politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Forget Paul Ryan, it’s Cruz or bust for the NeverTrump camp
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Forget Paul Ryan, it’s Cruz or bust for the NeverTrump campaign
It’s fair to say that Wisconsin occupies something of an odd place on the GOP primary calendar in 2016. If it feels like a long time since Republican voters have been to the polls that’s because it has been. By the time that Wisconsin votes this week, it will have been two weeks since Arizona and Utah and we will also have to wait two more weeks for the New York primary on April 19th.
Comments
-
First ..... again!0
-
FPT
I was just wondering yesterday whether Corbyn or Cameron was the luckiest politician alive. It seems to swing like a pendulum........Under any normal circumstances both wouldn't have survived. Cameron has lost his party but thanks to Corbyn is wearing an asbestos suit. Corbyn has a minute amount of support outside of his clique but it doesn't show because he's facing a disintegrating Tory Party.
Now there is this......... The Panama story which has given Corbyn an opening the size of the Grand Canyon.
Tax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010. (They're saying he hasn't paid tax in 30 years)
So advantage Corbyn0 -
FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.0 -
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.0 -
Knowing absolutely nothing about Paul Ryan, I watched the brief video clip of him speaking on the previous thread and was very underwhelmed. I would be astonished were he to progress to any extent in this contest.0
-
"Prime ministers father used some legal tax avoidance vehicles before the PM was born, and for which the is no evidence the PM profits from or indeed has any connection to"Roger said:FTax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010. (They're saying he hasn't paid tax in 30 years)
So advantage Corbyn
If that's your election winner, the left are more desperate than I thought.
0 -
It's headlines of nearly all the newspapes and it's leading all the news stories. It's not like there's no other news around. It strikes me we're facing a new witch hunt now that the celeb paedophile squall has died down.Indigo said:
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
As for my dreams ...I loathe these McCarthyite stories. I've never liked hunting prey0 -
If you check his Wikipedia profile he appears to be cursed with one of the least convincing smiles that I have ever seen on a politician!peter_from_putney said:Knowing absolutely nothing about Paul Ryan, I watched the brief video clip of him speaking on the previous thread and was very underwhelmed. I would be astonished were he to progress to any extent in this contest.
0 -
The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/0 -
Which of these do you buy, Indy?Indigo said:
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
"Taxation is theft"
"Tax avoidance is a sign of intelligence"
0 -
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/0 -
Latest ARSE4EU Referendum Projection Countdown :
8,888 seconds0 -
Cameron is not the issue. The issue is this need by fabulously rich people and corporations to hide away money they can never hope to spend so that it cannot be redistributed to those who might benefit from it. In the end the greed of the very rich will bring them down.Roger said:FPT
I was just wondering yesterday whether Corbyn or Cameron was the luckiest politician alive. It seems to swing like a pendulum........Under any normal circumstances both wouldn't have survived. Cameron has lost his party but thanks to Corbyn is wearing an asbestos suit. Corbyn has a minute amount of support outside of his clique but it doesn't show because he's facing a disintegrating Tory Party.
Now there is this......... The Panama story which has given Corbyn an opening the size of the Grand Canyon.
Tax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010. (They're saying he hasn't paid tax in 30 years)
So advantage Corbyn
0 -
Neither.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which of these do you buy, Indy?Indigo said:
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
"Taxation is theft"
"Tax avoidance is a sign of intelligence"
Parliament makes laws to collect tax. People are legally and morally obliged to pay the tax parliament enacts. They are not obliged to pay more than required. If parliament makes things so bloody complicated and opaque that there are grey areas and endless allowances and exceptions, whose fault is that? Personally I am in favour of a massive simplification of the tax code, ideally down to one slim volume which everyone should pay. In taxation as in other areas of law it ill becomes parliament to both pass sloppy hole ridden laws and bitch about people using those holes.
Wasn't it Lord Denning that said that a man is not required to arrange his affairs in such a way as to remit the maximum possible tax to the state.0 -
Is Indigo (or any other Peebie) a Mossack Fonseca client?
