Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Boris Johnson’s opposition to Indyref2 might be as Herculean as his opposition to a border in the Ir

1234689

Comments

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    eek said:

    eek said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Thinking the owners have "learnt their lesson" over this is as naive as I was thinking noone would ever take drugs in sport again when Ben Johnson was caught in 1988.

    If any lessons have been learnt it will be in how not to bungle it. Things they might have done differently to get away with it would be:

    Get FIFA's support - make it a world club competition at the outset, perhaps - so that the player's wouldn't be banned from World Cups.

    Plan it as an all-in breakaway, not depending on domestic leagues keeping them in. If you're undermining other organisations then you have to go all the way. Half measures won't do.
    Opposite of the latter one. Keep the pyramid.

    Do a breakaway but with the top clubs qualifying each year still. So that money and who controls the competition is the difference, not qualification.

    So West Ham etc can still qualify for it. That was the mistake.
    That was the screw up - the founding members should have got shares / guaranteed cash (would have been unfair but meh) but no guaranteed right to play.

    I wouldn't even go as far as shares/guaranteed cash. No guarantees at all but the money raised goes to the clubs who qualify instead of UEFA.

    The clubs would have no guarantees then but would still be tens if not hundreds of millions better off per annum.

    Possibly follow the Premier League model of parachute payments too.
    Who on earth pays the referees, match officials, marketing staff, logistics people if UEFA dont get any of the income?
    The club hosting the match is how it usually works.
    UEFA send dozens of staff to each match, paid for by UEFA. You cant see anything worrying about the home club paying the referees fees???
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865
    eek said:

    Dura_Ace said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    They haven't been Mercedes-McLaren since 2014. I fucking hate F1 (motorsport for people who don't like motorsport) and even I know that.
    Um - there wasn't a Mercedes powered McLaren between 2014 and March 2021...
    It's not officially McLaren-Mercedes now, Mercedes are merely an engine supplier rather tha engine partner as they were in the works years.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    edited April 2021
    Cyclefree said:

    eek said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Blimey, if even Kuenssberg is tweeting about it..

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1384735522556362755?s=21

    Would it have been better that we didn’t make this change and he didn’t do the work to try and help out in the pandemic?
    It would have been better to have paid taxes due. Once you establish that helping party donors to avoid paying taxes is in the national interest there is little left to say. Remember that in the same period they have zealously gone after UC claimants to recoup years old money which HMRC had just discovered was paid in error.

    One rule for the little people, another rule for Tory donors. Yet you insist your friends and party are above reproach when it comes to financial standards.
    Taxes due would have been zero if he stayed wherever he lives

    He came to help the UK

    He asked that those days didn’t count towards the 90 day limit

    That really is the sum total of it
    No - you are missing the point. No extra tax would have been payable if those coming over had stayed less than 90 days. (Couldn't the engineers have done much of the design back in Singapore? Why was it actually necessary for them to be physically present here?) So this was not necessary in order to allow the ventilator work to be done - on the assumption that they didn't need to stay in the UK for more than 3 months. It was only necessary because it might have prevented those people from later coming to work or visit in the U.K. in this tax year thus taking them over the 90 day limit. That further work might well have been nothing to do with the pandemic. Or it might just have been social visits. So why should it be exempt from tax?

    These companies were not doing the government a favour. They weren't acting like a charity or volunteers. They were being paid handsomely for their work. They should price the contract appropriately to take account of their costs, including any tax liabilities, arising from the fact that as a result of their decision, freely taken, they have sought to base themselves and employ people based outside the U.K.

    Actions have consequences but all too many rich people like lecturing others about this but do not want to apply this simple principle to themselves. That's what annoys.
    Did Dyson bill the Government for the work they did?

    I don't think any of the firms working on ventilator systems did.
    They didn't provide any ventilators. So why would they have been paid.

    I have yet to understand why it was necessary for these people to be physically in the country for more than 90 days to design a ventilator. Does anyone know?
    It depends if the design was heavily influenced by the manufacturing process, which in this case it would be.

    It's easy to design a product that does X but it's more difficult to design a product that does X and can be manufactured quickly and with minimal waste.

    You'd only need a few engineers though.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    edited April 2021

    Foss said:

    London Comres out:

    London Mayoral Voting Intention:

    Khan (LAB): 41%
    Bailey (CON): 28%
    Porritt (LDM): 8%
    Berry (GRN): 6%
    Omilana (IND): 5%

    Via
    @SavantaComRes
    , 13-19 Apr.

    Still a firm Khan win on the second round.

    Tories regretting not putting out a halfway capable candidate now. Stewart as the Tory would have won this given the vaccination boost.
    Dunno, I read that as meaning that by the final round, any Tory candidate would really struggle unless they are at more or less 50% up front. Presumably Boris used to get LibDem transfers.
    The Khan vote is pretty soft. I will probably vote Poritt or Berry 1st pref and Khan 2nd pref but Stewart would have been a clear 1st pref. Stewart is a good campaigner and would allow Tories to get both remain and leave voters here.
    I’ll probably go Berry first and Khan second. Had Stewart still been standing, he’d get my first preference. His appeal goes beyond Tories, and he was the only candidate with any prospect of beating Khan.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    tlg86 said:

    And then there were four...

    Real Madrid
    Barcelona
    Milan
    Juventus

    Serie A and La Liga really ought to kick them out now.

    My understanding is that Barcelona are only nominally involved now, pending a vote from members which is expected to be overwhelmingly negative.

    Pretty soon it's going to just be Real Madrid. Who will be very happy; they can decide the rules for themselves and in addition to all the historical wins they are claiming can win it every year in the future too. Everyone wins.
  • Endillion said:

    MaxPB said:

    Foss said:

    London Comres out:

    London Mayoral Voting Intention:

    Khan (LAB): 41%
    Bailey (CON): 28%
    Porritt (LDM): 8%
    Berry (GRN): 6%
    Omilana (IND): 5%

    Via
    @SavantaComRes
    , 13-19 Apr.

    Still a firm Khan win on the second round.

    That's a lot closer than I expected it to be and who the fuck is Omilana?
    All I know about Omilana is that she's the only candidate who couldn't or wouldn't stump up £10k to get her profile into the info booklet that gets sent to all voters. So either she's super hard up for cash, or has zero expectations of winning and isn't really trying, or assumes none of her likely voters can read so needs to reach them in other ways.

    Either way, 5% sounds... high.
    He (Niko Omilana) has 3.4M subscribers on youtube and is reaching his target voters that way.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,351

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,200
    Foss said:

    kinabalu said:

    Strong betting move to the Cons on Hartlepool. 1.5 now.

    I could cash out for 36% of my Tory win profit... which is tempting. OTOH, if its insider betting due to a good poll then it might be worth hanging on…
    Same here. I'm on at evens. I'm not closing out because I think it's nailed on. Don't think it will even be that close.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    eek said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Thinking the owners have "learnt their lesson" over this is as naive as I was thinking noone would ever take drugs in sport again when Ben Johnson was caught in 1988.

    If any lessons have been learnt it will be in how not to bungle it. Things they might have done differently to get away with it would be:

    Get FIFA's support - make it a world club competition at the outset, perhaps - so that the player's wouldn't be banned from World Cups.

    Plan it as an all-in breakaway, not depending on domestic leagues keeping them in. If you're undermining other organisations then you have to go all the way. Half measures won't do.
    Opposite of the latter one. Keep the pyramid.

    Do a breakaway but with the top clubs qualifying each year still. So that money and who controls the competition is the difference, not qualification.

    So West Ham etc can still qualify for it. That was the mistake.
    That was the screw up - the founding members should have got shares / guaranteed cash (would have been unfair but meh) but no guaranteed right to play.

    I wouldn't even go as far as shares/guaranteed cash. No guarantees at all but the money raised goes to the clubs who qualify instead of UEFA.

    The clubs would have no guarantees then but would still be tens if not hundreds of millions better off per annum.

    Possibly follow the Premier League model of parachute payments too.
    Who on earth pays the referees, match officials, marketing staff, logistics people if UEFA dont get any of the income?
    The newly created League would. Just as the PL does. It's not a new concept.

    UEFA make a big profit on the CL. Net of all that.
    That money stays in football, albeit UEFA are a bloated organisation that could cut costs, as indeed any new league would quickly become. Paying new UEFA instead of old UEFA doesnt change the economics. If the big clubs want a higher % it is either at the expense of small clubs, national associations or grassroots.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    Foss said:

    London Comres out:

    London Mayoral Voting Intention:

    Khan (LAB): 41%
    Bailey (CON): 28%
    Porritt (LDM): 8%
    Berry (GRN): 6%
    Omilana (IND): 5%

    Via
    @SavantaComRes
    , 13-19 Apr.

    Still a firm Khan win on the second round.

