The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
Again, are you a lawyer? Because the law is what it actually is, not what you think off the top of your head it ought to be.
That case would be lost in the court of public opinion before it ever came to the legal court. Mr Sunak might not be the deftest of politicians but I don't think he'd make that mistake
Are you suggesting that the site moderators rely on that?
All MPs are automatically domiciled in the UK for tax purposes.
See s41 Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.
41Tax status of MPs and members of the House of Lords
(1)Subsection (2) applies if a person is for any part of a tax year—
(a)a member of the House of Commons, or
(b)a member of the House of Lords.
(2)The person is to be treated for the purposes of the taxes listed in subsection (3) as resident and domiciled in the United Kingdom for the whole of that tax year.
Hmm. Once they've built these labs, will they be able to get the workers in? You'd almost need reverse commuting from London and Harlow up the M11 to Cambridge.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
Again, are you a lawyer? Because the law is what it actually is, not what you think off the top of your head it ought to be.
So explain why my second paragraph is wrong, Mr Lawyer.
Talk about giving high-income, high-taxpaying workers a massive incentive to take early retirement.
They have already tinkered with it a few times and the lifetime allowance being cut to its current level was one of the reasons given for GP's and Dentists retiring early.
All MPs are automatically domiciled in the UK for tax purposes.
See s41 Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.
41Tax status of MPs and members of the House of Lords
(1)Subsection (2) applies if a person is for any part of a tax year—
(a)a member of the House of Commons, or
(b)a member of the House of Lords.
(2)The person is to be treated for the purposes of the taxes listed in subsection (3) as resident and domiciled in the United Kingdom for the whole of that tax year.
(3)The taxes are—
(a)income tax,
(b)capital gains tax, and
(c)inheritance tax.
There might be the kernel of a defence in this. @Heathener’s allegation is so obviously absurd and misinformed that no right thinking person would think the worse of Sunak because of it.
There should be a plan to allow Cambridge to expand without putting too much pressure on the historical centre by creating a second or third hub.
The tightness of the Cambridge green belt is utterly insane; places like Girton really ought to be agreeable parts of the city rather than maintaining the fiction that they are distinct rural villages.
The other curiosity is how slowly places like Northstowe are being built out- it was being talked about when I was living in the area, and that was getting on for 20 years ago.
Trouble is that the growing pains of that sort of thing are felt acutely and locally and the benefits are more dispersed, and our political system doesn't handle that very well. But the UK has to decide whether it wants to be rich in the future.
The A14 cuts Girton (village not college) off from Cambridge, though, which would hinder its integration into the city. A lot of the greenery around Girton is the college's (very lovely) grounds.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
Again, are you a lawyer? Because the law is what it actually is, not what you think off the top of your head it ought to be.
So explain why my second paragraph is wrong, Mr Lawyer.
It's just completely misconceived. There's two questions: 1. Is the language complained of capable of being defamatory, in its natural meaning or by innuendo? Yes it is. 2. Is it actually defamatory in the circumstances in which it was used? It depends, but certainly it could be. Your claim that it "isn't libel" makes no more sense than saying running someone over with a car, isn't murder.
Until you read the detail, where they’re talking about highly-competitive degree apprenticeships with blue-chip companies - which, while great for those that get in, are not attainable for all but a tiny minority.
Until you read the detail, where they’re talking about highly-competitive degree apprenticeships with blue-chip companies - which, while great for those that get in, are not attainable for all but a tiny minority.
It's funny that they think the relevant point of action is what the parents want...
If they were good value, surely parents would be delighted, but getting comparable skills to an average degree just to end up self-employed or fake self-employed, until the day you get an injury and your income drops to zero, is pretty risky even if the hourly wage is better than a remote-work ex-office job.
Man City charged with over 100 breaches of the Fair Play Rules.
The odds on Arsenal being crowned Champions have surely just improved.
I see you can lay City to be relegated @ 37-1 on Betfair.
As an Arsenal fan, I don't want City getting docked points. It would not be good to win the league because of points deductions.
3-4 more performances like the weekend and Man Utd might be on their tail (wheezing and panting).
Performances like Arsenal at Everton? The Toffees ran 3km more in that game than in any other game this season, so I'm not getting worried just yet, but they need to get back on it against Brentford.
I think United need three wins against Leeds twice and Leicester to get back into it.
Until you read the detail, where they’re talking about highly-competitive degree apprenticeships with blue-chip companies - which, while great for those that get in, are not attainable for all but a tiny minority.
What you really want is a Civil Service Degree Apprenticeships - start at £26,000 now for a 4 day week (the other day is study leave).
Private sector ones pay 30% less before you look at the pension side of things.
Elsewhere however the issue is that there isn't enough time to train people up to do the job they need.
Current client is a case in point - we need to train 8 devs up because they really do know nothing yet management see them as instantly fully skilled able to do complex proof of concept work.
Which means I don't have time to train them as I have to do my job and most of the work they've been "assigned" before I have any chance of spending a couple of hours pointing them to useful learning resources.
Until you read the detail, where they’re talking about highly-competitive degree apprenticeships with blue-chip companies - which, while great for those that get in, are not attainable for all but a tiny minority.
What you really want is a Civil Service Degree Apprenticeships - start at £26,000 now for a 4 day week (the other day is study leave).
Private sector ones pay 30% less before you look at the pension side of things.
Elsewhere however the issue is that there isn't enough time to train people up to do the job they need.
Current client is a case in point - we need to train 8 devs up because they really do know nothing yet management see them as instantly fully skilled able to do complex proof of concept work.
Which means I don't have time to train them as I have to do my job and most of the work they've been "assigned" before I have any chance of spending a couple of hours pointing them to useful learning resources.
Ah, trust the CS to gold plate such a scheme, in the same way they gold plate everything else they do.
You pay your 18-year-olds the adult minimum wage, plus their tuition fees, in exchange for 4 days a week in a structured environment, with some sort of a training bond attached. That way, everyone benefits.
The minister in the linked article is talking about “lifetime loans” for “continuing education”. No you idiot, the whole point is to get a degree without the bloody loans in the first place - and there should be a million of them, with government encouragement for SMEs to recruit them.
One friend of mine eschewed university at 18, to join a firm of accountants as the trainee. Now, in her early 40s, she owns her house in Hampshire. She’ll probably retire at 55.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
Again, are you a lawyer? Because the law is what it actually is, not what you think off the top of your head it ought to be.
So explain why my second paragraph is wrong, Mr Lawyer.
It's just completely misconceived. There's two questions: 1. Is the language complained of capable of being defamatory, in its natural meaning or by innuendo? Yes it is. 2. Is it actually defamatory in the circumstances in which it was used? It depends, but certainly it could be. Your claim that it "isn't libel" makes no more sense than saying running someone over with a car, isn't murder.
You are saying an expression of political opinion - that holding non dom status is tax dodging - is libel. That's absurd.
There's a clear distinction between the terms tax evasion and tax avoidance (or at least was until HMRC blurred it), but "tax dodging" does not bear that weight.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
Again, are you a lawyer? Because the law is what it actually is, not what you think off the top of your head it ought to be.
So explain why my second paragraph is wrong, Mr Lawyer.
It's just completely misconceived. There's two questions: 1. Is the language complained of capable of being defamatory, in its natural meaning or by innuendo? Yes it is. 2. Is it actually defamatory in the circumstances in which it was used? It depends, but certainly it could be. Your claim that it "isn't libel" makes no more sense than saying running someone over with a car, isn't murder.
You are saying an expression of political opinion - that holding non dom status is tax dodging - is libel. That's absurd.
There's a clear distinction between the terms tax evasion and tax avoidance (or at least was until HMRC blurred it), but "tax dodging" does not bear that weight.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
Again, are you a lawyer? Because the law is what it actually is, not what you think off the top of your head it ought to be.
So explain why my second paragraph is wrong, Mr Lawyer.
It's just completely misconceived. There's two questions: 1. Is the language complained of capable of being defamatory, in its natural meaning or by innuendo? Yes it is. 2. Is it actually defamatory in the circumstances in which it was used? It depends, but certainly it could be. Your claim that it "isn't libel" makes no more sense than saying running someone over with a car, isn't murder.
You are saying an expression of political opinion - that holding non dom status is tax dodging - is libel. That's absurd.