I'm not.0 -
I think we're all sickened by the selfish and greedy behaviour of a good chunk of the super rich.SouthamObserver said:
Cameron is not the issue. The issue is this need by fabulously rich people and corporations to hide away money they can never hope to spend so that it cannot be redistributed to those who might benefit from it. In the end the greed of the very rich will bring them down.Roger said:FPT
I was just wondering yesterday whether Corbyn or Cameron was the luckiest politician alive. It seems to swing like a pendulum........Under any normal circumstances both wouldn't have survived. Cameron has lost his party but thanks to Corbyn is wearing an asbestos suit. Corbyn has a minute amount of support outside of his clique but it doesn't show because he's facing a disintegrating Tory Party.
Now there is this......... The Panama story which has given Corbyn an opening the size of the Grand Canyon.
Tax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010. (They're saying he hasn't paid tax in 30 years)
So advantage Corbyn
From a centre-right perspective, it means a far heavier tax burden on middle earners as well.0 -
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
0 -
Yes, because teachers in charity schools on the third world that do a little internet consulting on the side to pay the rent are the typical clients of dodgy Panama accountants. I dare say I come close to the lowest nett personal worth on this list. I couldn't afford the dust on their doormat!Innocent_Abroad said:Is Indigo (or any other Peebie) a Mossack Fonseca client?
I'm not.0 -
Exactly. And pressure on them, their advisers and the jurisdictions they squirrel their unspendable loot away in is only going to grow. The internet is probably the most powerful and undefeatable enemy they have. Its remorseless shining light is going to lead to more concerted action.Casino_Royale said:
I think we're all sickened by the selfish and greedy behaviour of a good chunk of the super rich.SouthamObserver said:
Cameron is not the issue. The issue is this need by fabulously rich people and corporations to hide away money they can never hope to spend so that it cannot be redistributed to those who might benefit from it. In the end the greed of the very rich will bring them down.Roger said:FPT
I was just wondering yesterday whether Corbyn or Cameron was the luckiest politician alive. It seems to swing like a pendulum........Under any normal circumstances both wouldn't have survived. Cameron has lost his party but thanks to Corbyn is wearing an asbestos suit. Corbyn has a minute amount of support outside of his clique but it doesn't show because he's facing a disintegrating Tory Party.
Now there is this......... The Panama story which has given Corbyn an opening the size of the Grand Canyon.
Tax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010. (They're saying he hasn't paid tax in 30 years)
So advantage Corbyn
From a centre-right perspective, it means a far heavier tax burden on middle earners as well.
0 -
Agree - if governments are so stupid as to make things so complicated smart lawyers can drive legal cart & horses through the tax law they have no one to blame but themselves.Indigo said:
Neither.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which of these do you buy, Indy?Indigo said:
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
"Taxation is theft"
"Tax avoidance is a sign of intelligence"
Parliament makes laws to collect tax. People are legally and morally obliged to pay the tax parliament enacts. They are not obliged to pay more than required. If parliament makes things so bloody complicated and opaque that there are grey areas and endless allowances and exceptions, whose fault is that? Personally I am in favour of a massive simplification of the tax code, ideally down to one slim volume which everyone should pay. In taxation as in other areas of law it ill becomes parliament to both pass sloppy hole ridden laws and bitch about people using those holes.
Wasn't it Lord Denning that said that a man is not required to arrange his affairs in such a way as to remit the maximum possible tax to the state.
That said, this government has done more than its predecessor - interestingly the peak of the Panama activity was 2005.......and of course if there was any illegality in Cameron Père's activity I'm sure we'd have heard about it by now - just a lot of righteous huffing and puffing and 'something must be done' ing (which is more than we ever did....)0 -
I believe Panama is one of the very few, possibly the only, country in which bearer shares are still legal. Makes is pretty hard tax someone when you don't know who is the shareholder of the company from day to day. Attempts have been made to get the to clear it up before, but it's the only industry in the country that makes significant money and they are not about to cast their population back into the dark ages.SouthamObserver said:
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/0 -
edit - deleted. Whoops!CarlottaVance said:
Agree - if governments are so stupid as to make things so complicated smart lawyers can drive legal cart & horses through the tax law they have no one to blame but themselves.Indigo said:
Neither.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which of these do you buy, Indy?Indigo said:
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
"Taxation is theft"
"Tax avoidance is a sign of intelligence"
Parliament makes laws to collect tax. People are legally and morally obliged to pay the tax parliament enacts. They are not obliged to pay more than required. If parliament makes things so bloody complicated and opaque that there are grey areas and endless allowances and exceptions, whose fault is that? Personally I am in favour of a massive simplification of the tax code, ideally down to one slim volume which everyone should pay. In taxation as in other areas of law it ill becomes parliament to both pass sloppy hole ridden laws and bitch about people using those holes.