    Tories regretting not putting out a halfway capable candidate now. Stewart as the Tory would have won this given the vaccination boost.
    Dunno, I read that as meaning that by the final round, any Tory candidate would really struggle unless they are at more or less 50% up front. Presumably Boris used to get LibDem transfers.
    The Khan vote is pretty soft. I will probably vote Poritt or Berry 1st pref and Khan 2nd pref but Stewart would have been a clear 1st pref. Stewart is a good campaigner and would allow Tories to get both remain and leave voters here.
    I’ll probably go Berry First voice and Khan second. Had Stewart still been standing, he’d get my first preference. His appeal goes beyond Tories, and he was the only candidate with any prospect of beating Khan.
    I would have expected him to be 5-8% behind normally but do think with the vaccination success he would have won.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    For those young people understandably looking on in some despair, interestingly the UK is actually a little below the OECD's average house price: earnings ratio.

    Interesting chart:

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1384817658705715202
  • Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
    Do you ever do a basic check of the facts? https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/case-study-ventilator-challenge-uk/
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,351

    Cyclefree said:

    eek said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Blimey, if even Kuenssberg is tweeting about it..

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1384735522556362755?s=21

    Would it have been better that we didn’t make this change and he didn’t do the work to try and help out in the pandemic?
    It would have been better to have paid taxes due. Once you establish that helping party donors to avoid paying taxes is in the national interest there is little left to say. Remember that in the same period they have zealously gone after UC claimants to recoup years old money which HMRC had just discovered was paid in error.

    One rule for the little people, another rule for Tory donors. Yet you insist your friends and party are above reproach when it comes to financial standards.
    Taxes due would have been zero if he stayed wherever he lives

    He came to help the UK

    He asked that those days didn’t count towards the 90 day limit

    That really is the sum total of it
    No - you are missing the point. No extra tax would have been payable if those coming over had stayed less than 90 days. (Couldn't the engineers have done much of the design back in Singapore? Why was it actually necessary for them to be physically present here?) So this was not necessary in order to allow the ventilator work to be done - on the assumption that they didn't need to stay in the UK for more than 3 months. It was only necessary because it might have prevented those people from later coming to work or visit in the U.K. in this tax year thus taking them over the 90 day limit. That further work might well have been nothing to do with the pandemic. Or it might just have been social visits. So why should it be exempt from tax?

    These companies were not doing the government a favour. They weren't acting like a charity or volunteers. They were being paid handsomely for their work. They should price the contract appropriately to take account of their costs, including any tax liabilities, arising from the fact that as a result of their decision, freely taken, they have sought to base themselves and employ people based outside the U.K.

    Actions have consequences but all too many rich people like lecturing others about this but do not want to apply this simple principle to themselves. That's what annoys.
    Did Dyson bill the Government for the work they did?

    I don't think any of the firms working on ventilator systems did.
    They didn't provide any ventilators. So why would they have been paid.

    I have yet to understand why it was necessary for these people to be physically in the country for more than 90 days to design a ventilator. Does anyone know?
    It depends if the design was heavily influenced by the manufacturing process, which in this case it would be.

    It's easy to design a product that does X but it's more difficult to design a product that does X and can be manufactured quickly and with minimal waste.

    You'd only need a few engineers though.
    Productionisation is an incredibly difficult field. It is very easy to create a piece of crap and throw it out the door (I'm looking at you, Sir Sinclair).

    I would expect that you'd want to get the production experts in the same room as the medical device experts and a number of other experts, bouncing ideas and issues off each other. You can do this kind of thing remotely, but it would definitely be slower.

    I've done software development stuff, involving getting multiple subject matter experts input, and there is no substitute for co-location.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865

    Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
    Do you ever do a basic check of the facts? https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/case-study-ventilator-challenge-uk/
    Do you? The modified CPAP was by Mercedes, McLaren made ventilator trays with better connections and ergonomics than the existing ones with rapid manufacturing in mind.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    eek said:

    Cookie said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Cookie said:

    Alternatively, maybe you can concoct a counterfactual (note: you can't) whereby Labour had managed to have a non-insane leader like, say, Kier Starmer ending up in charge of the country.

    No, but you can absolutely concoct a counterfactual where a Tory other than BoZo won the leadership election, or one where BoZo was removed by a Tory party that cared about the fact he is a Clown.

    There were other paths less disastrous than the one the fanbois continue to cheer.
    If Jeremy Hunt had won the leadership election ... he would also have dully followed sage advice most of the time. (I say this as someone who, in the unusual counterfactual that I was a member of the Tory party back at the last leadership election, would have voted for him.) But again, he might not have diverged from the EU on vaccine procurement.
    For me, the key player would have been Rory Stewart, who had worked through a previous pandemic and got the danger of rapid exponential growth. The week or so between the collapse of testing and lockdown contained an awful lot of the wave 1 infections and hence deaths. And I'm sure he would have stayed on under Hunt.

    And if we take the excess deaths data from the FT tracker,
    https://www.ft.com/content/a2901ce8-5eb7-4633-b89c-cbdf5b386938

    France is running at about half the UK's rate (10% vs 20%)
    Germany about a fifth (4% vs 20%)

    The UK has similar excess rates to Spain, Italy and Poland. Even though we're probably largely done and they probably aren't, I'm not sure they are comparators to shout from the rooftops.

    ETA: And now I must do some actual remunerative work. Shout at me if you see me here again.
    The inexcusable fuck up was allowing covid to be imported a second time during the summer.
    And this answers @IanB2 's question above. We will have a 3rd wave because a new mutation of the pox gets imported from countries not even close to having mass vaccination. At the moment the issue has been that we have the doors wide open to let people fly in with mutant pox. But in a month or so's time we're going to allow people to fly abroad on holibobs, and that was a great way of reimporting it last time.

    I don't see that the general populace is going to allow the current restrictions to continue much longer - they want a holiday. But that just means them coming back again later.
    The UK has already had a third wave - there's a clear difference between the second autumn wave imported from holidays and the third winter wave from the Kent variant (though that too may have been imported).

    But there are risks of a fourth from imported variants.
    Depends where you live

    On a lot of criteria Leicester is either about to enter it's 4th wave (as India hurries back before 4am Friday) or enter the 14th month of it's 1st wave.
    Yes, even now the districts at the top of the infections table are the same ones as last September - Leicester, Bradford, Luton... Though all at mercifully low levels still. Hopefully the extent of vaccinations in these towns (and elsewhere) will keep the numbers low.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392
    edited April 2021
    Cyclefree said:

    eek said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Blimey, if even Kuenssberg is tweeting about it..

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1384735522556362755?s=21

    Would it have been better that we didn’t make this change and he didn’t do the work to try and help out in the pandemic?
    It would have been better to have paid taxes due. Once you establish that helping party donors to avoid paying taxes is in the national interest there is little left to say. Remember that in the same period they have zealously gone after UC claimants to recoup years old money which HMRC had just discovered was paid in error.

    One rule for the little people, another rule for Tory donors. Yet you insist your friends and party are above reproach when it comes to financial standards.
    Taxes due would have been zero if he stayed wherever he lives

    He came to help the UK

    He asked that those days didn’t count towards the 90 day limit

    That really is the sum total of it
    No - you are missing the point. No extra tax would have been payable if those coming over had stayed less than 90 days. (Couldn't the engineers have done much of the design back in Singapore? Why was it actually necessary for them to be physically present here?) So this was not necessary in order to allow the ventilator work to be done - on the assumption that they didn't need to stay in the UK for more than 3 months. It was only necessary because it might have prevented those people from later coming to work or visit in the U.K. in this tax year thus taking them over the 90 day limit. That further work might well have been nothing to do with the pandemic. Or it might just have been social visits. So why should it be exempt from tax?

    These companies were not doing the government a favour. They weren't acting like a charity or volunteers. They were being paid handsomely for their work. They should price the contract appropriately to take account of their costs, including any tax liabilities, arising from the fact that as a result of their decision, freely taken, they have sought to base themselves and employ people based outside the U.K.

    Actions have consequences but all too many rich people like lecturing others about this but do not want to apply this simple principle to themselves. That's what annoys.
    Did Dyson bill the Government for the work they did?

    I don't think any of the firms working on ventilator systems did.
    They didn't provide any ventilators. So why would they have been paid.

    I have yet to understand why it was necessary for these people to be physically in the country for more than 90 days to design a ventilator. Does anyone know?
    because it a single site can increase team productivity by multiples.

    Put it this way, stop for a second and ask yourself this question

    Why are the people on here who develop technology all saying it was best to have everyone on site together while the lawyers and accountants are asking what was the point?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
    Do you ever do a basic check of the facts? https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/case-study-ventilator-challenge-uk/
    Different product!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,200

    Foss said:

    London Comres out:

    London Mayoral Voting Intention:

    Khan (LAB): 41%
    Bailey (CON): 28%
    Porritt (LDM): 8%
    Berry (GRN): 6%
    Omilana (IND): 5%

    Via
    @SavantaComRes
    , 13-19 Apr.

