who are relocating because of the new rules about taxing their global income is imo a misjudged policy. Would be far better to raise their cost of being here to 500k/annum in the short term and see what happens. I bet that would raise at least what the new rules do and we would still have them all here spending and contributing to the economy. I wasn’t arguing - just continuing on the back of your response to me. I fear you get so many negative responses that you just assume every reply is picking a fight 😄

we all pay lots of taxes on consumption. Wealthier people pay more than poorer people because they consume way more. It’s not a debate.

are we arguing that a multi millionaire and a cleaner are making the same annual contribution to the uk exchequer ?? and that the cleaner will build that same wealth over the next decade ? irrespective of your position on this, the idea that it’s a good thing for wealthy people to leave the country is ridiculous. there are no easy answers to this. I suspect if they’re going to bring in a wealth tax of some kind then the easiest one will be to just levy a fixed amount (£4k) on top of council tax top band H. Otherwise you’re introducing lots or new costs and complications if you try and revalue to current levels or try and tax actual ‘wealth’. of course that means those owners of a £2m property will pay the same as a £6m or £20m. That will lead to lots of complaints, especially in the se but that’s not an area of the country labour is desperate to please.

Wasn’t his poor clearance but he did well to avoid blocking the goal bound shot - almost Danny wardesque!

Seems like life is becoming more like a sixties satirical tv program every day Birmingham agency bin staff to strike over bullying https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg7nxx7dl40o

The Macquarie loan indicated that it could be nearer 15m.

Surely he can’t be that ham fisted and obvious ?

wymsey warned us this wasn’t going to be pleasant. Disgusting bloke. How many years had he been getting away with this? How many kids could be affected ? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgkxvjj054o

Ric is quiet on this must be updating his CV

Firstly I think Top is going to be quite disappointed by those interested in the job. Secondly, the person we get in should tell us how much say rudkin will still have. If it looks like a yes man then still a lot. If we manage to get a strong personality person in then just maybe ……….

the legal side is irrelevant to what is responsible journalism in a world of actual fake news. whilst the Beeb may well be able to defend any case for the reasons you have stated (and more), they need access to the white house to do their job over the next few years. Apologising for doing what they did isn’t such a stretch although their lawyers may advise that they don’t do this until trump’s case has fallen apart.

maybe to put an end to this? If the bbc are confident that they won’t get successfully sued in the states then they could just ignore it from now on. But trump and his minions won’t let it drop and will reference it at every opportunity which will undermine the corporation’s news journos over there. irrespective of what you think of trump, no one has claimed that what the bbc did was defensible. it’s no big deal to apologise profusely for that and they could word the apology in a way that highlights the irony of having to apologise to the kings of manipulation.

BBC faces fresh claim of misleading Trump edit https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr5e9erpnzlo if a us court can assert jurisdiction (unclear atm) then this won’t help the BBC’s case

Didn’t know it was about the football regulator my point stands though. Politics is full of lobby groups. All sorts of shady stuff happens that we never find out about. Sometimes it might take a decade for people to receive their pay off but I assure you that they do.

Well not in a brown paper bag …….

If the cloud cover is kind tonight then it’s likely an excellent chance to see the aurora !!!!

If he stays till end June then we have to pay his wages till end June if we can move him on for free in Jan then someone may take on those wages in lieu of any loan/tramfer fee. all monies are inside the current financial year so makes no difference to us re timings

Well it came from the telegraph so it was hardly going to have been written by a Marxist ………

Just don’t see incomings in Jan unless loans. would like to think that we could move a couple on if only to save six months of their wages

Fwiw, given that he said quite a lot leading up to Jan 6 which was effectively understood as meaning what was spliced together, whilst a court would likely find in his favour, the damages may well be fairly limited on the basis that his reputation hasn't been sullied that much because he had pretty much said what they edited to show he said.

Bomb in Delhi yesterday bomb in Islamabad today

News broadcasts routinely splice together bits of speeches to give a general sense of them They do but this was really poor. Trump absolutely did cause the January 6th riots Well yes and no. He’d not be found guilty in a court of law but he’d be probably be struggling in a civil action to evade responsibility.

Under this govt, the bbc will not disappear. If farage got in then it will survive but not as we know it. my guess on this and previous similar issues is that its down to cost cutting (outside production companies being used) and a related lack of due diligence on the content in these programs.