Wasn't it Lord Denning that said that a man is not required to arrange his affairs in such a way as to remit the maximum possible tax to the state.
That said, this government has done more than its predecessor - interestingly the peak of the Panama activity was 2005.......and of course if there was any illegality in Cameron Père's activity I'm sure we'd have heard about it by now - just a lot of righteous huffing and puffing and 'something must be done' ing (which is more than we ever did....)
0 -
Panama may not have a choice.Indigo said:
I believe Panama is one of the very few, possibly the only, country in which bearer shares are still legal. Makes is pretty hard tax someone when you don't know who is the shareholder of the company from day to day. Attempts have been made to get the to clear it up before, but it's the only industry in the country that makes significant money and they are not about to cast their population back into the dark ages.SouthamObserver said:
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
0 -
Given the Guardian's lamentable history in keeping information secret (see Wikileaks), expect the the full data to be out in the public soon.Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/0 -
The Crash has changed the game. Labour's record was lamentable, but before 2008 no-one really noticed or cared. Now they do. The Tories have been very strong on rhetoric, but in practical terms not much has been achieved. Cutting staff numbers at HMRC has not helped.CarlottaVance said:
Agree - if governments are so stupid as to make things so complicated smart lawyers can drive legal cart & horses through the tax law they have no one to blame but themselves.Indigo said:
Neither.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which of these do you buy, Indy?Indigo said:
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
"Taxation is theft"
"Tax avoidance is a sign of intelligence"
Parliament makes laws to collect tax. People are legally and morally obliged to pay the tax parliament enacts. They are not obliged to pay more than required. If parliament makes things so bloody complicated and opaque that there are grey areas and endless allowances and exceptions, whose fault is that? Personally I am in favour of a massive simplification of the tax code, ideally down to one slim volume which everyone should pay. In taxation as in other areas of law it ill becomes parliament to both pass sloppy hole ridden laws and bitch about people using those holes.
Wasn't it Lord Denning that said that a man is not required to arrange his affairs in such a way as to remit the maximum possible tax to the state.
That said, this government has done more than its predecessor - interestingly the peak of the Panama activity was 2005.......and of course if there was any illegality in Cameron Père's activity I'm sure we'd have heard about it by now - just a lot of righteous huffing and puffing and 'something must be done' ing (which is more than we ever did....)
0 -
SouthamObserver said:
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
As the BBC's barrister specialising in tax said "No innocent person sites their money in Panama". Quite a striking thing to say for a barrister whom in all other respects sounded cautious. It not only looks like the story will be huge but if you read Indigo's link it'll have legs tooSouthamObserver said:
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
*I've just heard them re quote him and they've used a sligtly watered down edit0 -
Frankly, I'm amazed you can afford to by a teacher at a charity school... Unless it's all part of some incredible tax dodge!Indigo said:
Yes, because teachers in charity schools on the third world that do a little internet consulting on the side to pay the rent are the typical clients of dodgy Panama accountants. I dare say I come close to the lowest nett personal worth on this list. I couldn't afford the dust on their doormat!Innocent_Abroad said:Is Indigo (or any other Peebie) a Mossack Fonseca client?