    Still a firm Khan win on the second round.

    Tories regretting not putting out a halfway capable candidate now. Stewart as the Tory would have won this given the vaccination boost.
    Dunno, I read that as meaning that by the final round, any Tory candidate would really struggle unless they are at more or less 50% up front. Presumably Boris used to get LibDem transfers.
    The Khan vote is pretty soft. I will probably vote Poritt or Berry 1st pref and Khan 2nd pref but Stewart would have been a clear 1st pref. Stewart is a good campaigner and would allow Tories to get both remain and leave voters here.
    I’ll probably go Berry first and Khan second. Had Stewart still been standing, he’d get my first preference. His appeal goes beyond Tories, and he was the only candidate with any prospect of beating Khan.
    Bet Sadiq can barely believe his luck with the opposition. Here mate, have another term.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,448
    Cyclefree said:

    eek said:

    Cyclefree said:


    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Blimey, if even Kuenssberg is tweeting about it..

    https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1384735522556362755?s=21

    Would it have been better that we didn’t make this change and he didn’t do the work to try and help out in the pandemic?
    It would have been better to have paid taxes due. Once you establish that helping party donors to avoid paying taxes is in the national interest there is little left to say. Remember that in the same period they have zealously gone after UC claimants to recoup years old money which HMRC had just discovered was paid in error.

    One rule for the little people, another rule for Tory donors. Yet you insist your friends and party are above reproach when it comes to financial standards.
    Taxes due would have been zero if he stayed wherever he lives

    He came to help the UK

    He asked that those days didn’t count towards the 90 day limit

    That really is the sum total of it
    No - you are missing the point. No extra tax would have been payable if those coming over had stayed less than 90 days. (Couldn't the engineers have done much of the design back in Singapore? Why was it actually necessary for them to be physically present here?) So this was not necessary in order to allow the ventilator work to be done - on the assumption that they didn't need to stay in the UK for more than 3 months. It was only necessary because it might have prevented those people from later coming to work or visit in the U.K. in this tax year thus taking them over the 90 day limit. That further work might well have been nothing to do with the pandemic. Or it might just have been social visits. So why should it be exempt from tax?

    These companies were not doing the government a favour. They weren't acting like a charity or volunteers. They were being paid handsomely for their work. They should price the contract appropriately to take account of their costs, including any tax liabilities, arising from the fact that as a result of their decision, freely taken, they have sought to base themselves and employ people based outside the U.K.

    Actions have consequences but all too many rich people like lecturing others about this but do not want to apply this simple principle to themselves. That's what annoys.
    Did Dyson bill the Government for the work they did?

    I don't think any of the firms working on ventilator systems did.
    They didn't provide any ventilators. So why would they have been paid.

    I have yet to understand why it was necessary for these people to be physically in the country for more than 90 days to design a ventilator. Does anyone know?
    Messrs Eek and Malmesbury made some good points. There's often an advantage of a bit of actual hands-on.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176

    For those young people understandably looking on in some despair, interestingly the UK is actually a little below the OECD's average house price: earnings ratio.

    Interesting chart:

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1384817658705715202

    Interesting, but I suspect those stats aren’t all that useful given the huge differences within countries.

    I’d suggest the best thing youngsters could do is to avoid London!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    edited April 2021



    Productionisation is an incredibly difficult field. It is very easy to create a piece of crap and throw it out the door (I'm looking at you, Sir Sinclair).

    I would expect that you'd want to get the production experts in the same room as the medical device experts and a number of other experts, bouncing ideas and issues off each other. You can do this kind of thing remotely, but it would definitely be slower.

    I've done software development stuff, involving getting multiple subject matter experts input, and there is no substitute for co-location.

    Plus, unlike software development, you've got to produce, evaluate and test physical prototypes, and physically supervise the setting up of the production facilities. Of all the daft criticisms by people who hate Boris (I'm not exactly a fan myself..), the suggestion that the design and production team didn't really need to be in the UK for 90 days is I think the daftest I've ever seen - a wonderfully clear-cut case of working backwards from a political conclusion to try to fit the facts to it.
  • MaxPB said:

    Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
    Do you ever do a basic check of the facts? https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/case-study-ventilator-challenge-uk/
    Do you? The modified CPAP was by Mercedes, McLaren made ventilator trays with better connections and ergonomics than the existing ones with rapid manufacturing in mind.
    So were McLaren involved in the Ventilator project or not? https://www.ventilatorchallengeuk.com/ says they were. Philip says not.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Business is business.

    He chose Britain. Britain said no. Same could happen again in the future.

    Blame the NIMBYs. I have nothing but contempt for NIMBYs and am 100% consistent on that.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Business is business.

    He chose Britain. Britain said no. Same could happen again in the future.

    Blame the NIMBYs. I have nothing but contempt for NIMBYs and am 100% consistent on that.
    Yes, business is business, but it isn't patriotism.

    He is a hypocrite and a scumbag and has no business delegating his charity to the British treasury.

    Believe in Britain my arse.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,351
    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    He wanted co-location with the design and other offices.

    Once that co-location was broken, and he had to setup another site... putting it in Singapore was cheaper than building another site in the UK.

    I'm quite sure the scumbags* locally (who I knew) are whining about him putting the manufacturing overseas.

    *They were quite clear that they liked the locals poor and without jobs. One actually told me that if Dyson expanded, the prices for gardeners and cleaners would go up, so he was opposed.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    edited April 2021
    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    Juventus Chairman Andrea Agnelli has blamed the collapse of the ESL on Boris and Brexit:
    "I have had speculation to that extent that if six teams would have broken away and would have threatened the EPL (Premier League), politics would have seen that as an attack to Brexit and their political scheme,"
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2021/04/21/european-super-league-news-teams-clubs-withdraw-collapse-live/

    Brexit derangement syndrome goes well beyond these shores.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    For those young people understandably looking on in some despair, interestingly the UK is actually a little below the OECD's average house price: earnings ratio.

    Interesting chart:

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1384817658705715202

    Isnt that measuring the change from 2015 by nation, not comparing nations against each other in terms of earnings?
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 5,331
    kinabalu said:

    Foss said:

    London Comres out:

    London Mayoral Voting Intention:

    Khan (LAB): 41%
    Bailey (CON): 28%
    Porritt (LDM): 8%
    Berry (GRN): 6%
    Omilana (IND): 5%

    Via
    @SavantaComRes
    , 13-19 Apr.

    Still a firm Khan win on the second round.

    Tories regretting not putting out a halfway capable candidate now. Stewart as the Tory would have won this given the vaccination boost.
    Dunno, I read that as meaning that by the final round, any Tory candidate would really struggle unless they are at more or less 50% up front. Presumably Boris used to get LibDem transfers.
    The Khan vote is pretty soft. I will probably vote Poritt or Berry 1st pref and Khan 2nd pref but Stewart would have been a clear 1st pref. Stewart is a good campaigner and would allow Tories to get both remain and leave voters here.
    I’ll probably go Berry first and Khan second. Had Stewart still been standing, he’d get my first preference. His appeal goes beyond Tories, and he was the only candidate with any prospect of beating Khan.
    Bet Sadiq can barely believe his luck with the opposition. Here mate, have another term.
    In that respect, he shares something quite significant with Johnson.
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    edited April 2021
    @TheScreamingEagles

    Naughty, you've declined to decline Societas Britannica into the necessary objective genitive: Malleus Societatis Britannicae.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392



    Productionisation is an incredibly difficult field. It is very easy to create a piece of crap and throw it out the door (I'm looking at you, Sir Sinclair).

    I would expect that you'd want to get the production experts in the same room as the medical device experts and a number of other experts, bouncing ideas and issues off each other. You can do this kind of thing remotely, but it would definitely be slower.

    I've done software development stuff, involving getting multiple subject matter experts input, and there is no substitute for co-location.

    Plus, unlike software development, you've got to produce, evaluate and test physical prototypes, and physically supervise the setting up of the production facilities. Of all the daft criticisms by people who hate Boris (I'm not exactly a fan myself..), the suggestion that the design and production team didn't really need to be in the UK for 90 days is I think the daftest I've ever seen - a wonderfully clear-cut case of working backwards from a political conclusion to try to fit the facts to it.
    It's the - you can't do that because of XYZ as person a glances over to see what team b is doing that gains you months.

    even in software development I want to watch what others are doing so I catch issues or false assumptions early. Just waiting until someone checks the code in can result in 8 hours of work being wasted.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,865

    MaxPB said:

    Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
    Do you ever do a basic check of the facts? https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/case-study-ventilator-challenge-uk/
    Do you? The modified CPAP was by Mercedes, McLaren made ventilator trays with better connections and ergonomics than the existing ones with rapid manufacturing in mind.
    So were McLaren involved in the Ventilator project or not? https://www.ventilatorchallengeuk.com/ says they were. Philip says not.
    Not for the bit Mercedes did.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    eek said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Thinking the owners have "learnt their lesson" over this is as naive as I was thinking noone would ever take drugs in sport again when Ben Johnson was caught in 1988.