There's a clear distinction between the terms tax evasion and tax avoidance (or at least was until HMRC blurred it), but "tax dodging" does not bear that weight.
It depends. "X has non dom status; that is essentially tax dodging" is probably ok. "X is a tax dodger" is probably not, even if in fact X has non dom status and that was all you meant.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
It's bizarre. One could always confidently predict that an hypothetical Isla Bryson would pop up to embarrass her within a matter of months; turns out there was an actual one all along, and she must have known about him.
The "Katie Dolatowski" case was happening while the Bill was going through Holyrood and was also reported. But somehow that case - where a 6ft 4 inch paedophile convicted of offences against under-age girls was actually moved from a man's prison after he attacked another male prisoner to a women's prison, one with a mother and baby unit - did not embarrass MSPs or get them to ask some critical questions about what they were voting for.
Odd how some stories catch the imagination and others don't.
Still policy-making on the hoof via public embarrassment is a pretty shoddy and incoherent way of governing.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
There is legal crookery and illegal crookery in the UK, if you are not rich you can only have one choice.
It's bizarre. One could always confidently predict that an hypothetical Isla Bryson would pop up to embarrass her within a matter of months; turns out there was an actual one all along, and she must have known about him.
The "Katie Dolatowski" case was happening while the Bill was going through Holyrood and was also reported. But somehow that case - where a 6ft 4 inch paedophile convicted of offences against under-age girls was actually moved from a man's prison after he attacked another male prisoner to a women's prison, one with a mother and baby unit - did not embarrass MSPs or get them to ask some critical questions about what they were voting for.
Odd how some stories catch the imagination and others don't.
Still policy-making on the hoof via public embarrassment is a pretty shoddy and incoherent way of governing.
It was “bad facts”, probably.
At a seminar on sensitivity trading I attended, we were told about “bad facts”. These are facts that offend protected groups or go against their beliefs.
In madness you dwell Not dead which eternal lie Stranger eons death may die Drain you of your sanity Face the thing that should not be
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
Again, are you a lawyer? Because the law is what it actually is, not what you think off the top of your head it ought to be.
So explain why my second paragraph is wrong, Mr Lawyer.
It's just completely misconceived. There's two questions: 1. Is the language complained of capable of being defamatory, in its natural meaning or by innuendo? Yes it is. 2. Is it actually defamatory in the circumstances in which it was used? It depends, but certainly it could be. Your claim that it "isn't libel" makes no more sense than saying running someone over with a car, isn't murder.
You are saying an expression of political opinion - that holding non dom status is tax dodging - is libel. That's absurd.
There's a clear distinction between the terms tax evasion and tax avoidance (or at least was until HMRC blurred it), but "tax dodging" does not bear that weight.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Looks like the government is playing for time on public sector pay settlements, aiming to get through to April without agreement and into another pay year. Due to high inflation this would allow them to bake in another 7% or so real terms pay cut and then agree a settlement next year more in-line with inflation. They can maybe use the savings for a tax cut ahead of the election.
Dare I be the one to suggest, that there’s exactly one person on this forum - for whom it’s 10pm right now - that’s interested in disaster porn.
Meanwhile, there’s others on this forum worried about friends and relatives caught up in the Turkish earthquake.
I've heard one more story. One of Mrs J's friends works abroad. His family lives in a tower block in a town. The tower block has fallen, and he cannot contact any of them.
Grim. Mrs J's working from home, and occasionally just spontaneously bursts into tears.
To put the Gaziantep earthquake in perspective, at 7.9 and with potentially 10,000 dead or more, it is the worst global earthquake since the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in 2011 (ie, Fukushima)
It will surely be as bad as the tragic 2015 earthquake which leveled much of Nepal, in 2015, and from which that beautiful country is still recovering
Worse, it is in probably the most precious archaeological landscape on the planet. Sanliurfa and the Tas Tepeler (Göbekli, Karahan etc). The cultural loss could outweigh the human loss, though both will be tragic, of course
It has already flattened Gaziantep castle. 2,200 years old
“What a horrendous day...
The horrible #Syria and #TurkeyEarthquake killed many, but it also destroyed priceless cultural heritage, such as the famed #Gaziantep Castle, built by the Romans in the 2nd century AD, when the place was known as Antiochia ad Taurum...”
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
There is legal crookery and illegal crookery in the UK, if you are not rich you can only have one choice.
And in the rest of the world too.
One of England's most important contributions to thieving world culture is the trust. The trust dates back centuries to when it was called a "use" (rhymes with loose). It was always about the rich hiding and protecting their assets from the state. It's far older than trading in stocks, or going offshore, or the "I'm an artist" dodge that's popular among some of the richest families in Ireland.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
Off topic but very political betting. Professor Stephen Fisher, an elections expert based at Oxford University, says there is certainly opportunity for the Greens to promote policies that would appeal to voters who liked Labour's policies under former leader Jeremy Corbyn. "Labour's more cautious approach to tax and spend... makes it easier for the Greens to make more bold claims about how they would do more to save the NHS and invest more in public services. "Greens might be able to get away with offering more spending on things that people like."
it is in Bristol where the green party sees their best hope for a second seat at Westminster, and where co-leader Carla Denyer Carla Denyer will be taking on Labour incumbent Thangam Debbonaire. Boundary changes are set to turn Bristol West into Bristol Central and make it, they say, "very Green-leaning".
Apprenticeships from my experience are either fantastic or absolute rubbish. A way to get into a job
Other way around. You need a job in order to undertake an apprenticeship.
Countless youngsters rock up at colleges, saying they want to enroll for an apprenticeship. Go away disappointed when told they need an employer first.
Anecdote: Niece's sister-in-law (in her 30s), quit accountancy (which she couldn't stand) and has embarked on a mechanical engineering degree apprenticeship - and loving it.
Serious question for @Leon do you think that GT was buried to save it from being damaged in such earthquakes??
It’s a damn good question and this awful quake has made me ask exactly that
In a quake prone region, the ONLY way to preserve something as miraculous as the Tas Tepeler would be to bury them
The reason they are terribly at risk now is because they have been unearthed. Exposed. So maybe they weren’t buried as a kind of sacrifice, maybe they were buried as an act of remarkable conservation??
I’ve been trying to reach my mate Aydin who is head of culture for Sanliurfa. A total dude. Passionately in love with Göbekli Tepe and the driving force behind their amazing new museum
Can’t reach him. I hesitate to trouble him with further messages. Ominous silence. We are left with petitions to the heavens
Off topic but very political betting. Professor Stephen Fisher, an elections expert based at Oxford University, says there is certainly opportunity for the Greens to promote policies that would appeal to voters who liked Labour's policies under former leader Jeremy Corbyn. "Labour's more cautious approach to tax and spend... makes it easier for the Greens to make more bold claims about how they would do more to save the NHS and invest more in public services. "Greens might be able to get away with offering more spending on things that people like."
it is in Bristol where the green party sees their best hope for a second seat at Westminster, and where co-leader Carla Denyer Carla Denyer will be taking on Labour incumbent Thangam Debbonaire. Boundary changes are set to turn Bristol West into Bristol Central and make it, they say, "very Green-leaning".
Off topic but very political betting. Professor Stephen Fisher, an elections expert based at Oxford University, says there is certainly opportunity for the Greens to promote policies that would appeal to voters who liked Labour's policies under former leader Jeremy Corbyn. "Labour's more cautious approach to tax and spend... makes it easier for the Greens to make more bold claims about how they would do more to save the NHS and invest more in public services. "Greens might be able to get away with offering more spending on things that people like."
it is in Bristol where the green party sees their best hope for a second seat at Westminster, and where co-leader Carla Denyer Carla Denyer will be taking on Labour incumbent Thangam Debbonaire. Boundary changes are set to turn Bristol West into Bristol Central and make it, they say, "very Green-leaning".
In my view they aren't likely to pick up a seat in Bristol this time. It's one thing doing well at low turnout local elections as principal opponent to Labour (whose elected Mayor was a fool not to co-opt them into his cabinet and instead try to run it as a minority administration. Quite another at a high turnout election where people will be looking for a change of Government.
The broad point is correct that Corbyn's departure and Starmer's move to the centre has created space on the left. But are there parliamentary seats for the Greens that way in addition to the one they have? I don't think so.