I'm not.0 -
Its still pushing water up hill.SouthamObserver said:
Panama may not have a choice.Indigo said:
I believe Panama is one of the very few, possibly the only, country in which bearer shares are still legal. Makes is pretty hard tax someone when you don't know who is the shareholder of the company from day to day. Attempts have been made to get the to clear it up before, but it's the only industry in the country that makes significant money and they are not about to cast their population back into the dark ages.SouthamObserver said:
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
There have been rumours for a while that China is considering making either HK or Macau a tax haven for international clients. Lots of nice liquidity for them. Be interesting to see what people try an do about a tax haven with a superpower backing it. Infact there already is one, Panama is only 13th on the world Bank Secrecy Index (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Secrecy_Index) The third is the USA, try getting them to tell you about accounts held in the USA by foreigners.0 -
Nope, its just very cheap to live here, I probably spend under £800 most months including my rent. Most of my friends here still feel this is being breathtakingly extravagantrcs1000 said:
Frankly, I'm amazed you can afford to by a teacher at a charity school... Unless it's all part of some incredible tax dodge!Indigo said:
Yes, because teachers in charity schools on the third world that do a little internet consulting on the side to pay the rent are the typical clients of dodgy Panama accountants. I dare say I come close to the lowest nett personal worth on this list. I couldn't afford the dust on their doormat!Innocent_Abroad said:Is Indigo (or any other Peebie) a Mossack Fonseca client?
I'm not.
0 -
Not quite as simple as that. Apparently people are entitled to keep their tax affairs private which is why hiding assets is so easy. The question is why.CarlottaVance said:
Agree - if governments are so stupid as to make things so complicated smart lawyers can drive legal cart & horses through the tax law they have no one to blame but themselves.Indigo said:
Neither.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which of these do you buy, Indy?Indigo said:
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
"Taxation is theft"
"Tax avoidance is a sign of intelligence"
Parliament makes laws to collect tax. People are legally and morally obliged to pay the tax parliament enacts. They are not obliged to pay more than required. If parliament makes things so bloody complicated and opaque that there are grey areas and endless allowances and exceptions, whose fault is that? Personally I am in favour of a massive simplification of the tax code, ideally down to one slim volume which everyone should pay. In taxation as in other areas of law it ill becomes parliament to both pass sloppy hole ridden laws and bitch about people using those holes.
Wasn't it Lord Denning that said that a man is not required to arrange his affairs in such a way as to remit the maximum possible tax to the state.
That said, this government has done more than its predecessor - interestingly the peak of the Panama activity was 2005.......and of course if there was any illegality in Cameron Père's activity I'm sure we'd have heard about it by now - just a lot of righteous huffing and puffing and 'something must be done' ing (which is more than we ever did....)
0 -
Pop quiz......which jurisdictions top the compliance list for Financial Action Task Force Standards..... (hint, its not the UK or US....)
http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21571554-some-onshore-jurisdictions-can-be-laxer-offshore-sort-not-palm-tree-sight0 -
Apparently the British Virgin Islands are the worst. As it happens I'm trying to sell a small sea front plot on Anegada and I literally can't give it away.
Doesn't anyone fancy putting a tent up with a beautiful sea front view and by the sound of it not a taxman in sight?0 -
It already is:JosiasJessop said:
Given the Guardian's lamentable history in keeping information secret (see Wikileaks), expect the the full data to be out in the public soon.Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/search?country=UK&q=&ppl=on&ent=on&adr=on0 -
I still don't care, rich people use tax haven shocker. The Cameron dad story is old and he's been dead seven years already.
I honestly don't expect much to change. Osborne's done quite a bit on this subject, but that counts for nothing vs the stereotype. Maybe Iceland will get a new PM, hey-ho.
The best Panama story remains the canoeist.0 -
Indeed. The USA as usual has the cheek of Old Nick, given the number of deniable shell companies formed in Delaware every year. As I commented earlier, the hand wringers are going to be trying to sweep water up hill if they want a crack down on this, its defacto supported by one or more of the superpowers.CarlottaVance said:Pop quiz......which jurisdictions top the compliance list for Financial Action Task Force Standards..... (hint, its not the UK or US....)
http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21571554-some-onshore-jurisdictions-can-be-laxer-offshore-sort-not-palm-tree-sight0 -
ICYMI
This did make me laugh, their faces are a picture of disappointment.
Alex Wickham
Khan holds a "Sadisqco" party. 8 people turn up. All of them blokes. More like a Sad-disco. https://t.co/a8OsGs35Pa https://t.co/hNVZ7Quzvu0 -
I'd like to avoid paying 40% tax on most of my very hard earned money.