    If any lessons have been learnt it will be in how not to bungle it. Things they might have done differently to get away with it would be:

    Get FIFA's support - make it a world club competition at the outset, perhaps - so that the player's wouldn't be banned from World Cups.

    Plan it as an all-in breakaway, not depending on domestic leagues keeping them in. If you're undermining other organisations then you have to go all the way. Half measures won't do.
    Opposite of the latter one. Keep the pyramid.

    Do a breakaway but with the top clubs qualifying each year still. So that money and who controls the competition is the difference, not qualification.

    So West Ham etc can still qualify for it. That was the mistake.
    That was the screw up - the founding members should have got shares / guaranteed cash (would have been unfair but meh) but no guaranteed right to play.

    I wouldn't even go as far as shares/guaranteed cash. No guarantees at all but the money raised goes to the clubs who qualify instead of UEFA.

    The clubs would have no guarantees then but would still be tens if not hundreds of millions better off per annum.

    Possibly follow the Premier League model of parachute payments too.
    Who on earth pays the referees, match officials, marketing staff, logistics people if UEFA dont get any of the income?
    The newly created League would. Just as the PL does. It's not a new concept.

    UEFA make a big profit on the CL. Net of all that.
    That money stays in football, albeit UEFA are a bloated organisation that could cut costs, as indeed any new league would quickly become. Paying new UEFA instead of old UEFA doesnt change the economics. If the big clubs want a higher % it is either at the expense of small clubs, national associations or grassroots.
    Or they expand the product by have a consistent fare of matches between teams people have actually heard of and are interested in generating more TV revenue, merchandising etc. It was not necessarily a zero sum game. The iniquitous part was the absence of relegation for the founder members. If this proposal ever comes back, and it might, that will surely be missing.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821

    For those young people understandably looking on in some despair, interestingly the UK is actually a little below the OECD's average house price: earnings ratio.

    Interesting chart:

    https://twitter.com/gsoh31/status/1384817658705715202

    Isnt that measuring the change from 2015 by nation, not comparing nations against each other in terms of earnings?
    Ah, you might be right. It did look very odd!

    Scrub that one, then.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    .

    MaxPB said:

    Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
    Do you ever do a basic check of the facts? https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/case-study-ventilator-challenge-uk/
    Do you? The modified CPAP was by Mercedes, McLaren made ventilator trays with better connections and ergonomics than the existing ones with rapid manufacturing in mind.
    So were McLaren involved in the Ventilator project or not? https://www.ventilatorchallengeuk.com/ says they were. Philip says not.
    They were involved in a different project.

    They government set a Challenge to any and all manufacturers with engineering experience to help. As a result many large manufacturers rose to the challenge including but not limited to McLaren, JCB, Dyson and Mercedes.

    Mercedes were the one that cracked it with their incredible CPAP machines that saved many lives. Without the challenge Dyson, JCB and others wouldn't have taken part, but neither would Mercedes.

    Some people want to mix up McLaren and Mercedes. But they were different companies, designing different products, in the same challenge. Just like JCB, Dyson and the others.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176
    Cookie said:

    Juventus Chairman Andrea Agnelli has blamed the collapse of the ESL on Boris and Brexit:
    "I have had speculation to that extent that if six teams would have broken away and would have threatened the EPL (Premier League), politics would have seen that as an attack to Brexit and their political scheme,"
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2021/04/21/european-super-league-news-teams-clubs-withdraw-collapse-live/

    Brexit derangement syndrome goes well beyond these shores.

    You mean, Brexit saved football?

    :lol:
  • Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
    Do you ever do a basic check of the facts? https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/case-study-ventilator-challenge-uk/
    Different product!
    The consortium built two products. McLaren were making 200 of these a day https://www.penlon.com/Product-Groups/Emergency-Ventilators/ESO-2

    So the answer to "who built the ventilator Mercedes or McLaren" is "both". Not your usual fact-free superiority.

    Oops!
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    Apologies for harking on about this after everyone has moved on, but I'm still enjoying the ESL story.

    The National Football Museum is trying to get hold of the Chelsea fan who crafted the placard "We want our cold nights in Stoke"
    https://twitter.com/FootballMuseum/status/1384784913837268994

    I'd say the fans of the big 6 clubs - particularly Chelsea, whom the fixture list gave the first chance of a proper shout - have come out of this with a lot of credit. Shows they do follow the same game as the rest of us.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 23,486
    Cookie said:

    Apologies for harking on about this after everyone has moved on, but I'm still enjoying the ESL story.

    The National Football Museum is trying to get hold of the Chelsea fan who crafted the placard "We want our cold nights in Stoke"
    https://twitter.com/FootballMuseum/status/1384784913837268994

    I'd say the fans of the big 6 clubs - particularly Chelsea, whom the fixture list gave the first chance of a proper shout - have come out of this with a lot of credit. Shows they do follow the same game as the rest of us.

    Of course they follow the same game as everyone else. For many people (millions!) a Big Six side is their local club – round me most people support Spurs with a few Arsenal. Those clubs are the local sides here.

    I know it's hard to believe on PB, given the prevalence of Plastic Scousers who have no connection to Merseyside (Philip being the honourable expedition), but for lots of people the likes of Tottenham Hotspur and Manchester City are their local clubs!
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Thinking the owners have "learnt their lesson" over this is as naive as I was thinking noone would ever take drugs in sport again when Ben Johnson was caught in 1988.

    If any lessons have been learnt it will be in how not to bungle it. Things they might have done differently to get away with it would be:

    Get FIFA's support - make it a world club competition at the outset, perhaps - so that the player's wouldn't be banned from World Cups.

    Plan it as an all-in breakaway, not depending on domestic leagues keeping them in. If you're undermining other organisations then you have to go all the way. Half measures won't do.
    Opposite of the latter one. Keep the pyramid.

    Do a breakaway but with the top clubs qualifying each year still. So that money and who controls the competition is the difference, not qualification.

    So West Ham etc can still qualify for it. That was the mistake.
    That was the screw up - the founding members should have got shares / guaranteed cash (would have been unfair but meh) but no guaranteed right to play.

    I wouldn't even go as far as shares/guaranteed cash. No guarantees at all but the money raised goes to the clubs who qualify instead of UEFA.

    The clubs would have no guarantees then but would still be tens if not hundreds of millions better off per annum.

    Possibly follow the Premier League model of parachute payments too.
    Who on earth pays the referees, match officials, marketing staff, logistics people if UEFA dont get any of the income?
    The newly created League would. Just as the PL does. It's not a new concept.

    UEFA make a big profit on the CL. Net of all that.
    That money stays in football, albeit UEFA are a bloated organisation that could cut costs, as indeed any new league would quickly become. Paying new UEFA instead of old UEFA doesnt change the economics. If the big clubs want a higher % it is either at the expense of small clubs, national associations or grassroots.
    Or they expand the product by have a consistent fare of matches between teams people have actually heard of and are interested in generating more TV revenue, merchandising etc. It was not necessarily a zero sum game. The iniquitous part was the absence of relegation for the founder members. If this proposal ever comes back, and it might, that will surely be missing.
    Sure, you can expand revenues, and that is what both UEFA and super league try to do. But to expand the share the big clubs get significantly it is coming out of one of small clubs, national associations or grassroots, not UEFA's admin costs.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392
    edited April 2021
    Cookie said:

    Apologies for harking on about this after everyone has moved on, but I'm still enjoying the ESL story.

    The National Football Museum is trying to get hold of the Chelsea fan who crafted the placard "We want our cold nights in Stoke"
    https://twitter.com/FootballMuseum/status/1384784913837268994

    I'd say the fans of the big 6 clubs - particularly Chelsea, whom the fixture list gave the first chance of a proper shout - have come out of this with a lot of credit. Shows they do follow the same game as the rest of us.

    One thing I contribute towards every year is this sign

    image

    It was the banner Barrow supporters displayed as Darlington played their last match before going bankrupt in 2012

    image
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    McLaren may have that knowledge.

    McLaren didn't do it though. Mercedes did.

    Oops! 🤦🏻‍♂️
    Do you ever do a basic check of the facts? https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/case-study-ventilator-challenge-uk/
    Different product!
    The consortium built two products. McLaren were making 200 of these a day https://www.penlon.com/Product-Groups/Emergency-Ventilators/ESO-2

    So the answer to "who built the ventilator Mercedes or McLaren" is "both". Not your usual fact-free superiority.

    Oops!
    I didn't deny that McLaren were responsible for their own product.

    I denied that McLaren were responsible for Mercedes.

    Fact free @Nigel_Foremain acted like only companies with pre-existing medical expertise like McLaren should have taken part in the challenge which would exclude JCB and Dyson. It would also have excluded Mercedes.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,873

    @TheScreamingEagles

    Naughty, you've declined to decline Societas Britannica into the necessary objective genitive: Malleus Societatis Britannicae.

