When you think about things, deep down - whatever your political persuasion (Unless it's very far left or right I'd suggest... you realise that May is probably the best person to get us through Brexit. If you were going to do it as a Gov't of national unity, having May and Brown working together probably wouldn't be the worst idea in the world on this.
I'd rather have Corbyn as PM than Boris. Boris would destroy the Tory reputation for competence (ragged as it is under May). The Tories need to shut up and go away, as a wise owl once said. A period in opposition would do them good.
The only problem with that thesis is that the next Conservative PM after a Far Left Government would probably inherit a devastated economy, to which they would then have to administer a whole pharmacy full of nasty medicine to try to save it from death.
I'm not sure what would happen after said unfortunate Tory cut pensions and the schools budget in half and privatised the healthcare system, but I doubt that it would involve their being returned at the following election with a healthy majority. Remember: the electorate never blame themselves for the negative consequences of their own shitty choices.
If business taxes are slashed then individuals of working age are going to have to be told to pay more to compensate.
As I understand it, most people who are opposed to corporation tax would rather shift over to taxing the dividends/other gains of shareholders. You're still ultimately taxing corporate profits, but at the point at which it is distributed rather than generated. The proposed benefit being that you have switched from taxing legal entities, which are legally "slippery" and highly mobile, to human beings, who are rather less so. So it isn't as simple as that £50bn pa "disappearing" if corporation tax were abolished tomorrow, since even without changing the way shareholders pay tax some of that additional untaxed profit is going to be fed back to shareholders and taxed that way, and in fact one would expect both to be changed.
Obviously there are complexities that may require other adjustments too (firms that make profits in the UK but have foreign shareholders, and vice versa; the capacity of human shareholders to avoid taxes too) and I'm neither proposing that the change would be a good one nor that it is especially likely to happen. But it isn't as absurd as it might first sound, nor is it without proponents, nor is it unthinkable under any circumstances (e.g. PT's scenario, or a round of competitive tax cuts that leaves 0% as the next logical place to go).
Exactly. You'd also be abolishing dividends tax and simply treating all dividends as income.
Dividend tax is (or was) set up so that the effects of corporation tax + dividend tax was the same 9for an individual receiving the dividends) as straight income tax, except using some slightly arcane formulas.
The trick, though, is ensuring profits don't simply get shifted out of the jurisdiction and paid elsewhere.
If business taxes are slashed then individuals of working age are going to have to be told to pay more to compensate.
As I understand it, most people who are opposed to corporation tax would rather shift over to taxing the dividends/other gains of shareholders. You're still ultimately taxing corporate profits, but at the point at which it is distributed rather than generated. The proposed benefit being that you have switched from taxing legal entities, which are legally "slippery" and highly mobile, to human beings, who are rather less so. So it isn't as simple as that £50bn pa "disappearing" if corporation tax were abolished tomorrow, since even without changing the way shareholders pay tax some of that additional untaxed profit is going to be fed back to shareholders and taxed that way, and in fact one would expect both to be changed.
Obviously there are complexities that may require other adjustments too (firms that make profits in the UK but have foreign shareholders, and vice versa; the capacity of human shareholders to avoid taxes too) and I'm neither proposing that the change would be a good one nor that it is especially likely to happen. But it isn't as absurd as it might first sound, nor is it without proponents, nor is it unthinkable under any circumstances (e.g. PT's scenario, or a round of competitive tax cuts that leaves 0% as the next logical place to go).
Exactly. You'd also be abolishing dividends tax and simply treating all dividends as income.
Dividend tax is (or was) set up so that the effects of corporation tax + dividend tax was the same 9for an individual receiving the dividends) as straight income tax, except using some slightly arcane formulas.
The trick, though, is ensuring profits don't simply get shifted out of the jurisdiction and paid elsewhere.
You would need some kind of withholding tax.
Problem is that then is incentitising companies to 'hoard' profit, and not pay it out.