Looks like the government is playing for time on public sector pay settlements, aiming to get through to April without agreement and into another pay year. Due to high inflation this would allow them to bake in another 7% or so real terms pay cut and then agree a settlement next year more in-line with inflation. They can maybe use the savings for a tax cut ahead of the election.
It is a very cynical ploy. They used it with the pensioners cpi rise last year only agreeing a 2.1% rise when for most of the year it was 10%. They will probably settle for lower this year for the public sector after they have been suffereing under 10%+ this year. Then Sunak has the gall to accept credit for a proposed drop in inflation by natural causes and nothing he has done.
Off topic but very political betting. Professor Stephen Fisher, an elections expert based at Oxford University, says there is certainly opportunity for the Greens to promote policies that would appeal to voters who liked Labour's policies under former leader Jeremy Corbyn. "Labour's more cautious approach to tax and spend... makes it easier for the Greens to make more bold claims about how they would do more to save the NHS and invest more in public services. "Greens might be able to get away with offering more spending on things that people like."
it is in Bristol where the green party sees their best hope for a second seat at Westminster, and where co-leader Carla Denyer Carla Denyer will be taking on Labour incumbent Thangam Debbonaire. Boundary changes are set to turn Bristol West into Bristol Central and make it, they say, "very Green-leaning".
In my view they aren't likely to pick up a seat in Bristol this time. It's one thing doing well at low turnout local elections as principal opponent to Labour (whose elected Mayor was a fool not to co-opt them into his cabinet and instead try to run it as a minority administration. Quite another at a high turnout election where people will be looking for a change of Government.
The broad point is correct that Corbyn's departure and Starmer's move to the centre has created space on the left. But are there parliamentary seats for the Greens that way in addition to the one they have? I don't think so.
The Greens should not be representing themselves as a Scargillite alternative to Labour.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
The use of “tax dodging” in this context was clearly to be critical and suggest incorrect behaviour, if referring to tax dodging in relation to managing financial affairs within the scope of tax laws such as using an ISA then the criticism would be completely pointless as there would be nothing to criticise however it’s pretty clear the comment was made in order to blacken Sunak’s reputation.
Of course the poster could spend the next few hours criticising every politician who “tax dodges” in the way you put it but then it would be a very long post needed.
It would have been a great deal simpler to say that Heathener was simply wrong in assuming Sunak's, as opposed to his wife's non dom status (which on checking I see she appears to have now given up).
Indicating disapproval of someone who did hold non dom status by calling it tax dodging isn't libellous.
Again, are you a lawyer? Because the law is what it actually is, not what you think off the top of your head it ought to be.
So explain why my second paragraph is wrong, Mr Lawyer.
It's just completely misconceived. There's two questions: 1. Is the language complained of capable of being defamatory, in its natural meaning or by innuendo? Yes it is. 2. Is it actually defamatory in the circumstances in which it was used? It depends, but certainly it could be. Your claim that it "isn't libel" makes no more sense than saying running someone over with a car, isn't murder.
You are saying an expression of political opinion - that holding non dom status is tax dodging - is libel. That's absurd.
There's a clear distinction between the terms tax evasion and tax avoidance (or at least was until HMRC blurred it), but "tax dodging" does not bear that weight.
It depends. "X has non dom status; that is essentially tax dodging" is probably ok. "X is a tax dodger" is probably not, even if in fact X has non dom status and that was all you meant.
"Tax dodging non dom" was what we were discussing. As a description of a politician who had non dom status, in no way would that be actionable.
In the same way, Lewis Hamilton was called a tax dodger when he decamped to Monaco.
It's an expression of disapproval. I think it a bit unfair on him, but it's daft to call it libel.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Absolutely crackers.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
I had an incident recently where someone changed the address on my mortgage. I got the letter saying it had been done and phoned them up, apparently it had been transferred to an address in London. Apparently it shouldn't have normally been possible for an owner-occupier mortgage. Apparently if places have got small mortgages they might pay them off and sell them to a cash buyer, pocketing the proceeds. Reckon it must have been someone who had access to my mail to pass the ID checks so suspicion has to fall on the drug dealers and cannabis farmers who used to live upstairs and one of whom was an estate agent by profession
Off topic but very political betting. Professor Stephen Fisher, an elections expert based at Oxford University, says there is certainly opportunity for the Greens to promote policies that would appeal to voters who liked Labour's policies under former leader Jeremy Corbyn. "Labour's more cautious approach to tax and spend... makes it easier for the Greens to make more bold claims about how they would do more to save the NHS and invest more in public services. "Greens might be able to get away with offering more spending on things that people like."
it is in Bristol where the green party sees their best hope for a second seat at Westminster, and where co-leader Carla Denyer Carla Denyer will be taking on Labour incumbent Thangam Debbonaire. Boundary changes are set to turn Bristol West into Bristol Central and make it, they say, "very Green-leaning".
In my view they aren't likely to pick up a seat in Bristol this time. It's one thing doing well at low turnout local elections as principal opponent to Labour (whose elected Mayor was a fool not to co-opt them into his cabinet and instead try to run it as a minority administration. Quite another at a high turnout election where people will be looking for a change of Government.
The broad point is correct that Corbyn's departure and Starmer's move to the centre has created space on the left. But are there parliamentary seats for the Greens that way in addition to the one they have? I don't think so.
The Greens should not be representing themselves as a Scargillite alternative to Labour.
I personally agree, although largely because I am not a Scargill-ite.
I'd just say as a point of political fact that there are more votes there since Corbyn went and Labour vacated the space. I'd also, though, say that there aren't seats there in FPTP. Bristol Central is a pretty good example of that. It has a pretty rich, highly educated, liberal electorate who are all in favour of clean air, bikes and buses... but probably aren't screaming out for massive redistribution and seizing the means of production. Instead, tacking left would get the Greens 5% of the vote nationally, and one seat as now.
Off topic but very political betting. Professor Stephen Fisher, an elections expert based at Oxford University, says there is certainly opportunity for the Greens to promote policies that would appeal to voters who liked Labour's policies under former leader Jeremy Corbyn. "Labour's more cautious approach to tax and spend... makes it easier for the Greens to make more bold claims about how they would do more to save the NHS and invest more in public services. "Greens might be able to get away with offering more spending on things that people like."
it is in Bristol where the green party sees their best hope for a second seat at Westminster, and where co-leader Carla Denyer Carla Denyer will be taking on Labour incumbent Thangam Debbonaire. Boundary changes are set to turn Bristol West into Bristol Central and make it, they say, "very Green-leaning".
In my view they aren't likely to pick up a seat in Bristol this time. It's one thing doing well at low turnout local elections as principal opponent to Labour (whose elected Mayor was a fool not to co-opt them into his cabinet and instead try to run it as a minority administration. Quite another at a high turnout election where people will be looking for a change of Government.
The broad point is correct that Corbyn's departure and Starmer's move to the centre has created space on the left. But are there parliamentary seats for the Greens that way in addition to the one they have? I don't think so.
I’m not saying you are wrong, but the safety of a Labour MP can’t just be based on the result last time, and the idea centre and right voters will have swung to them nationally, if there is boundary changes to make the new seat green leaning, and so much evidence the wards have swung strongly against Labour in recent years. In fact the size of the vote for Corbyn’s Labour in the seat might be more a sign of threat from the Greens than strong position against them.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
So now you're a Liz Truss fan? Jesus Christ Moon, look at yourself.
Liz Truss implemented a load of uncosted spending plans that were so bad she refused to have the OBR report on them.
The markets got spooked as would have happened in 2010 if a Government hadn't been formed (plenty of literature on this but Coalition 2015 is a good documentary on it).
Liz Truss called the markets left wing and that they threw her out. She is the one re-writing history.
If this had been Keir Starmer you'd have said he was totally to blame. I know you're a Tory fangirl but this is pathetic even from you.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Absolutely crackers.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
You are the one rewriting history here.
Liz Truss doesn't actually use the phrase 'left-wing economic establishment' anywhere in that Telegraph piece...
much like Mari Antoinette never said let them eat cake. But that’s not going to stop your spin is it.
what she is pointing out, politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity.
Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making. Way over your head isn’t it?
Apprenticeships from my experience are either fantastic or absolute rubbish. A way to get into a job
Other way around. You need a job in order to undertake an apprenticeship.