    Surely Confederationis?
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Some people seem to get more angry about 20s somethings tweeting about the Union Jack than they do about people literally taking jobs and opportunities away from British workers, or using private friendships to receive special treatment from the government.

    Talk about priorities.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Less money won't flow into the Treasury as the engineers weren't in the UK and may not have come to the UK without this reform.

    So all you'd have had is the worlds best and brightest not already located in the UK during a pandemic going to other nations that would welcome them, and fewer people coming here trying to save lives here. Not a penny of extra tax generated. Way to cut off your nose to spite your face.

    You are betraying pure Corbynista hatred and jealousy.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
  • .They were involved in a different project.

    They government set a Challenge to any and all manufacturers with engineering experience to help. As a result many large manufacturers rose to the challenge including but not limited to McLaren, JCB, Dyson and Mercedes.

    Mercedes were the one that cracked it with their incredible CPAP machines that saved many lives. Without the challenge Dyson, JCB and others wouldn't have taken part, but neither would Mercedes.

    Some people want to mix up McLaren and Mercedes. But they were different companies, designing different products, in the same challenge. Just like JCB, Dyson and the others.

    A different project? Again I bow to your superior knowledge. Someone should call the consortium and tell them to correct the record.

    Or perhaps, you are doing your usual stunt of dancing on a pinhead trying to "win". Though why you feel the need to "win" a supposed contest on PB is beyond me. Both Mercedes and McLaren were in the consortium and produced parts and ventilators. Unlike JCB and Dyson who were not.

    As Faisal Islam reported, the industry was clear that the only way to proceed was to use as a blueprint an already approved device. Not start from scratch as Dyson proposed. Yet the PM focused his attention on the Tory donors as opposed to the consortium of actual experts. Nor can you say "best not to put your eggs in one basket" as the consortium produced two devices with 61 companies involved.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    You need to understand the difference between Dyson and his employees.

    Dyson's employees are not his slaves he can in your words "control".
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Less money won't flow into the Treasury as the engineers weren't in the UK and may not have come to the UK without this reform.

    So all you'd have had is the worlds best and brightest not already located in the UK during a pandemic going to other nations that would welcome them, and fewer people coming here trying to save lives here. Not a penny of extra tax generated. Way to cut off your nose to spite your face.

    You are betraying pure Corbynista hatred and jealousy.
    You are betraying pure Boris Johnson hypocrisy.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,856

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Thinking the owners have "learnt their lesson" over this is as naive as I was thinking noone would ever take drugs in sport again when Ben Johnson was caught in 1988.

    If any lessons have been learnt it will be in how not to bungle it. Things they might have done differently to get away with it would be:

    Get FIFA's support - make it a world club competition at the outset, perhaps - so that the player's wouldn't be banned from World Cups.

    Plan it as an all-in breakaway, not depending on domestic leagues keeping them in. If you're undermining other organisations then you have to go all the way. Half measures won't do.
    Opposite of the latter one. Keep the pyramid.

    Do a breakaway but with the top clubs qualifying each year still. So that money and who controls the competition is the difference, not qualification.

    So West Ham etc can still qualify for it. That was the mistake.
    That was the screw up - the founding members should have got shares / guaranteed cash (would have been unfair but meh) but no guaranteed right to play.

    I wouldn't even go as far as shares/guaranteed cash. No guarantees at all but the money raised goes to the clubs who qualify instead of UEFA.

    The clubs would have no guarantees then but would still be tens if not hundreds of millions better off per annum.

    Possibly follow the Premier League model of parachute payments too.
    Who on earth pays the referees, match officials, marketing staff, logistics people if UEFA dont get any of the income?
    The newly created League would. Just as the PL does. It's not a new concept.

    UEFA make a big profit on the CL. Net of all that.
    That money stays in football, albeit UEFA are a bloated organisation that could cut costs, as indeed any new league would quickly become. Paying new UEFA instead of old UEFA doesnt change the economics. If the big clubs want a higher % it is either at the expense of small clubs, national associations or grassroots.
    Or they expand the product by have a consistent fare of matches between teams people have actually heard of and are interested in generating more TV revenue, merchandising etc. It was not necessarily a zero sum game. The iniquitous part was the absence of relegation for the founder members. If this proposal ever comes back, and it might, that will surely be missing.
    Sure, you can expand revenues, and that is what both UEFA and super league try to do. But to expand the share the big clubs get significantly it is coming out of one of small clubs, national associations or grassroots, not UEFA's admin costs.
    No, you can grow the cake. Just like the EPL did after it was launched. Of course some teams from smaller countries, including Scotland, would lose their moments in the limelight of the UEFA Champions league being the whipping boys of the group and that would have an effect on their finances but there is no reason why more money would not have come into football as a whole, not just the members of the ESL.

    Anyway, academic now.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    You need to understand the difference between Dyson and his employees.

    Dyson's employees are not his slaves he can in your words "control".
    We've been over this. Dyson could have funded this endeavour out of the goodness of his heart but he chose not to. He preferred to get special treatment from his mate Boris Johnson.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    gealbhan said:

    DavidL said:

    ClippP said:

    Scott_xP said:

    But then your anti Boris posts are not working

    WTF are you talking about?

    We are commenting on an obscure internet blog, not texting Cabinet Ministers...
    The only point in your posts is to attack Boris while at the same time he grows in popularity

    It must be very annoying
    Of course Johnson grows in popularity. Everything this government says or does has but one objective - into crease Johnson's personal popularity.

    The rights and wrongs of policy decisions do not matter in the slightest. Johnson is concerned with only one person. And his image.

    That is no way to run a country.
    It is an absolute outrage. Boris keeps getting the big decisions right and what he does is popular leaving those who have an irrational hatred of the man gnashing their teeth in despair. Surely there has to be an ECHR angle to this? Its not fair that people like @Scott_xP and @RochdalePioneers are reduced to complaining about a tax break given to engineers coming to this country to save lives. Its just demeaning for them. Something must be done.
    Except, there is short term long term...

    1. As the government are not going to underwrite the huge debt football is now in, torpedoing footballs best money making schemes out of that debt is a courageous political decision.

    2. Don’t you feel at all there is going to be a third wave of Covid here, on the basis that’s how it works, it comes and goes in waves, places that don’t even lock down it flows and ebbs over them - as it ebbs we might be fooling ourselves it’s something we done, fooling ourselves we won’t get it bad again?

    If scientifically I am right, the political message has to align with it? Which it isn’t.
    The Super League plan wasn't about making more money for football overall, it was about the top sides taking a larger, and more predictable, share of the money.

    It would have seen smaller teams in the Premier League, La Liga and Serie A in the serious financial difficulties that sent Bury FC to the wall.
    Wrong. It was about generating money for all football.

    Football is in crisis, losing support for the product, and with massive post covid debt. The government wants kudos for torpedoing a solution, it has now to own the crisis.

    The problem is people like yourself saying crisis, what crisis?

  • They should have just asked Philip to build the ventilators. He is the fountain of all knowledge after all.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392
    edited April 2021

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again as you are one of the few people still complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,448
    edited April 2021

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    He wanted co-location with the design and other offices.

    Once that co-location was broken, and he had to setup another site... putting it in Singapore was cheaper than building another site in the UK.

    I'm quite sure the scumbags* locally (who I knew) are whining about him putting the manufacturing overseas.

    *They were quite clear that they liked the locals poor and without jobs. One actually told me that if Dyson expanded, the prices for gardeners and cleaners would go up, so he was opposed.
    Sadly, I can quite believe the starred section. There's a development locally which isn't scenically popular but which may well produce jobs. At a function I was told, when I refused to sign a petition, that 'if it come is will devalue your house". Which will, I hope, be a matter of concern for my heirs, not for my wife and myself. And will simply reduce any inheritance tax.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    .They were involved in a different project.

    They government set a Challenge to any and all manufacturers with engineering experience to help. As a result many large manufacturers rose to the challenge including but not limited to McLaren, JCB, Dyson and Mercedes.

    Mercedes were the one that cracked it with their incredible CPAP machines that saved many lives. Without the challenge Dyson, JCB and others wouldn't have taken part, but neither would Mercedes.

    Some people want to mix up McLaren and Mercedes. But they were different companies, designing different products, in the same challenge. Just like JCB, Dyson and the others.

    A different project? Again I bow to your superior knowledge. Someone should call the consortium and tell them to correct the record.

    Or perhaps, you are doing your usual stunt of dancing on a pinhead trying to "win". Though why you feel the need to "win" a supposed contest on PB is beyond me. Both Mercedes and McLaren were in the consortium and produced parts and ventilators. Unlike JCB and Dyson who were not.