It would be quite something to have a judge rule on whether or not the leader of a major political party might plausibly be described as an antisemite. Probably wouldn't make a jot of difference to Corbyn's position in the long run though: the party membership are mostly just a bunch of North Korean cheerleaders and the MPs are too frightened for their careers to push the nuclear button and dump the party.
I'd just feel sorry for whichever poor bastard was lumbered with hearing the case.
Nobody ever knows why they are on a train to Siberia. The Party has decided Comrade.
Three men are on a train to Siberia. The first asks the second why he has been imprisoned, who replies, "Because I criticized Karl Radek." The first man responds, "But I am here because I spoke out in favour of Radek!" They turn to the third man who has been sitting quietly, and ask him why he is going to jail. He answers, "I'm Karl Radek."
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
To bankrupt the Labour Party ? Her loyalty to the cause is obvious !
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
To appear in a new TV series Celebrity Litigation Island?
A YouTube video from Corbyn is just not going to cut the mustard.
Adopted the full set of examples won't do it - because he is pretty clearly in breach of some of the missing ones and there won't be an investigation into him.
Even presenting himself for conversion to Judaism is not going to do it.
He has allowed a situation to develop where there is no resolution short of resignation.
And I don't see that happening.
I cannot think of any form of words short of 'I resign' that will bring this matter to a close. Indeed the video could well make it worse.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
The answer to that stupidly worded letter @£100 a minute is: if every apology was an admission of guilt, then imagine what the costs would be.
An apology is what it says it is: an apology, period.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
They’re brilliant, the sort of thing every lawyer would love to be writing. Hope there’s an arrangement with Mrs Hodge about the fees though, there’s a lot of hours in there!
I can actually see this ending up in court, Hodge is in her seventies and probably retiring soon anyway, but understandably wants to make a point about the racism in her party.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
After months/years of abuse, and the way she's been treated over this compared to the scores of antisemites who were let-off, ignored, or praised by senior Labour figures, then I don't blame her one jot.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
Making this an open process - not hidden away. Sunlight is the best disinfectant as they say. And Labour is in a very, very shadowy place right now.
She is being asked to make an apology to deal with complaints that have not yet been revealed to her or her representatives. How, in any way at all, is that a fair and transparent way to proceed?
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
They’re brilliant, the sort of thing every lawyer would love to be writing. Hope there’s an arrangement with Mrs Hodge about the fees though, there’s a lot of hours in there!
I can actually see this ending up in court, Hodge is in her seventies and probably retiring soon anyway, but understandably wants to make a point about the racism in her party.
In terms of the uptick in future earnings that a case like this would bring, they should be paying her.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
They’re brilliant, the sort of thing every lawyer would love to be writing. Hope there’s an arrangement with Mrs Hodge about the fees though, there’s a lot of hours in there!
I can actually see this ending up in court, Hodge is in her seventies and probably retiring soon anyway, but understandably wants to make a point about the racism in her party.
Trust me, these aren't the letters that take the time to write. They practically write themselves.
Margaret Hodge would be happy to see this go to court. I can't imagine the Labour party or Jeremy Corbyn would. It would be a circus.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
Force the Labour high command to make a grovelling apology to her (amounting to an admission that she was right) - OR drag Corbyn's reputation through the sewage farm in open court?
I suppose that, unlike her many quiescent colleagues on the Labour backbenches, she is already past pensionable age and doesn't have a career to worry about, so she's more prepared to go down fighting. And I don't see how Labour's officials can easily dig themselves out of this particular hole if Hodge isn't prepared to play nice with them.
For reasons previously articulated I don't think it'll make a jot of difference in the long run, but watching the nightly news reports of the remnants of Corbyn's reputation being shredded by clever barristers would provide some measure of grim satisfaction.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
They’re brilliant, the sort of thing every lawyer would love to be writing. Hope there’s an arrangement with Mrs Hodge about the fees though, there’s a lot of hours in there!