Countless youngsters rock up at colleges, saying they want to enroll for an apprenticeship. Go away disappointed when told they need an employer first.
Anecdote: Niece's sister-in-law (in her 30s), quit accountancy (which she couldn't stand) and has embarked on a mechanical engineering degree apprenticeship - and loving it.
What I mean is, they're a way to get into a long term job with the company when the apprenticeship is over. They'll take you on because you're cheaper initially than a grad or somebody else - is my experience from my work at Vodafone anyway
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Absolutely crackers.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
You are the one rewriting history here.
Liz Truss doesn't actually use the phrase 'left-wing economic establishment' anywhere in that Telegraph piece...
much like Mari Antoinette never said let them eat cake. But that’s not going to stop your spin is it.
what she is pointing out, politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity.
Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making. Way over your head isn’t it?
I just can't understand your brain. Are you just here to troll? You've had so many points of view I am dizzy. I think it must be trolling.
“Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted leftward,” she added.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
So now you're a Liz Truss fan? Jesus Christ Moon, look at yourself.
Liz Truss implemented a load of uncosted spending plans that were so bad she refused to have the OBR report on them.
The markets got spooked as would have happened in 2010 if a Government hadn't been formed (plenty of literature on this but Coalition 2015 is a good documentary on it).
Liz Truss called the markets left wing and that they threw her out. She is the one re-writing history.
If this had been Keir Starmer you'd have said he was totally to blame. I know you're a Tory fangirl but this is pathetic even from you.
I’m not a Tory fan girl at all. You have no clue about politics if you genuinely think that. I’m supporting the point she is making politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity. Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making.
By sticking to the truth of what actually happened, and not doing spin, I get MASSIVE likes on ConHome, who are obviously just smarter at politics than some of you here.
Its a fascinating world some people exist in where referring to the PM as "tax dodging non dom" is seen as apparently worth of an "ahhhhhhhh that's Libel that is, you're going to have to pay a squillion quid" response.
A country where you can't pass comment on senior politicians is one that is authoritarian. It makes no difference whether its authoritarianism via the police arresting dissenters or the grotesquely rich threatening libel action against journalists who expose the truth they are hiding.
Seriously. You are Rishi Sunak. Somehow you read Politicalbetting.com this morning and not only think "I'm not having that" but instruct Carter Fuck to go after both the poster and OGH for damages.
Its not remotely going to happen. For a lengthy list of reasons including the political furore over his family's non-dom status. Some people need to chill out before they harrumph themselves so hard that something prolapses.
Looks like the government is playing for time on public sector pay settlements, aiming to get through to April without agreement and into another pay year. Due to high inflation this would allow them to bake in another 7% or so real terms pay cut and then agree a settlement next year more in-line with inflation. They can maybe use the savings for a tax cut ahead of the election.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
You can apply to the Land Registry, to notify you by email if someone tries to register a disposition of the property.
I don't think Radio 4 is correct, though. If the property is sold fraudulently, the buyer takes the hit, and then sues the Seller.
Its a fascinating world some people exist in where referring to the PM as "tax dodging non dom" is seen as apparently worth of an "ahhhhhhhh that's Libel that is, you're going to have to pay a squillion quid" response.
A country where you can't pass comment on senior politicians is one that is authoritarian. It makes no difference whether its authoritarianism via the police arresting dissenters or the grotesquely rich threatening libel action against journalists who expose the truth they are hiding.
Seriously. You are Rishi Sunak. Somehow you read Politicalbetting.com this morning and not only think "I'm not having that" but instruct Carter Fuck to go after both the poster and OGH for damages.
Its not remotely going to happen. For a lengthy list of reasons including the political furore over his family's non-dom status. Some people need to chill out before they harrumph themselves so hard that something prolapses.
Nonetheless, it would be risky for moderation policy to be based on an assessment of how likely it is that action might be taken.
"Magistrates courts in England and Wales have been ordered to stop authorising warrants for energy firms to forcibly install prepayment meters with immediate effect."
I don't understand how the regulator has allowed this situation to happen and why the directors of these companies aren't being investigated. Fucking sack the lot of them.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Absolutely crackers.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
You are the one rewriting history here.
Liz Truss doesn't actually use the phrase 'left-wing economic establishment' anywhere in that Telegraph piece...
much like Mari Antoinette never said let them eat cake. But that’s not going to stop your spin is it.
what she is pointing out, politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity.
Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making. Way over your head isn’t it?
I just can't understand your brain. Are you just here to troll? You've had so many points of view I am dizzy. I think it must be trolling.
“Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted leftward,” she added.
Liz Truss herself.
In comparison I Can understand your brain - it doesn’t do enough thinking about actual politics. Politics is tge pursuit of an ideology.
I’m taking up an argument against New Labour and what they done Tony Benn or Arthur Scargill could have made, and in your eyes that proves me a Tory?
You will more likely end up voting Tory in your life than me, becuase you don’t understand it.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
He didn't, his wife did.
"Tax dodging" is easily capable of being defamatory.
Depends on context. I might dodge tax by taking out an ISA, just as a non dom dodges tax by virtue of that status.
Unless something actually libellous is attached, then it's not.
(In which context, I'm grateful for the correction about Sunak himself.)
Looks like the government is playing for time on public sector pay settlements, aiming to get through to April without agreement and into another pay year. Due to high inflation this would allow them to bake in another 7% or so real terms pay cut and then agree a settlement next year more in-line with inflation. They can maybe use the savings for a tax cut ahead of the election.
It is a very cynical ploy. They used it with the pensioners cpi rise last year only agreeing a 2.1% rise when for most of the year it was 10%. They will probably settle for lower this year for the public sector after they have been suffereing under 10%+ this year. Then Sunak has the gall to accept credit for a proposed drop in inflation by natural causes and nothing he has done.
It was 3.1% linked to inflation the previous September. The link to earnings was removed because there was an artificial bounce back in average earnings, as measured, after a fall the previous year due to Covid. This year's increase will be 10.1% again linked to last September
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
In the UK you can register an email address with the Land Registry & they will send alerts about any application to change the ownership of a property or to take out a mortgage on it: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/property-alert
Worth doing, both for your own properties if you have them & maybe your parent’s property too, as anything they own may well have paid off any mortgages secured against them. Your parents don’t even need to know about it - you don’t have to own a property to receive alerts.
"Magistrates courts in England and Wales have been ordered to stop authorising warrants for energy firms to forcibly install prepayment meters with immediate effect."
I don't understand how the regulator has allowed this situation to happen and why the directors of these companies aren't being investigated. Fucking sack the lot of them.
In answer to part 1 of your lack of comprehension, it's because the regulator is totally fucking useless.
Its a fascinating world some people exist in where referring to the PM as "tax dodging non dom" is seen as apparently worth of an "ahhhhhhhh that's Libel that is, you're going to have to pay a squillion quid" response.
A country where you can't pass comment on senior politicians is one that is authoritarian. It makes no difference whether its authoritarianism via the police arresting dissenters or the grotesquely rich threatening libel action against journalists who expose the truth they are hiding.
Seriously. You are Rishi Sunak. Somehow you read Politicalbetting.com this morning and not only think "I'm not having that" but instruct Carter Fuck to go after both the poster and OGH for damages.
Its not remotely going to happen. For a lengthy list of reasons including the political furore over his family's non-dom status. Some people need to chill out before they harrumph themselves so hard that something prolapses.
Off topic
We do have some real Tory snowflakes on this site. Most of my off-topics are for criticising Johnson whilst PM, and in one or two posts I wasn't even off topic!
(Anticipating an off-topic or a flag)
On topic
Sunak seems politically naive. Do what Thatcher did, pay off the NHS and the teachers and go to war with some unloved unions.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Absolutely crackers.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
You are the one rewriting history here.
Liz Truss doesn't actually use the phrase 'left-wing economic establishment' anywhere in that Telegraph piece...
much like Mari Antoinette never said let them eat cake. But that’s not going to stop your spin is it.
what she is pointing out, politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity.
Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making. Way over your head isn’t it?
I have not at any point claimed Truss used the phrase "left-wing economic establishment" in her article. However, the Sunday Telegraph, which has been very positive about her remarks, used the phrase in its headline. I'm not aware she's distanced herself from that.