    As Faisal Islam reported, the industry was clear that the only way to proceed was to use as a blueprint an already approved device. Not start from scratch as Dyson proposed. Yet the PM focused his attention on the Tory donors as opposed to the consortium of actual experts. Nor can you say "best not to put your eggs in one basket" as the consortium produced two devices with 61 companies involved.
    So are you saying that Mercedes CPAP design was an already approved pre-existing design and not a new one designed by Mercedes? 🤔

    The PM didn't focus his attention on one company, there was a challenge for which many, many companies took part. Dyson was one of many, not the sole one, which is precisely shown by the fact the consortium did succeed.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Less money won't flow into the Treasury as the engineers weren't in the UK and may not have come to the UK without this reform.

    So all you'd have had is the worlds best and brightest not already located in the UK during a pandemic going to other nations that would welcome them, and fewer people coming here trying to save lives here. Not a penny of extra tax generated. Way to cut off your nose to spite your face.

    You are betraying pure Corbynista hatred and jealousy.
    You are betraying pure Boris Johnson hypocrisy.
    Why?

    If there's hypocrisy show me supporting the opposite opinion.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
  • BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    edited April 2021
    Carnyx said:

    @TheScreamingEagles

    Naughty, you've declined to decline Societas Britannica into the necessary objective genitive: Malleus Societatis Britannicae.

    Surely Confederationis?
    We had a bit of a discussion about this yesterday: foederatio / confoederatio are both distinctly late Latin, whereas societas is perfectly classical and carries the right kind of political connotation; I could also have added one of the rarer senses of concilium. Remember the Social War.

    For those of a more polemical Scottish Nationalist mindset, simple imperium would also have been quite idiomatic...
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Less money won't flow into the Treasury as the engineers weren't in the UK and may not have come to the UK without this reform.

    So all you'd have had is the worlds best and brightest not already located in the UK during a pandemic going to other nations that would welcome them, and fewer people coming here trying to save lives here. Not a penny of extra tax generated. Way to cut off your nose to spite your face.

    You are betraying pure Corbynista hatred and jealousy.
    You are betraying pure Boris Johnson hypocrisy.
    Why?

    If there's hypocrisy show me supporting the opposite opinion.
    The hypocrisy is supporting a man and a company who clearly does not have Britain's best interests at heart and are more interested self-enrichment than the good of the nation.

    This is the exact same reason why Liverpool have been "unfairly" targeted in the Super League fiasco. If you hold yourself out to be some bastion of patriotism then expect to be held to a higher level of conduct.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    You need to understand the difference between Dyson and his employees.

    Dyson's employees are not his slaves he can in your words "control".
    We've been over this. Dyson could have funded this endeavour out of the goodness of his heart but he chose not to. He preferred to get special treatment from his mate Boris Johnson.
    He did fund the endeavour. He made a loss on this project.

    What he isn't responsible for and shouldn't be is the personal taxation on people who would never be in this country if it weren't for them trying to help the country out - on a project he funded and made no money on.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,639
    PMQs:

    Keir - six questions wittering on about text messages

    Boris - leading the Government to address the biggest crisis we have seen since WWII, Covid 19.

    Is this is why CON are about 14% ahead in the polls?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
    How?

    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages. How would he indemnify them from that. Show your workings.
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    edited April 2021
    House prices up 8.6% (!!!!!)

    A disaster for social mobility. A win for the Tory client vote.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56830288
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Thinking the owners have "learnt their lesson" over this is as naive as I was thinking noone would ever take drugs in sport again when Ben Johnson was caught in 1988.

    If any lessons have been learnt it will be in how not to bungle it. Things they might have done differently to get away with it would be:

    Get FIFA's support - make it a world club competition at the outset, perhaps - so that the player's wouldn't be banned from World Cups.

    Plan it as an all-in breakaway, not depending on domestic leagues keeping them in. If you're undermining other organisations then you have to go all the way. Half measures won't do.
    Opposite of the latter one. Keep the pyramid.

    Do a breakaway but with the top clubs qualifying each year still. So that money and who controls the competition is the difference, not qualification.

    So West Ham etc can still qualify for it. That was the mistake.
    That was the screw up - the founding members should have got shares / guaranteed cash (would have been unfair but meh) but no guaranteed right to play.

    I wouldn't even go as far as shares/guaranteed cash. No guarantees at all but the money raised goes to the clubs who qualify instead of UEFA.

    The clubs would have no guarantees then but would still be tens if not hundreds of millions better off per annum.

    Possibly follow the Premier League model of parachute payments too.
    Who on earth pays the referees, match officials, marketing staff, logistics people if UEFA dont get any of the income?
    The newly created League would. Just as the PL does. It's not a new concept.

    UEFA make a big profit on the CL. Net of all that.
    That money stays in football, albeit UEFA are a bloated organisation that could cut costs, as indeed any new league would quickly become. Paying new UEFA instead of old UEFA doesnt change the economics. If the big clubs want a higher % it is either at the expense of small clubs, national associations or grassroots.
    Or they expand the product by have a consistent fare of matches between teams people have actually heard of and are interested in generating more TV revenue, merchandising etc. It was not necessarily a zero sum game. The iniquitous part was the absence of relegation for the founder members. If this proposal ever comes back, and it might, that will surely be missing.
    Sure, you can expand revenues, and that is what both UEFA and super league try to do. But to expand the share the big clubs get significantly it is coming out of one of small clubs, national associations or grassroots, not UEFA's admin costs.
    No, you can grow the cake. Just like the EPL did after it was launched. Of course some teams from smaller countries, including Scotland, would lose their moments in the limelight of the UEFA Champions league being the whipping boys of the group and that would have an effect on their finances but there is no reason why more money would not have come into football as a whole, not just the members of the ESL.

    Anyway, academic now.
    The first thing I said was you can expand revenues - that is growing the cake! If big clubs get a bigger % it is inevitable the % the smaller clubs or grassroots get drop because UEFA's admin costs, whilst bloated, are not something that will dent the finances of the big clubs.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    You need to understand the difference between Dyson and his employees.

    Dyson's employees are not his slaves he can in your words "control".
    We've been over this. Dyson could have funded this endeavour out of the goodness of his heart but he chose not to. He preferred to get special treatment from his mate Boris Johnson.
    He did fund the endeavour. He made a loss on this project.

    What he isn't responsible for and shouldn't be is the personal taxation on people who would never be in this country if it weren't for them trying to help the country out - on a project he funded and made no money on.
    He could have made an even greater loss rather than using his private connections with public officials to get special treatment.

    My heart bleeds for poor James Dyson, what a great guy.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176

    PMQs:

    Keir - six questions wittering on about text messages

    Boris - leading the Government to address the biggest crisis we have seen since WWII, Covid 19.

    Is this is why CON are about 14% ahead in the polls?

    So not the ESL, then?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    ping said:

    House prices up 8.6% (!!!!!)

    A disaster for social mobility. A win for the Tory client vote.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56830288

    Agreed. We need more housing built.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited April 2021
    I can quite believe there are MOUNTAINS of Johnsonian Sleaze to discover.

    (And there are certainly Cambrian Mountains of Labour sleaze in Corruption Bay, Cardiff).

    But, all the huffing & puffing in the world really can't take the MOLEHILLS of the Hancock's sister's document shredding Company in Wrecsam and the Dyson Tax story and make them into big MOUNTAINS of sleaze.

    A large number of reasonably non-aligned commentators on pb.com have said so.

    Perhaps all this effort being expended on rage about Dyson could actually be put into finding some real Johnsonian sleaze ? I am sure it is there.

    And when it is found, we'll happily condemn it.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
    How?

    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages. How would he indemnify them from that. Show your workings.
    What on earth are you talking about? It would be simple for Dyson to contract to pay a bonus grossed up to cover tax liability arising that would not otherwise.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
    How?

    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages. How would he indemnify them from that. Show your workings.
    What on earth are you talking about? It would be simple for Dyson to contract to pay a bonus grossed up to cover tax liability arising that would not otherwise.
    Exactly how much do you know about Tax and employment law?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,351

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    He wanted co-location with the design and other offices.

    Once that co-location was broken, and he had to setup another site... putting it in Singapore was cheaper than building another site in the UK.

    I'm quite sure the scumbags* locally (who I knew) are whining about him putting the manufacturing overseas.

    *They were quite clear that they liked the locals poor and without jobs. One actually told me that if Dyson expanded, the prices for gardeners and cleaners would go up, so he was opposed.
    Sadly, I can quite believe the starred section. There's a development locally which isn't scenically popular but which may well produce jobs. At a function I was told, when I refused to sign a petition, that 'if it come is will devalue your house". Which will, I hope, be a matter of concern for my heirs, not for my wife and myself. And will simply reduce any inheritance tax.
    De-valuing your house is one thing.

    Actually stating that you want to suppress development to keep wages at minimum wage level is something else.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,821
    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    DavidL said:

    ClippP said:

    Scott_xP said:

    But then your anti Boris posts are not working

    WTF are you talking about?