I can actually see this ending up in court, Hodge is in her seventies and probably retiring soon anyway, but understandably wants to make a point about the racism in her party.
Trust me, these aren't the letters that take the time to write. They practically write themselves.
Margaret Hodge would be happy to see this go to court. I can't imagine the Labour party or Jeremy Corbyn would. It would be a circus.
My wife once had your firm write a letter like that on her behalf. It was a masterpiece. I've always wanted to nick bits from it and re-use them, but have never had the opportunity to do so.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
The answer to that stupidly worded letter @£100 a minute is: if every apology was an admission of guilt, then imagine what the costs would be.
An apology is what it says it is: an apology, period.
Not if one is demanded ... or else we proceed with disciplinary proceedings.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
They’re brilliant, the sort of thing every lawyer would love to be writing. Hope there’s an arrangement with Mrs Hodge about the fees though, there’s a lot of hours in there!
I can actually see this ending up in court, Hodge is in her seventies and probably retiring soon anyway, but understandably wants to make a point about the racism in her party.
Trust me, these aren't the letters that take the time to write. They practically write themselves.
Margaret Hodge would be happy to see this go to court. I can't imagine the Labour party or Jeremy Corbyn would. It would be a circus.
A YouTube video from Corbyn is just not going to cut the mustard.
Adopted the full set of examples won't do it - because he is pretty clearly in breach of some of the missing ones and there won't be an investigation into him.
Even presenting himself for conversion to Judaism is not going to do it.
He has allowed a situation to develop where there is no resolution short of resignation.
And I don't see that happening.
I cannot think of any form of words short of 'I resign' that will bring this matter to a close. Indeed the video could well make it worse.
A YouTube video from Corbyn is just not going to cut the mustard.
Adopted the full set of examples won't do it - because he is pretty clearly in breach of some of the missing ones and there won't be an investigation into him.
Even presenting himself for conversion to Judaism is not going to do it.
He has allowed a situation to develop where there is no resolution short of resignation.
And I don't see that happening.
I cannot think of any form of words short of 'I resign' that will bring this matter to a close. Indeed the video could well make it worse.
A YouTube video from Corbyn is just not going to cut the mustard.
Adopted the full set of examples won't do it - because he is pretty clearly in breach of some of the missing ones and there won't be an investigation into him.
Even presenting himself for conversion to Judaism is not going to do it.
He has allowed a situation to develop where there is no resolution short of resignation.
And I don't see that happening.
I cannot think of any form of words short of 'I resign' that will bring this matter to a close. Indeed the video could well make it worse.
A YouTube video from Corbyn is just not going to cut the mustard.
Adopted the full set of examples won't do it - because he is pretty clearly in breach of some of the missing ones and there won't be an investigation into him.
Even presenting himself for conversion to Judaism is not going to do it.
He has allowed a situation to develop where there is no resolution short of resignation.
And I don't see that happening.
I cannot think of any form of words short of 'I resign' that will bring this matter to a close. Indeed the video could well make it worse.
My favourite letters included the one that demanded an act of public oral satisfaction.
I liked the letter that said ‘We are proceeding on the assumption that you understand the tort of negligence, please correct us it this assumption is incorrect. We don’t wish to have to go through this all over again when your client claims inadequate representation’
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
Force the Labour high command to make a grovelling apology to her (amounting to an admission that she was right) - OR drag Corbyn's reputation through the sewage farm in open court?
No grovelling apology can be forced. The resolution will probably look something like:
"We asked for your client to apologise. She has declined to do so, which candidly we think is very graceless. However, as we indicated a week ago we do not see this as a case that should clog up the disciplinary system so we are not going to pursue it further for now."
Margaret Hodge will then wheel around the pitch with her shirt over her head and Labour party apparatchiki will gravely warn that this was not a vindication but an illustration of clemency.