She also came pretty close to it in her article, saying that, "frankly, we were also pushing water uphill. Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted Left-wards."
Her consistent claim has been that, in warning that the approach she pursued would precipitate a financial meltdown, the Treasury, OBR, Bank of England and media commentators had been captured by a centre-left delusion. What her article fails to recognise is that, whether or not those groups had been influenced in the way she describes, they were absolutely correct about what the market reaction would be.
The people who should be most furious are those who broadly agree with her prescription, and I am surprised we don't hear more from them. There was a path for her which involved a gradual tightening of the screw, with tax cuts going hand in hand with spending cuts. I'd not have agreed with it particularly, but it was the obvious way to proceed and the path Thatcher would have taken. That she charged in with a totally botched job has discredited her wing for many years to come.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Absolutely crackers.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
You are the one rewriting history here.
Liz Truss doesn't actually use the phrase 'left-wing economic establishment' anywhere in that Telegraph piece...
much like Mari Antoinette never said let them eat cake. But that’s not going to stop your spin is it.
what she is pointing out, politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity.
Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making. Way over your head isn’t it?
I just can't understand your brain. Are you just here to troll? You've had so many points of view I am dizzy. I think it must be trolling.
“Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted leftward,” she added.
Liz Truss herself.
In comparison I Can understand your brain - it doesn’t do enough thinking about actual politics. Politics is tge pursuit of an ideology.
I’m taking up an argument against New Labour and what they done Tony Benn or Arthur Scargill could have made, and in your eyes that proves me a Tory?
You will more likely end up voting Tory in your life than me, becuase you don’t understand it.
Sorry Moon Phase, I tried, but I can't make head nor tail of that post.
Let's be honest, if Jeremy Corbyn had done the same thing she'd be calling him a Communist.
Allow me to explain it to you, simply put. @keystone got 6 likes for this inaccurate rubbish about my posting record on PB. I am actually very consistent in my positions.
Witty, resilient and provocative I’ll accept. Everything else keys said was wrong.
I have NEVER EVER posted to PB any support for Boris, Truss, or Sunak. Except, whilst acknowledging Truss as a joke, the liberal bits of her economic platform seem sensible to me.
Classic Conservativism always had a liberal - in the old fashioned, tolerant sense which believes in freedom, rights and responsibility - so Being liberal is at the heart of being a true Conservative, and makes the difference between them and of what is to the right of them. By calling me a Conservative not a liberal, you clearly don’t understand this do you.
Having said that, I have as yet to vote Conservative in my life, and have no plans to start anytime soon. A vote should be decided not just on what a party is called or stands for, but also on how incompetent and corrupt they currently are.
And I support Truss taking back the political responsibility New Labour outsourced, because Labour were embarrassed to be thought of as ideological - much your own and Mex Pex embarrassment as its way beyond your political comprehension, my support for Truss on this point and attack on New Labour does not make me Tory or anti Labour at all, insofar as using the same argument against New Labour the very not-Tory Tony Benn and Arfur Scargill would have made! 😌
Don’t just take the point from me, listen to them.
Its a fascinating world some people exist in where referring to the PM as "tax dodging non dom" is seen as apparently worth of an "ahhhhhhhh that's Libel that is, you're going to have to pay a squillion quid" response.
A country where you can't pass comment on senior politicians is one that is authoritarian. It makes no difference whether its authoritarianism via the police arresting dissenters or the grotesquely rich threatening libel action against journalists who expose the truth they are hiding.
Seriously. You are Rishi Sunak. Somehow you read Politicalbetting.com this morning and not only think "I'm not having that" but instruct Carter Fuck to go after both the poster and OGH for damages.
Its not remotely going to happen. For a lengthy list of reasons including the political furore over his family's non-dom status. Some people need to chill out before they harrumph themselves so hard that something prolapses.
Nonetheless, it would be risky for moderation policy to be based on an assessment of how likely it is that action might be taken.
No, you ban things which are libellous. This was not libellous. Regardless of the "ahhhhhh thats libel that is" screeching.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
So now you're a Liz Truss fan? Jesus Christ Moon, look at yourself.
Liz Truss implemented a load of uncosted spending plans that were so bad she refused to have the OBR report on them.
The markets got spooked as would have happened in 2010 if a Government hadn't been formed (plenty of literature on this but Coalition 2015 is a good documentary on it).
Liz Truss called the markets left wing and that they threw her out. She is the one re-writing history.
If this had been Keir Starmer you'd have said he was totally to blame. I know you're a Tory fangirl but this is pathetic even from you.
I’m not a Tory fan girl at all. You have no clue about politics if you genuinely think that. I’m supporting the point she is making politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity. Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making.
By sticking to the truth of what actually happened, and not doing spin, I get MASSIVE likes on ConHome, who are obviously just smarter at politics than some of you here.
"Magistrates courts in England and Wales have been ordered to stop authorising warrants for energy firms to forcibly install prepayment meters with immediate effect."
I don't understand how the regulator has allowed this situation to happen and why the directors of these companies aren't being investigated. Fucking sack the lot of them.
In answer to part 1 of your lack of comprehension, it's because the regulator is totally fucking useless.
It wasn't just the regulator - it was also the magistrates who nodded things through rather than spending time checking the information given was accurate so the applications were valid.
Of course even a Magistrate follows what other Magistrates do so it's a problem that's being going on for yeats with cases being accept on the nod rather than actual checks being performed.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
You can apply to the Land Registry, to notify you by email if someone tries to register a disposition of the property.
I don't think Radio 4 is correct, though. If the property is sold fraudulently, the buyer takes the hit, and then sues the Seller.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
In the UK you can register an email address with the Land Registry & they will send alerts about any application to change the ownership of a property or to take out a mortgage on it: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/property-alert
Worth doing, both for your own properties if you have them & maybe your parent’s property too, as anything they own may well have paid off any mortgages secured against them. Your parents don’t even need to know about it - you don’t have to own a property to receive alerts.
The website needs to be rewritten though - it says if you are at risk of fraud - which makes it sound like a nice to have rather than essential feature.
The Conservatives have lost the plot…..non-dom tax dodging PM.
Evidently not the only ones.
You’d have thought someone who “has been on national TV and written articles for national newspapers” would have a passing a acquaintance with the laws of libel and the consequences for breaching them.
Mind you given the defamatory nature of some of the comments made on PB.COM about JKR recently, I wonder if the Mod team here are taking a more laid back approach.
I would have thought they would have been all over anything risky. Like the comment you refer to.
The PM had non dom status, did he not ? That enables by its nature the dodging of some tax. That's not defamation, but fact.
The word "dodge" might indicate strong disapproval, but it falls way short if anything which might be termed defamation.
I suspect the same is true of the other "defamatory" comments you complain of - though that's just a guess.
The PM was not a non-dom, his wife was and is no longer.
The poster wrote “ And all made worse by having a stinking rich totally out of touch non-dom tax dodging PM.” clearly stating that the PM, Rishi Sunak, is (not even was) a non-dom and is tax dodging.
Now Heathener might have some knowledge that His Majesty’s Press have not discovered yet but if not it’s something that should not be claimed falsely in order to have a dig at the Tories surely.
Or was simply mistaken.
Is "non dom" libellous, if untrue ? Interesting question, since it's a status legally recognised and defended by the government. In this case, possibly.
In the case of a PM, who has occasionally been accused of a lack of commitment to the UK ( eg the Green Card nonsense) it certainly would be.
Who needs lawyers when we've got plenty of the barrack room variety?
Its a fascinating world some people exist in where referring to the PM as "tax dodging non dom" is seen as apparently worth of an "ahhhhhhhh that's Libel that is, you're going to have to pay a squillion quid" response.
A country where you can't pass comment on senior politicians is one that is authoritarian. It makes no difference whether its authoritarianism via the police arresting dissenters or the grotesquely rich threatening libel action against journalists who expose the truth they are hiding.
Seriously. You are Rishi Sunak. Somehow you read Politicalbetting.com this morning and not only think "I'm not having that" but instruct Carter Fuck to go after both the poster and OGH for damages.
Its not remotely going to happen. For a lengthy list of reasons including the political furore over his family's non-dom status. Some people need to chill out before they harrumph themselves so hard that something prolapses.