    We are commenting on an obscure internet blog, not texting Cabinet Ministers...
    The only point in your posts is to attack Boris while at the same time he grows in popularity

    It must be very annoying
    Of course Johnson grows in popularity. Everything this government says or does has but one objective - into crease Johnson's personal popularity.

    The rights and wrongs of policy decisions do not matter in the slightest. Johnson is concerned with only one person. And his image.

    That is no way to run a country.
    It is an absolute outrage. Boris keeps getting the big decisions right and what he does is popular leaving those who have an irrational hatred of the man gnashing their teeth in despair. Surely there has to be an ECHR angle to this? Its not fair that people like @Scott_xP and @RochdalePioneers are reduced to complaining about a tax break given to engineers coming to this country to save lives. Its just demeaning for them. Something must be done.
    Except, there is short term long term...

    1. As the government are not going to underwrite the huge debt football is now in, torpedoing footballs best money making schemes out of that debt is a courageous political decision.

    2. Don’t you feel at all there is going to be a third wave of Covid here, on the basis that’s how it works, it comes and goes in waves, places that don’t even lock down it flows and ebbs over them - as it ebbs we might be fooling ourselves it’s something we done, fooling ourselves we won’t get it bad again?

    If scientifically I am right, the political message has to align with it? Which it isn’t.
    The Super League plan wasn't about making more money for football overall, it was about the top sides taking a larger, and more predictable, share of the money.

    It would have seen smaller teams in the Premier League, La Liga and Serie A in the serious financial difficulties that sent Bury FC to the wall.
    Wrong. It was about generating money for all football.

    Football is in crisis, losing support for the product, and with massive post covid debt. The government wants kudos for torpedoing a solution, it has now to own the crisis.

    The problem is people like yourself saying crisis, what crisis?

    You may be right. But from where I'm sitting the big clubs look absolutely awash with money and wanted more of it.
    It might be that they are living beyond their means. In which case the answer is to stop living beyond their means. Get out of the ridiculous arms race whereby they are paying more and more to star players. If everyone is paying millionaire players too much, stop doing it.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    ping said:

    House prices up 8.6% (!!!!!)

    A disaster for social mobility. A win for the Tory client vote.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56830288

    Agreed. We need more housing built.
    Less subsidies for home owners and especially landlords.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    eek said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Thinking the owners have "learnt their lesson" over this is as naive as I was thinking noone would ever take drugs in sport again when Ben Johnson was caught in 1988.

    If any lessons have been learnt it will be in how not to bungle it. Things they might have done differently to get away with it would be:

    Get FIFA's support - make it a world club competition at the outset, perhaps - so that the player's wouldn't be banned from World Cups.

    Plan it as an all-in breakaway, not depending on domestic leagues keeping them in. If you're undermining other organisations then you have to go all the way. Half measures won't do.
    Opposite of the latter one. Keep the pyramid.

    Do a breakaway but with the top clubs qualifying each year still. So that money and who controls the competition is the difference, not qualification.

    So West Ham etc can still qualify for it. That was the mistake.
    That was the screw up - the founding members should have got shares / guaranteed cash (would have been unfair but meh) but no guaranteed right to play.

    I wouldn't even go as far as shares/guaranteed cash. No guarantees at all but the money raised goes to the clubs who qualify instead of UEFA.

    The clubs would have no guarantees then but would still be tens if not hundreds of millions better off per annum.

    Possibly follow the Premier League model of parachute payments too.
    Who on earth pays the referees, match officials, marketing staff, logistics people if UEFA dont get any of the income?
    The newly created League would. Just as the PL does. It's not a new concept.

    UEFA make a big profit on the CL. Net of all that.
    That money stays in football, albeit UEFA are a bloated organisation that could cut costs, as indeed any new league would quickly become. Paying new UEFA instead of old UEFA doesnt change the economics. If the big clubs want a higher % it is either at the expense of small clubs, national associations or grassroots.
    Or they expand the product by have a consistent fare of matches between teams people have actually heard of and are interested in generating more TV revenue, merchandising etc. It was not necessarily a zero sum game. The iniquitous part was the absence of relegation for the founder members. If this proposal ever comes back, and it might, that will surely be missing.
    Sure, you can expand revenues, and that is what both UEFA and super league try to do. But to expand the share the big clubs get significantly it is coming out of one of small clubs, national associations or grassroots, not UEFA's admin costs.
    No, you can grow the cake. Just like the EPL did after it was launched. Of course some teams from smaller countries, including Scotland, would lose their moments in the limelight of the UEFA Champions league being the whipping boys of the group and that would have an effect on their finances but there is no reason why more money would not have come into football as a whole, not just the members of the ESL.

    Anyway, academic now.
    The first thing I said was you can expand revenues - that is growing the cake! If big clubs get a bigger % it is inevitable the % the smaller clubs or grassroots get drop because UEFA's admin costs, whilst bloated, are not something that will dent the finances of the big clubs.
    Bigger leagues getting a bigger % would be better for the sport as a whole.

    A lot of money goes to the clubs from the minor leagues who are guaranteed the same money for a win at the group stage as the big clubs from the big leagues. This has had the effect of destroying some of the minor leagues whose participants get so much money from the Champions League it utterly dwarfs what other clubs in the same League but without European football get.

    This has resulted in many nations eg seeing the same winner something like ten years in a row.

    It might sound perverse but more money flowing to the clubs from the big leagues, with big expenditure and who pull in the big revenues would actually improve the sport all around.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
    How?

    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages. How would he indemnify them from that. Show your workings.
    What on earth are you talking about? It would be simple for Dyson to contract to pay a bonus grossed up to cover tax liability arising that would not otherwise.
    Exactly how much do you know about Tax and employment law?
    Not loads. How much do you know about Tax and employment law?

    There may be some public policy bar against such a thing but in high likelihood the only objection is unwillingness to pay.

    In Spain I believe footballers are guaranteed a certain amount of post-tax income in their contacts so the gross value will vary depending on the current statutory tax regime.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 1,993
    Foxy said:

    On topic, I don't think there's a contradiction between the Tories campaigning on a "no second referendum" platform and then conceding there must be one if the nationalists win a big majority. The former line only holds if they are able to deny the nationalists a majority.

    On the strategy for one I've seen two suggestions. One, that the exit terms should be pre-negotiated so Scots know what they'd be voting on as a condition of a vote and, two, that the benefits of the Union should be made loud & clear - rather than going full Project Fear.

    I think they are good ones.

    I think a further Sindyref inevitable, it is just a matter of timing. Having an outline agreed between Westminster and Holyrood of what Indy Scotland would be like would be a useful lesson to learn from the post Brexit fiasco.
    600+ pages last time and The Yes campaign was criticised for not declaring how much a first class stamp would cost.....
  • ping said:

    House prices up 8.6% (!!!!!)

    A disaster for social mobility. A win for the Tory client vote.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56830288

    Agreed. We need more housing built.
    Less subsidies for home owners and especially landlords.
    What subsidies do landlords get? Purchasing a series of properties for rent now is not a particularly financially viable opportunity. Problems with stamp duty and not been allowed to account for loan interest as an expense now make quite thin margins.

    The money in renting has come from buying up houses pre boom and bathing in capital appreciation.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392

    I can quite believe there are MOUNTAINS of Johnsonian Sleaze to discover.

    (And there are certainly Cambrian Mountains of Labour sleaze in Corruption Bay, Cardiff).

    But, all the huffing & puffing in the world really can't take the MOLEHILLS of the Hancock's sister's document shredding Company in Wrecsam and the Dyson Tax story and make them into big MOUNTAINS of sleaze.

    A large number of reasonably non-aligned commentators on pb.com have said so.

    Perhaps all this effort being expended on rage about Dyson could actually be put into finding some real Johnsonian sleaze ? I am sure it is there.

    And when it is found, we'll happily condemn it.

    Oh there is plenty of sleaze - this has been leaked because while on one hand it looks like sleaze to more reasonable people it looks perfectly acceptable.

    Now when the next lot is released, some people (potentially even me) will just ignore it without looking because the previous X attempts all had reasonable justifications...

    The issue is that you need sleazes that both looks and quacks like a duck. This looks like a duck but seems to be making the sounds of a wild goose.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
    How?

    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages. How would he indemnify them from that. Show your workings.
    What on earth are you talking about? It would be simple for Dyson to contract to pay a bonus grossed up to cover tax liability arising that would not otherwise.
    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages.

    He could do a bonus to cover tax liability arising from the wages he pays them. How does he cover anything else people might now suddenly be liable for?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    Endillion said:


    They would have been paid had their ventilator design been fit for purpose and been ordered. As Faisal Islam reports, there seemed to be an odd leaning towards non-competent JCB and Dyson (Brexit supporting Tory donors) over the others which seems inextricable...

    [I presume you mean 'inexplicable'.]