And of course, thanks to her share of the proceeds from a Liechtenstein foundation which sheltered holdings in Stemcor, Ms Hodge probably has the spare dosh to pay the legal bills.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
This is lawyer-on-lawyer violence, mind you; only solicitors say stuff like "I now deal with your numbered points" as in the Formby letter. It's just that Mr Stramash is not as good at it.
A YouTube video from Corbyn is just not going to cut the mustard.
Adopted the full set of examples won't do it - because he is pretty clearly in breach of some of the missing ones and there won't be an investigation into him.
Even presenting himself for conversion to Judaism is not going to do it.
He has allowed a situation to develop where there is no resolution short of resignation.
And I don't see that happening.
I cannot think of any form of words short of 'I resign' that will bring this matter to a close. Indeed the video could well make it worse.
It would be quite something to have a judge rule on whether or not the leader of a major political party might plausibly be described as an antisemite. Probably wouldn't make a jot of difference to Corbyn's position in the long run though: the party membership are mostly just a bunch of North Korean cheerleaders and the MPs are too frightened for their careers to push the nuclear button and dump the party.
I'd just feel sorry for whichever poor bastard was lumbered with hearing the case.
Corbyn is mad enough to attempt his own defence, or perhaps use the services of Ken Livingston.
The jury will have to sit through week's of detailed, academic papers about the precise definition of zionism in a historical context.
And of course, thanks to her share of the proceeds from a Liechtenstein foundation which sheltered holdings in Stemcor, Ms Hodge probably has the spare dosh to pay the legal bills.
Thank God, a Tory wrote it. If I did , the mob would have shouted "anti-semitic"
It would be quite something to have a judge rule on whether or not the leader of a major political party might plausibly be described as an antisemite. Probably wouldn't make a jot of difference to Corbyn's position in the long run though: the party membership are mostly just a bunch of North Korean cheerleaders and the MPs are too frightened for their careers to push the nuclear button and dump the party.
I'd just feel sorry for whichever poor bastard was lumbered with hearing the case.
Corbyn is mad enough to attempt his own defence, or perhaps use the services of Ken Livingston.
Ken: you know who else was sent to prison for challenging the powers that be...
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
Force the Labour high command to make a grovelling apology to her (amounting to an admission that she was right) - OR drag Corbyn's reputation through the sewage farm in open court?
No grovelling apology can be forced. The resolution will probably look something like:
"We asked for your client to apologise. She has declined to do so, which candidly we think is very graceless. However, as we indicated a week ago we do not see this as a case that should clog up the disciplinary system so we are not going to pursue it further for now."
Margaret Hodge will then wheel around the pitch with her shirt over her head and Labour party apparatchiki will gravely warn that this was not a vindication but an illustration of clemency.
If only the current Labour bigwigs had enough nous to do just that. McDonnell excepted.
The Mishcon de Reya letters to Labour are a masterclass. It's Muhammad Ali vs. Mr Muscle.
Favourite bit:
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
One of the important things to note about these letters is that they have been made public. It tells you a lot about what Margaret Hodge's aims are.
Force the Labour high command to make a grovelling apology to her (amounting to an admission that she was right) - OR drag Corbyn's reputation through the sewage farm in open court?
No grovelling apology can be forced. The resolution will probably look something like:
"We asked for your client to apologise. She has declined to do so, which candidly we think is very graceless. However, as we indicated a week ago we do not see this as a case that should clog up the disciplinary system so we are not going to pursue it further for now."
Margaret Hodge will then wheel around the pitch with her shirt over her head and Labour party apparatchiki will gravely warn that this was not a vindication but an illustration of clemency.
Hopefully followed by a tour of the TV studios and several pieces in various newspapers, in which Hodge repeats the accusations and justifies them at considerable length.
A YouTube video from Corbyn is just not going to cut the mustard.
Adopted the full set of examples won't do it - because he is pretty clearly in breach of some of the missing ones and there won't be an investigation into him.
Even presenting himself for conversion to Judaism is not going to do it.
He has allowed a situation to develop where there is no resolution short of resignation.