Nonetheless, it would be risky for moderation policy to be based on an assessment of how likely it is that action might be taken.
No, you ban things which are libellous. This was not libellous. Regardless of the "ahhhhhh thats libel that is" screeching.
Just taking a second to stop clutching my pearls and before grabbing my smelling salts but I don’t think there was any “screeching”. More that I questioned whether Heathener should have written what she wrote (we all have a responsibility to OGH and the site) but also what she wrote was demonstrably false.
This was followed by a relatively (for PB) light and largely unpersonal debate about whether it was possibly libellous. I don’t recall anyone demanding bans or getting out the pitchforks and flaming torches.
That is all. To try and turn it into “Tory snowflakes screeching” because the political attack is vaguely in line with your politics is a bit pathetic really. If Heathener had written an attack on Sunak’s perceived weaknesses then likely nobody would worry but to assign dodgy tax insinuations to make an attack on him isn’t great.
Now I shall return to my fit of the vapors if you don’t mind.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
You can apply to the Land Registry, to notify you by email if someone tries to register a disposition of the property.
I don't think Radio 4 is correct, though. If the property is sold fraudulently, the buyer takes the hit, and then sues the Seller.
Thanks for the heads up Sean. Just registered now.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Absolutely crackers.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
You are the one rewriting history here.
Liz Truss doesn't actually use the phrase 'left-wing economic establishment' anywhere in that Telegraph piece...
much like Mari Antoinette never said let them eat cake. But that’s not going to stop your spin is it.
what she is pointing out, politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity.
Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making. Way over your head isn’t it?
I have not at any point claimed Truss used the phrase "left-wing economic establishment" in her article. However, the Sunday Telegraph, which has been very positive about her remarks, used the phrase in its headline. I'm not aware she's distanced herself from that.
She also came pretty close to it in her article, saying that, "frankly, we were also pushing water uphill. Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted Left-wards."
Her consistent claim has been that, in warning that the approach she pursued would precipitate a financial meltdown, the Treasury, OBR, Bank of England and media commentators had been captured by a centre-left delusion. What her article fails to recognise is that, whether or not those groups had been influenced in the way she describes, they were absolutely correct about what the market reaction would be.
The people who should be most furious are those who broadly agree with her prescription, and I am surprised we don't hear more from them. There was a path for her which involved a gradual tightening of the screw, with tax cuts going hand in hand with spending cuts. I'd not have agreed with it particularly, but it was the obvious way to proceed and the path Thatcher would have taken. That she charged in with a totally botched job has discredited her wing for many years to come.
The trouble with that is that the indulged child wing of the Conservative Party have convinced themselves that that's unnecessary. That the Laffer Curve means that the government can cut tax rates and revenues will definitely rise, so we don't need the spending cuts after all. And yes, there are scenarios when that's the case, but there's no particular reason to think it's where we are now.
And if you want to cut government spending, the question is what the government should stop doing...
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
You can apply to the Land Registry, to notify you by email if someone tries to register a disposition of the property.
I don't think Radio 4 is correct, though. If the property is sold fraudulently, the buyer takes the hit, and then sues the Seller.
@Sean_F that is what I would of thought but this arose quite a few months ago now and I am aware of two cases (the first was a vicar I believe who was working away and was notified by a neighbour that there were builders in his house, he returned and challenged them. They were working for the new owners) and in both cases the owner of the house lost their house and the buyers kept it.
Having heard about that we did what you suggested on both our properties. Particularly relevant for our second home.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
Absolutely crackers.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
You are the one rewriting history here.
Liz Truss doesn't actually use the phrase 'left-wing economic establishment' anywhere in that Telegraph piece...
much like Mari Antoinette never said let them eat cake. But that’s not going to stop your spin is it.
what she is pointing out, politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity.
Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making. Way over your head isn’t it?
I have not at any point claimed Truss used the phrase "left-wing economic establishment" in her article. However, the Sunday Telegraph, which has been very positive about her remarks, used the phrase in its headline. I'm not aware she's distanced herself from that.
She also came pretty close to it in her article, saying that, "frankly, we were also pushing water uphill. Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted Left-wards."
Her consistent claim has been that, in warning that the approach she pursued would precipitate a financial meltdown, the Treasury, OBR, Bank of England and media commentators had been captured by a centre-left delusion. What her article fails to recognise is that, whether or not those groups had been influenced in the way she describes, they were absolutely correct about what the market reaction would be.
The people who should be most furious are those who broadly agree with her prescription, and I am surprised we don't hear more from them. There was a path for her which involved a gradual tightening of the screw, with tax cuts going hand in hand with spending cuts. I'd not have agreed with it particularly, but it was the obvious way to proceed and the path Thatcher would have taken. That she charged in with a totally botched job has discredited her wing for many years to come.
The trouble with that is that the indulged child wing of the Conservative Party have convinced themselves that that's unnecessary. That the Laffer Curve means that the government can cut tax rates and revenues will definitely rise, so we don't need the spending cuts after all. And yes, there are scenarios when that's the case, but there's no particular reason to think it's where we are now.
And if you want to cut government spending, the question is what the government should stop doing...
A lot of the current Labour front bench voted to get rid of our Trident nuclear deterrent last year. Though it’s probably no more expensive through life than building HS2.
I suppose the obvious smart Alec political answer is how much are we currently spending/chucking away on interest on our borrowing and how far would that go in helping the NHS etc - David Cameron added nearly hundred seats using that line and very little else.
Its a fascinating world some people exist in where referring to the PM as "tax dodging non dom" is seen as apparently worth of an "ahhhhhhhh that's Libel that is, you're going to have to pay a squillion quid" response.
A country where you can't pass comment on senior politicians is one that is authoritarian. It makes no difference whether its authoritarianism via the police arresting dissenters or the grotesquely rich threatening libel action against journalists who expose the truth they are hiding.
Seriously. You are Rishi Sunak. Somehow you read Politicalbetting.com this morning and not only think "I'm not having that" but instruct Carter Fuck to go after both the poster and OGH for damages.
Its not remotely going to happen. For a lengthy list of reasons including the political furore over his family's non-dom status. Some people need to chill out before they harrumph themselves so hard that something prolapses.
Nonetheless, it would be risky for moderation policy to be based on an assessment of how likely it is that action might be taken.
No, you ban things which are libellous. This was not libellous. Regardless of the "ahhhhhh thats libel that is" screeching.
Just taking a second to stop clutching my pearls and before grabbing my smelling salts but I don’t think there was any “screeching”. More that I questioned whether Heathener should have written what she wrote (we all have a responsibility to OGH and the site) but also what she wrote was demonstrably false.
This was followed by a relatively (for PB) light and largely unpersonal debate about whether it was possibly libellous. I don’t recall anyone demanding bans or getting out the pitchforks and flaming torches.
That is all. To try and turn it into “Tory snowflakes screeching” because the political attack is vaguely in line with your politics is a bit pathetic really. If Heathener had written an attack on Sunak’s perceived weaknesses then likely nobody would worry but to assign dodgy tax insinuations to make an attack on him isn’t great.
Now I shall return to my fit of the vapors if you don’t mind.
Have cut a response pointing out how the "light and unpersonal debate" is doing the same work as Zahawi did when he threatened libel action against someone exposing what he was dodging.
The Sunak family finances have in recent memory benefitted from both Green Card status (very unusual for the CofE to be on the hook for taxes to a foreign power) and non-dom status. Pointing to these already established facts is not even possibly libellous. But suggesting it is does the work for the Zahawis of this world...
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
So now you're a Liz Truss fan? Jesus Christ Moon, look at yourself.
Liz Truss implemented a load of uncosted spending plans that were so bad she refused to have the OBR report on them.
The markets got spooked as would have happened in 2010 if a Government hadn't been formed (plenty of literature on this but Coalition 2015 is a good documentary on it).
Liz Truss called the markets left wing and that they threw her out. She is the one re-writing history.
If this had been Keir Starmer you'd have said he was totally to blame. I know you're a Tory fangirl but this is pathetic even from you.
I’m not a Tory fan girl at all. You have no clue about politics if you genuinely think that. I’m supporting the point she is making politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity. Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making.
By sticking to the truth of what actually happened, and not doing spin, I get MASSIVE likes on ConHome, who are obviously just smarter at politics than some of you here.