How do I get an offshore account?0 -
Made me laugh so much.Plato_Says said:ICYMI
This did make me laugh, their faces are a picture of disappointment.
Alex Wickham
Khan holds a "Sadisqco" party. 8 people turn up. All of them blokes. More like a Sad-disco. https://t.co/a8OsGs35Pa https://t.co/hNVZ7Quzvu
FWIW, this is normal. When I ran my university Tory association you'd struggle to get anything north of a dozen turning up for a political event, in a university of thousands.
Conversely, turnout for the Tory v. Labour laser quest was very good.0 -
What was funny?Plato_Says said:ICYMI
This did make me laugh, their faces are a picture of disappointment.
Alex Wickham
Khan holds a "Sadisqco" party. 8 people turn up. All of them blokes. More like a Sad-disco. https://t.co/a8OsGs35Pa https://t.co/hNVZ7Quzvu0 -
Wow this election really is Dull vs Boring isn't it.....Plato_Says said:ICYMI
This did make me laugh, their faces are a picture of disappointment.
Alex Wickham
Khan holds a "Sadisqco" party. 8 people turn up. All of them blokes. More like a Sad-disco. https://t.co/a8OsGs35Pa https://t.co/hNVZ7Quzvu0 -
Spot on from Kieran. If you are starting De novo buy Cruz over Ryan at today's prices0
-
Remember how Amazon used to ship DVDs from Jersey?SouthamObserver said:
The Tories have been very strong on rhetoric, but in practical terms not much has been achieved.CarlottaVance said:
Agree - if governments are so stupid as to make things so complicated smart lawyers can drive legal cart & horses through the tax law they have no one to blame but themselves.Indigo said:
Neither.Innocent_Abroad said:
Which of these do you buy, Indy?Indigo said:
You can dream, but it's all a bit meh so far.Roger said:FPT
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
"Taxation is theft"
"Tax avoidance is a sign of intelligence"
Parliament makes laws to collect tax. People are legally and morally obliged to pay the tax parliament enacts. They are not obliged to pay more than required. If parliament makes things so bloody complicated and opaque that there are grey areas and endless allowances and exceptions, whose fault is that? Personally I am in favour of a massive simplification of the tax code, ideally down to one slim volume which everyone should pay. In taxation as in other areas of law it ill becomes parliament to both pass sloppy hole ridden laws and bitch about people using those holes.
Wasn't it Lord Denning that said that a man is not required to arrange his affairs in such a way as to remit the maximum possible tax to the state.
That said, this government has done more than its predecessor - interestingly the peak of the Panama activity was 2005.......and of course if there was any illegality in Cameron Père's activity I'm sure we'd have heard about it by now - just a lot of righteous huffing and puffing and 'something must be done' ing (which is more than we ever did....)
Not anymore. Flourished under Labour, shut down (with hundreds of job losses) under the coalition.0 -
***** Betting Post *****
Whatever the outcome of the EU Referendum in June, this whole Panama tax business will inevitably result in shortening David Cameron's tenure of No. 10. Indeed it may well reinforce his own wish and determination to leave the top job sooner rather than later.
This reminded me to revisit Hills' “When will David Cameron Cease to be Tory Leader” market, where the value bet appears to be 2017 at odds of 8.0 decimal and I've topped up accordingly, together with a small saver on 2016 at odds of 4.5 decimal.
As ever, DYOR.0 -
O/T: "Interesting" development in the Land of the Free.