And I don't see that happening.
I cannot think of any form of words short of 'I resign' that will bring this matter to a close. Indeed the video could well make it worse.
Can't wait to see Jacob talk his way around the massive Brexit recession that's coming.
He'll be too busy though, over in Dublin.
Since we have a free floating currency a massive recession is unlikely. I think a 2 or 3 quarters of low or no growth is the most likely outcome of no deal and then 1-2 years of below trend growth. The biggest downside risk to the UK economy is probably a recession in the EU. That really could result in a massive recession here. Unfortunately a no deal brexit may end up precipitating a recession in the EU as financial markets there will seize up and it could result in banks needing bailouts.
I have some sympathy for the argument that the Governor should stay out of politics.
Yes, the Governor of the Bank of England shouldn’t talk about the economy, especially since no deal Brexit is something some Leavers want.
Yes, the man whose entire job description is to maintain price stability within the United Kingdom, to support the economic policy and growth objectives of the government and for formulating monetary policy should definitely butt the fuck out on Brexit it's clearly not even *remotely* relevant.
THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH EYE ROLL EMOJIS FOR THE CONTEMPT I FEEL FOR JACOB REES MOGG.
Can't wait to see Jacob talk his way around the massive Brexit recession that's coming.
He'll be too busy though, over in Dublin.
Since we have a free floating currency a massive recession is unlikely. I think a 2 or 3 quarters of low or no growth is the most likely outcome of no deal and then 1-2 years of below trend growth. The biggest downside risk to the UK economy is probably a recession in the EU. That really could result in a massive recession here. Unfortunately a no deal brexit may end up precipitating a recession in the EU as financial markets there will seize up and it could result in banks needing bailouts.
If there’s no deal the corporation tax rate will go through the floor.
I have some sympathy for the argument that the Governor should stay out of politics.
Yes, the Governor of the Bank of England shouldn’t talk about the economy, especially since no deal Brexit is something some Leavers want.
Yes, the man whose entire job description is to maintain price stability within the United Kingdom, to support the economic policy and growth objectives of the government and for formulating monetary policy should definitely butt the fuck out on Brexit it's clearly not even *remotely* relevant.
THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH EYE ROLL EMOJIS FOR THE CONTEMPT I FEEL FOR JACOB REES MOGG.
JRM is not loyal to the UK, he takes his whip from Rome.
Can't wait to see Jacob talk his way around the massive Brexit recession that's coming.
He'll be too busy though, over in Dublin.
I wouldn't go counting chickens over the Brexit slump just yet.
The actual Leave vote itself was meant to result in a recession along with (according to various authorities including the Treasury, the IMF and the Bank of England) half-a-million job losses, an emergency budget containing £30bn in tax rises and spending cuts, a stock market crash, and an 18% fall in house prices.
Two years on, we are still awaiting the apocalypse. I don't know, perhaps the men pacing the streets with their 'End of the World is Nigh' sandwich boards have got the date right this time? But people are entitled to treat such claims with a certain degree of scepticism.
Comments
They'll probably be out shortly after resuming when the light improves, though.
Oh please let this go to court.
https://twitter.com/charlotteahenry/status/1025376488571514881
I'm not sure what would happen after said unfortunate Tory cut pensions and the schools budget in half and privatised the healthcare system, but I doubt that it would involve their being returned at the following election with a healthy majority. Remember: the electorate never blame themselves for the negative consequences of their own shitty choices.
Dividend tax is (or was) set up so that the effects of corporation tax + dividend tax was the same 9for an individual receiving the dividends) as straight income tax, except using some slightly arcane formulas.
The trick, though, is ensuring profits don't simply get shifted out of the jurisdiction and paid elsewhere.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/45053384
Problem is that then is incentitising companies to 'hoard' profit, and not pay it out.
I'd just feel sorry for whichever poor bastard was lumbered with hearing the case.