Are you Tony from Torquay?
Nah. I’m Mandy from Tonypandy - witty, resilient and provocative 😇
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
In the UK you can register an email address with the Land Registry & they will send alerts about any application to change the ownership of a property or to take out a mortgage on it: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/property-alert
Worth doing, both for your own properties if you have them & maybe your parent’s property too, as anything they own may well have paid off any mortgages secured against them. Your parents don’t even need to know about it - you don’t have to own a property to receive alerts.
For her services in delivering the next Labour Government
Citation needed from you.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
So now you're a Liz Truss fan? Jesus Christ Moon, look at yourself.
Liz Truss implemented a load of uncosted spending plans that were so bad she refused to have the OBR report on them.
The markets got spooked as would have happened in 2010 if a Government hadn't been formed (plenty of literature on this but Coalition 2015 is a good documentary on it).
Liz Truss called the markets left wing and that they threw her out. She is the one re-writing history.
If this had been Keir Starmer you'd have said he was totally to blame. I know you're a Tory fangirl but this is pathetic even from you.
I’m not a Tory fan girl at all. You have no clue about politics if you genuinely think that. I’m supporting the point she is making politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity. Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making.
By sticking to the truth of what actually happened, and not doing spin, I get MASSIVE likes on ConHome, who are obviously just smarter at politics than some of you here.
Are you Tony from Torquay?
Nah. I’m Mandy from Tonypandy - witty, resilient and provocative 😇
I saw Mandy from Tonypandy at Tonyrefail Rugby Club on Saturday night. After 20 pints of Brains Dark she was dancing on the bar to Delilah. Was that you?
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
Many moons ago, I was told that you should always keep a (very small) mortgage on your place to avoid this kind of thing happening - simply because there's a very good system as part of conveyancing to understand if there's an outstanding loan against a property.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
In the UK you can register an email address with the Land Registry & they will send alerts about any application to change the ownership of a property or to take out a mortgage on it: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/property-alert
Worth doing, both for your own properties if you have them & maybe your parent’s property too, as anything they own may well have paid off any mortgages secured against them. Your parents don’t even need to know about it - you don’t have to own a property to receive alerts.
Comments
The odds on Arsenal being crowned Champions have surely just improved.
See s41 Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.
41Tax status of MPs and members of the House of Lords
(1)Subsection (2) applies if a person is for any part of a tax year—
(a)a member of the House of Commons, or
(b)a member of the House of Lords.
(2)The person is to be treated for the purposes of the taxes listed in subsection (3) as resident and domiciled in the United Kingdom for the whole of that tax year.
(3)The taxes are—
(a)income tax,
(b)capital gains tax, and
(c)inheritance tax.
As an Arsenal fan, I don't want City getting docked points. It would not be good to win the league because of points deductions.
I am planning to do it myself shortly.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/02/05/middle-class-parents-should-encourage-children-do-apprenticeships/
Until you read the detail, where they’re talking about highly-competitive degree apprenticeships with blue-chip companies - which, while great for those that get in, are not attainable for all but a tiny minority.
If they were good value, surely parents would be delighted, but getting comparable skills to an average degree just to end up self-employed or fake self-employed, until the day you get an injury and your income drops to zero, is pretty risky even if the hourly wage is better than a remote-work ex-office job.
I think United need three wins against Leeds twice and Leicester to get back into it.
Private sector ones pay 30% less before you look at the pension side of things.
Elsewhere however the issue is that there isn't enough time to train people up to do the job they need.
Current client is a case in point - we need to train 8 devs up because they really do know nothing yet management see them as instantly fully skilled able to do complex proof of concept work.
Which means I don't have time to train them as I have to do my job and most of the work they've been "assigned" before I have any chance of spending a couple of hours pointing them to useful learning resources.
You pay your 18-year-olds the adult minimum wage, plus their tuition fees, in exchange for 4 days a week in a structured environment, with some sort of a training bond attached. That way, everyone benefits.
The minister in the linked article is talking about “lifetime loans” for “continuing education”. No you idiot, the whole point is to get a degree without the bloody loans in the first place - and there should be a million of them, with government encouragement for SMEs to recruit them.
One friend of mine eschewed university at 18, to join a firm of accountants as the trainee. Now, in her early 40s, she owns her house in Hampshire. She’ll probably retire at 55.
That's absurd.
There's a clear distinction between the terms tax evasion and tax avoidance (or at least was until HMRC blurred it), but "tax dodging" does not bear that weight.
Radio 4 today at 12pm: apparently someone can sell your house to someone else without your knowledge and there's nothing you can do about it. Once the house is sold it belongs to the person who's bought it. Anyone can pretend to be an estate agent without checks.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001hwz9
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-63871888
Odd how some stories catch the imagination and others don't.
Still policy-making on the hoof via public embarrassment is a pretty shoddy and incoherent way of governing.
At a seminar on sensitivity trading I attended, we were told about “bad facts”. These are facts that offend protected groups or go against their beliefs.
In madness you dwell
Not dead which eternal lie
Stranger eons death may die
Drain you of your sanity
Face the thing that should not be
The scale is enormous. Could be 10,000+ dead
This is like a modest nuclear bomb went off. Sweet Jesus
https://twitter.com/remarks/status/1622471980573147137?s=61&t=cC91ZBI3tvEEoXz6I9yUOA
Meanwhile, there’s others on this forum worried about friends and relatives caught up in the Turkish earthquake.
FUCK OFF
Wouldn’t it be embarrassing if S’Keir had slalomed past more taxes than Sunak?
China says the balloon over South America is Chinese. Where it actually is now is unclear.
Grim. Mrs J's working from home, and occasionally just spontaneously bursts into tears.
It will surely be as bad as the tragic 2015 earthquake which leveled much of Nepal, in 2015, and from which that beautiful country is still recovering
Worse, it is in probably the most precious archaeological landscape on the planet. Sanliurfa and the Tas Tepeler (Göbekli, Karahan etc). The cultural loss could outweigh the human loss, though both will be tragic, of course
It has already flattened Gaziantep castle. 2,200 years old
“What a horrendous day...
The horrible #Syria and #TurkeyEarthquake killed many, but it also destroyed priceless cultural heritage, such as the famed #Gaziantep Castle, built by the Romans in the 2nd century AD, when the place was known as Antiochia ad Taurum...”
https://twitter.com/catimperator/status/1622549031044931584?s=61&t=-3DuV9nq-TBVAwtlUSNcNg
One of England's most important contributions to thieving world culture is the trust. The trust dates back centuries to when it was called a "use" (rhymes with loose). It was always about the rich hiding and protecting their assets from the state. It's far older than trading in stocks, or going offshore, or the "I'm an artist" dodge that's popular among some of the richest families in Ireland.
You think Truss sent mortgage rates soaring to 6.5 per cent and brought pension funds to within hours of collapse? Let’s not lose the true history here. Liz Truss took all the blame for the near meltdown of our country’s bond markets and pension system, but the truth is the main culprit turned out to be pension fund managers who essentially bet that long-term interest rates would not rise too fast. She also took the blame for a run on the pound in a week everyone suffered from US strengthening their dollar. For your own personal selfishness you are ripping up true history. And that’s bad.
And your bank will shower you with paperwork about the repayment of the mortgage in the event that someone attempted to purchase the property.
Interestingly, in the US, when you buy a house you take out "title insurance" to cover you (as a purchaser) against the risk that the person who sold you the property didn't have the right to sell it to you.
"Labour's more cautious approach to tax and spend... makes it easier for the Greens to make more bold claims about how they would do more to save the NHS and invest more in public services.
"Greens might be able to get away with offering more spending on things that people like."
it is in Bristol where the green party sees their best hope for a second seat at Westminster, and where co-leader Carla Denyer Carla Denyer will be taking on Labour incumbent Thangam Debbonaire. Boundary changes are set to turn Bristol West into Bristol Central and make it, they say, "very Green-leaning".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64501427
Countless youngsters rock up at colleges, saying they want to enroll for an apprenticeship. Go away disappointed when told they need an employer first.
Anecdote: Niece's sister-in-law (in her 30s), quit accountancy (which she couldn't stand) and has embarked on a mechanical engineering degree apprenticeship - and loving it.