    Yes, that is the valid criticism. There was absolutely nothing wrong with a temporary dispensation on the tax rules to prevent those who were trying to help being penalised with a whopping personal tax charge; after all, there were lots of temporary amendments to the rules because of the peculiar circumstances of the pandemic.

    However, there does seem to have been a rather naive belief that JCB and Dyson were in a better position to design and produce medical-grade equipment in a hurry than companies with actual experience in the field. (And indeed they weren't, as it turned out).

    So, nothing dodgy about this, just mismanagement.
    No mismanagement since they did this scheme in parallel with other schemes. The one that worked and made this one redundant was from a Formula 1 company.

    Its like the vaccine project all over again. Don't pick one horse and run with it - back them all and see which works.
    To an extent, yes, and to be fair I'd cut the government quite a lot of slack on this. At the time, getting enough ventilators looked like a critical requirement, although in the end it wasn't. Nonetheless, it does seem that insufficient attention was given to the existing, experienced manufacturers.
    The existing experienced manufacturers couldn't manufacture 10,000 of them in the time available.

    That's why the challenge was offered to all manufacturers anywhere to get in touch. Skills in manufacturing are transferable, as Mercedes showed.
    Again, Philip stop talking out of your backside. If you are referring to Mercedes McLaren, they already had a significant medical device arm to their business
    It wasn't the medical team that produced the ventilator, though; it was the F1 team. I saw a talk by the team responsible last year - amazing stuff. I suggest - your knowledge of the pharma industry notwithstanding - it may be you who is talking out of turn here.
    Sorry, my main area is not pharma it is devices. McLaren was able to do it because it had the ability to manufacture to the quality systems required by ISO 13485 and knew the regulatory and safety requirements. That would be due to their medical affliiate knowledge
    You're wrong on this, and refusing to listen. McLaren's medical device arm wasn't involved. It was the Mercedes F1 team, who reverse engineered an existing device that was out of patent, in collaboration with a team at UCLH. The specific medical engineering knowledge was provided by UCLH, not by McLaren.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,392

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
    How?

    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages. How would he indemnify them from that. Show your workings.
    What on earth are you talking about? It would be simple for Dyson to contract to pay a bonus grossed up to cover tax liability arising that would not otherwise.
    Exactly how much do you know about Tax and employment law?
    Not loads. How much do you know about Tax and employment law?

    There may be some public policy bar against such a thing but in high likelihood the only objection is unwillingness to pay.

    In Spain I believe footballers are guaranteed a certain amount of post-tax income in their contacts so the gross value will vary depending on the current statutory tax regime.
    Clearly more than you do.

    So 2 quick questions -

    If say I sold none primary residency property while sat in Singapore - what capital gains tax do I need to pay? What tax would I need to pay if I was in the UK for over 90 days.

    On dividend payments what happens for all dividends in the past 5 years were you to accidently spend more than 90 days in the UK..

  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
    How?

    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages. How would he indemnify them from that. Show your workings.
    What on earth are you talking about? It would be simple for Dyson to contract to pay a bonus grossed up to cover tax liability arising that would not otherwise.
    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages.

    He could do a bonus to cover tax liability arising from the wages he pays them. How does he cover anything else people might now suddenly be liable for?
    Easily.

    Tax liability in the UK on all income prior to COVID = X

    Tax liability in the UK on all income after COVID = Y

    Difference in tax liability = (Y-X)

    Dyson agrees to pay the employee a discretionary payment in Singapore, or wherever, once Y-X is known, grossed up to cover it.

    Job done. The employee suffers no loss and the treasury gets anything due.

    You could even increase the price of any widget sold to account for the extra expense. Welcome to capitalism.
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    You need to understand the difference between Dyson and his employees.

    Dyson's employees are not his slaves he can in your words "control".
    We've been over this. Dyson could have funded this endeavour out of the goodness of his heart but he chose not to. He preferred to get special treatment from his mate Boris Johnson.
    He did fund the endeavour. He made a loss on this project.

    What he isn't responsible for and shouldn't be is the personal taxation on people who would never be in this country if it weren't for them trying to help the country out - on a project he funded and made no money on.
    He could have made an even greater loss rather than using his private connections with public officials to get special treatment.

    My heart bleeds for poor James Dyson, what a great guy.
    No one's arguing that Dyson comes out of this looking great. The question is that - if he was determined not to help unless he got paid back for it - should we have taken him up on it, or told him to get stuffed and accepted the consequences?

    And a side helping of "could Johnson have tried harder to persuade him to help anyway?"
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    eek said:

    Furthermore if Dyson hadn't abandoned Britain and British workers and moved their HQ to Singapore, this wouldn't even be an issue.

    Believe in Britain my arse.

    Dyson moved the manufacturing out of the UK, after permission to extend his site in..... Malmesbury in Wiltshire was refused. He kept other jobs here.

    The problem was that the site, as is, was literally too small to expand production.

    The refusal was a campaign by the middle/upper class incomers to the neighbourhood, who wanted to prevent *any* development in the area. Since they dominated the council and local politics they got their way.....
    I'm not sure what point you're making. Of course the only alternative to manufacturing in Malmesbury, Wiltshire is Singapore.

    Believe in Britain.
    If you have to start completely afresh (as Dyson was forced to do) - the UK may not be the best place to build a factory.

    NIMBYism has consequences - as the saying goes be careful what you wish for - the outcome may not be what you expect.
    Yes, I know that.

    But that doesn't mean he isn't a hypocrite. He's supposed to be a patriot, so why wouldn't he choose to enrich Britain and her population, at a bit more cost to himself, rather than Singapore?
    Because he looked at where his sales were coming from and growing and Singapore made more sense.

    Boris sold everyone Global Britain - manufacturing outside Britain is one possible consequence of that.
    I know that, but it isn't patriotism. It isn't what the red wall want. They want jobs here in Britain, and they don't want to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson.
    You're losing your mind over pre-existing hate unrelated to what is going on here.

    Nobody at all has to pay MORE tax because of James Dyson, as a result of this.
    Of course they do.

    Boris changes the rules so that less money would flow into the treasury. Less money means more tax.

    I'm angry about hypocrisy. It's all very well flying the flag for Britain but it's not okay doing the exact opposite in private.
    Boris changed the rules so there was 1 more team working in a single building to try and rapidly build a solution to a pressing problem where people were dying

    Yet you clearly think (tax) money is more important than people's lives.
    No, Dyson clearly thinks tax money is more important than people's lives.
    Nope Dyson knows that he cannot ask people to come to the UK if coming here results in them paying £xx,000 in tax.

    He also knows that he needs those people in that building or there is zero point doing the project.

    I repeat again you as you are the person complaining that Boris agreed the deal

    YOU are more concerned about potentially lost tax revenue than you are about people's lives...
    This is laughable.

    Dyson can clearly indemnify his workers against a potential increased tax liability.

    He chose to instead use his private connections, not available to others, to have the law changed.

    The choice isn't the deal or nothing, the choice is the deal vs Dyson indemnifying his own workers.

    He chose to delegate that indemnification to the UK treasury, to me and to you.
    This is bullshit, you don't know how personal taxation works. How would Dyson indemnify his workers from taxes on earnings they'd be liable not from his payments to them?
    Through a contract.
    How?

    Personal taxation applies to more than just wages. How would he indemnify them from that. Show your workings.
    What on earth are you talking about? It would be simple for Dyson to contract to pay a bonus grossed up to cover tax liability arising that would not otherwise.
    Exactly how much do you know about Tax and employment law?
    Not loads. How much do you know about Tax and employment law?

    There may be some public policy bar against such a thing but in high likelihood the only objection is unwillingness to pay.

    In Spain I believe footballers are guaranteed a certain amount of post-tax income in their contacts so the gross value will vary depending on the current statutory tax regime.
    Clearly more than you do.

    So 2 quick questions -

    If say I sold none primary residency property while sat in Singapore - what capital gains tax do I need to pay? What tax would I need to pay if I was in the UK for over 90 days.

    On dividend payments what happens for all dividends in the past 5 years were you to accidently spend more than 90 days in the UK..

    All these questions have a defined answer that Dyson could have agreed to indemnify if they wanted to.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,827

    ping said:

    House prices up 8.6% (!!!!!)

    A disaster for social mobility. A win for the Tory client vote.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56830288

    Agreed. We need more housing built.
    Less subsidies for home owners and especially landlords.
    What subsidies do landlords get? Purchasing a series of properties for rent now is not a particularly financially viable opportunity. Problems with stamp duty and not been allowed to account for loan interest as an expense now make quite thin margins.

    The money in renting has come from buying up houses pre boom and bathing in capital appreciation.
    You don't think capital appreciation has anything to do with QE, HTB or Govt mortgage guarantees, stamp duty holidays or bailing out the banks to prevent them mass selling housing stock? Ok!

    Also housing benefit artificially inflates rent and creates a guaranteed floor for landlords.
This discussion has been closed.