"If an apology is not an admission of guilt or liability, what is the current status of recent 'apologies' provided by Peter Willsman... and Mr Corbyn in relation to hosting a meeting in which he shared a platform with individuals comparing Israelis to Nazis on Holocaust Remembrance Day?"
Ouch.
Adopted the full set of examples won't do it - because he is pretty clearly in breach of some of the missing ones and there won't be an investigation into him.
Even presenting himself for conversion to Judaism is not going to do it.
He has allowed a situation to develop where there is no resolution short of resignation.
And I don't see that happening.
I cannot think of any form of words short of 'I resign' that will bring this matter to a close. Indeed the video could well make it worse.
An apology is what it says it is: an apology, period.
I can actually see this ending up in court, Hodge is in her seventies and probably retiring soon anyway, but understandably wants to make a point about the racism in her party.
Take the bastards down.
She is being asked to make an apology to deal with complaints that have not yet been revealed to her or her representatives. How, in any way at all, is that a fair and transparent way to proceed?
But, you know, lawyers. :P
Margaret Hodge would be happy to see this go to court. I can't imagine the Labour party or Jeremy Corbyn would. It would be a circus.
I suppose that, unlike her many quiescent colleagues on the Labour backbenches, she is already past pensionable age and doesn't have a career to worry about, so she's more prepared to go down fighting. And I don't see how Labour's officials can easily dig themselves out of this particular hole if Hodge isn't prepared to play nice with them.
For reasons previously articulated I don't think it'll make a jot of difference in the long run, but watching the nightly news reports of the remnants of Corbyn's reputation being shredded by clever barristers would provide some measure of grim satisfaction.
https://twitter.com/make_trouble/status/1025385841810653184
I liked the letter that said ‘We are proceeding on the assumption that you understand the tort of negligence, please correct us it this assumption is incorrect. We don’t wish to have to go through this all over again when your client claims inadequate representation’
https://order-order.com/2018/08/03/wearecorbyn-backed-by-russian-twitter-accounts/
No.6 in Tests, No.13 in ODIs and not even in the top 20 in T20s.
Moeen in #7 in tests and #6 in ODIs.
"We asked for your client to apologise. She has declined to do so, which candidly we think is very graceless. However, as we indicated a week ago we do not see this as a case that should clog up the disciplinary system so we are not going to pursue it further for now."
Margaret Hodge will then wheel around the pitch with her shirt over her head and Labour party apparatchiki will gravely warn that this was not a vindication but an illustration of clemency.
As a good Muslim boy I’ve never eaten anything pig related.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qtNk1B9At8k
The jury will have to sit through week's of detailed, academic papers about the precise definition of zionism in a historical context.
I didn’t even get a knighthood from Dave.
Is there any UK institution left that hasn't been attacked by these whackos? Maybe the British Museum?
https://twitter.com/Jacob_Rees_Mogg/status/1025375333757935616
He'll be too busy though, over in Dublin.
First rule of Brexiteering: Nothing is ever your fault. Ever.
Because I don't think that's *quite* accurate.
The first rule is Brexit is/will be easy.
If the BoE have something to say then they can speak through the Chancellor.
Which of course is exactly what’s happening, just the other way around. When did we last hear from Hammond about anything?
THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH EYE ROLL EMOJIS FOR THE CONTEMPT I FEEL FOR JACOB REES MOGG.
He’s doing his job.
Moeen isn't particularly reliable, either - though he might do rather better with Curran's footmarks to bowl into.
The actual Leave vote itself was meant to result in a recession along with (according to various authorities including the Treasury, the IMF and the Bank of England) half-a-million job losses, an emergency budget containing £30bn in tax rises and spending cuts, a stock market crash, and an 18% fall in house prices.
Two years on, we are still awaiting the apocalypse. I don't know, perhaps the men pacing the streets with their 'End of the World is Nigh' sandwich boards have got the date right this time? But people are entitled to treat such claims with a certain degree of scepticism.