In a quake prone region, the ONLY way to preserve something as miraculous as the Tas Tepeler would be to bury them
The reason they are terribly at risk now is because they have been unearthed. Exposed. So maybe they weren’t buried as a kind of sacrifice, maybe they were buried as an act of remarkable conservation??
I’ve been trying to reach my mate Aydin who is head of culture for Sanliurfa. A total dude. Passionately in love with Göbekli Tepe and the driving force behind their amazing new museum
Can’t reach him. I hesitate to trouble him with further messages. Ominous silence. We are left with petitions to the heavens
The broad point is correct that Corbyn's departure and Starmer's move to the centre has created space on the left. But are there parliamentary seats for the Greens that way in addition to the one they have? I don't think so.
Sturgeon 'can't recall' when she knew husband loaned SNP £107,000
https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/23302114.sturgeon-cant-recall-knew-husband-loaned-snp-107-000/
As a description of a politician who had non dom status, in no way would that be actionable.
In the same way, Lewis Hamilton was called a tax dodger when he decamped to Monaco.
It's an expression of disapproval.
I think it a bit unfair on him, but it's daft to call it libel.
Absurd to suggest otherwise.
She was told that an inflationary, tax slashing "mini" budget without any sense of direction on spending cuts would send interest rates soaring and the currency crashing. She sacked the people saying that, bypassed the OBR and Bank of England, did it anyway... and now blames everyone else for the fact that what they said would happen in fact happened. The moment the policies and personnel behind it were ditched, the situation stabilised - but not without long term damage.
You are the one rewriting history here.
Fucking wankers the lot of you
I'd just say as a point of political fact that there are more votes there since Corbyn went and Labour vacated the space. I'd also, though, say that there aren't seats there in FPTP. Bristol Central is a pretty good example of that. It has a pretty rich, highly educated, liberal electorate who are all in favour of clean air, bikes and buses... but probably aren't screaming out for massive redistribution and seizing the means of production. Instead, tacking left would get the Greens 5% of the vote nationally, and one seat as now.
Liz Truss implemented a load of uncosted spending plans that were so bad she refused to have the OBR report on them.
The markets got spooked as would have happened in 2010 if a Government hadn't been formed (plenty of literature on this but Coalition 2015 is a good documentary on it).
Liz Truss called the markets left wing and that they threw her out. She is the one re-writing history.
If this had been Keir Starmer you'd have said he was totally to blame. I know you're a Tory fangirl but this is pathetic even from you.
much like Mari Antoinette never said let them eat cake. But that’s not going to stop your spin is it.
what she is pointing out, politicians, rather cowardly, starting with Brown and Labour, have outsourced decision making politicians should be responsible for. Politics should be about pursuing a purpose, an ideology, and UK politicians need that power back to pursue their ideology. The UK political and economic system just isn’t working so well with so much of this outsourced, is it? Unless you would like to argue that it is - taxed to the eyebrows, borrowed to the eyebrows, and BoE printing money way beyond the point of sanity.
Ideology shouldn’t be a dirty word like Blair’s Labour turned it into is the point she is making. Way over your head isn’t it?
“Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted leftward,” she added.
Liz Truss herself.
Let's be honest, if Jeremy Corbyn had done the same thing she'd be calling him a Communist.
By sticking to the truth of what actually happened, and not doing spin, I get MASSIVE likes on ConHome, who are obviously just smarter at politics than some of you here.
A country where you can't pass comment on senior politicians is one that is authoritarian. It makes no difference whether its authoritarianism via the police arresting dissenters or the grotesquely rich threatening libel action against journalists who expose the truth they are hiding.
Seriously. You are Rishi Sunak. Somehow you read Politicalbetting.com this morning and not only think "I'm not having that" but instruct Carter Fuck to go after both the poster and OGH for damages.
Its not remotely going to happen. For a lengthy list of reasons including the political furore over his family's non-dom status. Some people need to chill out before they harrumph themselves so hard that something prolapses.
I don't think Radio 4 is correct, though. If the property is sold fraudulently, the buyer takes the hit, and then sues the Seller.
"Magistrates courts in England and Wales have been ordered to stop authorising warrants for energy firms to forcibly install prepayment meters with immediate effect."
I don't understand how the regulator has allowed this situation to happen and why the directors of these companies aren't being investigated. Fucking sack the lot of them.
I’m taking up an argument against New Labour and what they done Tony Benn or Arthur Scargill could have made, and in your eyes that proves me a Tory?
You will more likely end up voting Tory in your life than me, becuase you don’t understand it.
Worth doing, both for your own properties if you have them & maybe your parent’s property too, as anything they own may well have paid off any mortgages secured against them. Your parents don’t even need to know about it - you don’t have to own a property to receive alerts.
URL: https://propertyalert.landregistry.gov.uk/
We do have some real Tory snowflakes on this site. Most of my off-topics are for criticising Johnson whilst PM, and in one or two posts I wasn't even off topic!
(Anticipating an off-topic or a flag)
On topic
Sunak seems politically naive. Do what Thatcher did, pay off the NHS and the teachers and go to war with some unloved unions.
However, the Sunday Telegraph, which has been very positive about her remarks, used the phrase in its headline. I'm not aware she's distanced herself from that.
She also came pretty close to it in her article, saying that, "frankly, we were also pushing water uphill. Large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy and over time sentiment had shifted Left-wards."
Her consistent claim has been that, in warning that the approach she pursued would precipitate a financial meltdown, the Treasury, OBR, Bank of England and media commentators had been captured by a centre-left delusion. What her article fails to recognise is that, whether or not those groups had been influenced in the way she describes, they were absolutely correct about what the market reaction would be.
The people who should be most furious are those who broadly agree with her prescription, and I am surprised we don't hear more from them. There was a path for her which involved a gradual tightening of the screw, with tax cuts going hand in hand with spending cuts. I'd not have agreed with it particularly, but it was the obvious way to proceed and the path Thatcher would have taken. That she charged in with a totally botched job has discredited her wing for many years to come.
Witty, resilient and provocative I’ll accept. Everything else keys said was wrong.
I have NEVER EVER posted to PB any support for Boris, Truss, or Sunak. Except, whilst acknowledging Truss as a joke, the liberal bits of her economic platform seem sensible to me.
Classic Conservativism always had a liberal - in the old fashioned, tolerant sense which believes in freedom, rights and responsibility - so Being liberal is at the heart of being a true Conservative, and makes the difference between them and of what is to the right of them. By calling me a Conservative not a liberal, you clearly don’t understand this do you.
Having said that, I have as yet to vote Conservative in my life, and have no plans to start anytime soon. A vote should be decided not just on what a party is called or stands for, but also on how incompetent and corrupt they currently are.
And I support Truss taking back the political responsibility New Labour outsourced, because Labour were embarrassed to be thought of as ideological - much your own and Mex Pex embarrassment as its way beyond your political comprehension, my support for Truss on this point and attack on New Labour does not make me Tory or anti Labour at all, insofar as using the same argument against New Labour the very not-Tory Tony Benn and Arfur Scargill would have made! 😌
Don’t just take the point from me, listen to them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQKTrKF94f4
Of course even a Magistrate follows what other Magistrates do so it's a problem that's being going on for yeats with cases being accept on the nod rather than actual checks being performed.
OK.
This was followed by a relatively (for PB) light and largely unpersonal debate about whether it was possibly libellous. I don’t recall anyone demanding bans or getting out the pitchforks and flaming torches.
That is all. To try and turn it into “Tory snowflakes screeching” because the political attack is vaguely in line with your politics is a bit pathetic really. If Heathener had written an attack on Sunak’s perceived weaknesses then likely nobody would worry but to assign dodgy tax insinuations to make an attack on him isn’t great.
Now I shall return to my fit of the vapors if you don’t mind.
And if you want to cut government spending, the question is what the government should stop doing...
Having heard about that we did what you suggested on both our properties. Particularly relevant for our second home.
I suppose the obvious smart Alec political answer is how much are we currently spending/chucking away on interest on our borrowing and how far would that go in helping the NHS etc - David Cameron added nearly hundred seats using that line and very little else.
The Sunak family finances have in recent memory benefitted from both Green Card status (very unusual for the CofE to be on the hook for taxes to a foreign power) and non-dom status. Pointing to these already established facts is not even possibly libellous. But suggesting it is does the work for the Zahawis of this world...