http://reverbpress.com/religion/soldiers-of-god-bill/The state of Mississippi has just passed a law that gives churches and its members as much power as state security forces. The Mississippi Church Protection Act has now legalized all acts of violence, including killing, committed by so-called followers of Christ or soldiers of God. Also known as the Mississippi House Bill 786, the bill seeks;
0 -
I think Panama will bring down the Iceland PM personally. Everyone expects it of third world tinpot despots - but Gunnlaugson is surely gone soon !0
-
Considering the Chinese are neck-deep in the Panama story, that wouldn't be a surprise: they'd have much more control.Indigo said:
Its still pushing water up hill.SouthamObserver said:
Panama may not have a choice.Indigo said:
I believe Panama is one of the very few, possibly the only, country in which bearer shares are still legal. Makes is pretty hard tax someone when you don't know who is the shareholder of the company from day to day. Attempts have been made to get the to clear it up before, but it's the only industry in the country that makes significant money and they are not about to cast their population back into the dark ages.SouthamObserver said:
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
There have been rumours for a while that China is considering making either HK or Macau a tax haven for international clients. Lots of nice liquidity for them. Be interesting to see what people try an do about a tax haven with a superpower backing it. Infact there already is one, Panama is only 13th on the world Bank Secrecy Index (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Secrecy_Index) The third is the USA, try getting them to tell you about accounts held in the USA by foreigners.
However isn't part of the reason that all these dictators, despots and criminals (*) put their money offshore from their own countries is access? Once it's out of their country it's harder for people in their own country to discover about it, and it's more accessible if the worst comes and they need to flee.
Now a question: would it be possible for (say) the UK to ask Panama to freeze accounts belonging to terrorists and/or criminals? I'm guessing not.
(*) Naturally not including Cameron's dad ...0 -
Leftie liberals deploy their latest wheeze for trying to close down debate on areas they find uncomfortable, and happily come a cropper
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/no-simon-schama-people-worried-about-gang-rape-and-fgm-arent-obsessed-with-sex/0 -
http://www.ncpolitics.uk/2016/04/matt-singh-responds-debate-around-polls-apart.html/
Our argument was not about the outright level of undecided voters, and there’s a good reason for this – it’s only a small subsection that we’re interested in – specifically those that seem to be answering differently depending on how the question is presented.
If you've read any of the articles, worth 2 mins
John Curtice’s point about squeezing is a concern – it appears that prompting for don’t knows and then squeezing them has a slightly different effect to simply not prompting (as was the procedure in our split test). This is an interesting puzzle, but we think it more likely that adding a third option that is not on the ballot paper – which is essentially an artefact of the self-completing nature of online polls – creates additional uncertainty among a group of voters that seem to lean quite strongly lean one way...0 -
It makes a lot of sense to avoid paying excess tax..only a fool pays more than they should and all legal procedures are exactly that..Legal0
-
I am no expert here, but I imagine the problem is going to be one of identification of the relevant accounts as much as anything else. If you have a regime which allows shell companies to be formed without even needing to show any ID (as I beleive is also the case in Delaware), and that company is controlled by the current holders of bearer shares, and I think there is no legal requirement to list directors or hold general meetings, you are going to have a tough time following the money.JosiasJessop said:Now a question: would it be possible for (say) the UK to ask Panama to freeze accounts belonging to terrorists and/or criminals? I'm guessing not.
0 -
It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax evasion or is it avoidance? Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation though?
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/
Edit - for avoidance / evasion0 -
Can we expect to see changes, however modest, in JackW's imminent projection of the June EU Referendum voting and turnout?
I rather think so ..... if would simply being too boring to repeat last week's numbers precisely.0 -
Morning all.
Fully agree that governments cause the problem by excessively complicated tax codes.
The question is, How do you stop a Chancellor/Fin minister tinkering with the tax code?
GO may have done more than previous CotE to crack down on tax avoidance, but what new opportunities has he created which his brand of tinkering?0 -
Its an irregular verb.Moses_ said:It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax avoidance but Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation......
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/
I make efficiency savings
You avoid tax
They are prosecuted under the Taxes Management Act 19700 -
Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.Moses_ said:It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax evasion or is it avoidance? Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation though?
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/0 -
Tax and Panama -- I'm not expecting the Chancellor to send the Fraud Squad next door but has whichever minister is in charge of collecting tax said anything?0
-
Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?peter_from_putney said:
Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.Moses_ said:It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax evasion or is it avoidance? Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation though?
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/0 -
Didn't that colossus of the Treasury Brown introduce some 10000 new tax laws or close to?Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:Morning all.
Fully agree that governments cause the problem by excessively complicated tax codes.
The question is, How do you stop a Chancellor/Fin minister tinkering with the tax code?
GO may have done more than previous CotE to crack down on tax avoidance, but what new opportunities has he created which his brand of tinkering?0 -
If we take the reported numbers protesting as c22k, with a population of only 300k ish - it's quite a percentage.Pulpstar said:
I think Panama will bring down the Iceland PM personally. Everyone expects it of third world tinpot despots - but Gunnlaugson is surely gone soon !
0 -
I agree and realistically Ryan would not get anywhere near enough delegates defecting from Trump and Cruz to get anywhere near the nomination not to mention he has said he does not want it anyway. Cruz is the only viable alternative but he needs a big win in Wisconsin tonight, even a narrow loss for Trump would not be too bad for him given his recent problems0
-
Decrepitjohn..Are you suggesting the PM has committed a crime...gosh..what evidence do you have..apart from a smear..0
-
"Is there any reason why someone would invest in the tax haven of Panama rather than Jersey or The Isle of Man?"
"Only for secrecy. It's almost impossible for British tax authorities to investigate"
0 -
Yup, I think he's toast.Plato_Says said:If we take the reported numbers protesting as c22k, with a population of only 300k ish - it's quite a percentage.
Pulpstar said:I think Panama will bring down the Iceland PM personally. Everyone expects it of third world tinpot despots - but Gunnlaugson is surely gone soon !
Shame, as up to now I rather liked him.0 -
LOLDecrepitJohnL said:
Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?peter_from_putney said:
Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.Moses_ said:It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax evasion or is it avoidance? Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation though?
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/
Ahh.. Tax avoidance by right bad ... Tax avoidance by left " look squirrel" . What's actually the difference between the Guardian and Cameron's Pops? The Guardian refuse to answer the same questions they demand others themselves answer openly .0 -
Anecdotage... 4or5 REMAIN campaigners out and about in Ledbury centre on Saturday morning.... Not obviously promising territory for them. From my brief observations while MrsFB was in and out of shops they were getting a distinctly less encouraging reaction than the OUT types the other week. A lot of curt headshakes when leaflets were offered, people movingtothe outside of the pavement and averting their gaze when passing them.... Totally subjective iknow
Also Mrs FB educated professional generally interested and well informed lady thatshe is has already declared herself heartedly fed up to the back teeth with all this referendum stuff.... Bored to tears by it. It seems excitement maynot be building!, outside this site that is. I forecast a low turnout
0 -
Yes yes But it's all just smear and innuendo unless there is evidence of a criminal enterprise.Roger said:"Is there any reason why someone would invest in the tax haven of Panama rather than Jersey or The Isle of Man?"
"Only for secrecy. It's almost impossible for British tax authorities to investigate"
I feel some Thomas More coming on...
NORFOLK Then your reasons must be treasonable!
MORE Not "must be"; may be.
NORFOLK It's a fair assumption!
MORE The law requires more than an assumption; the law requires a fact.0 -
.... and what would that forecast be Mr. FB?FattyBolger said:Anecdotage... 4or5 REMAIN campaigners out and about in Ledbury centre on Saturday morning.... Not obviously promising territory for them. From my brief observations while MrsFB was in and out of shops they were getting a distinctly less encouraging reaction than the OUT types the other week. A lot of curt headshakes when leaflets were offered, people movingtothe outside of the pavement and averting their gaze when passing them.... Totally subjective iknow
Also Mrs FB educated professional generally interested and well informed lady thatshe is has already declared herself heartedly fed up to the back teeth with all this referendum stuff.... Bored to tears by it. It seems excitement maynot be building!, outside this site that is. I forecast a low turnout0 -
What law has "next door" broken or fraudulent activity undertaken requiring the fraud squad?DecrepitJohnL said:Tax and Panama -- I'm not expecting the Chancellor to send the Fraud Squad next door but has whichever minister is in charge of collecting tax said anything?
0 -
Good morning, everyone.
Nice quote, Mr. Indigo.
On-topic: good article, Mr. Pedley. I concur that there'd be a democratic (ahem) outcry if someone not even standing won.0 -
“I'll give my jewels for a set of beads,Indigo said:
Yes yes But it's all just smear and innuendo unless there is evidence of a criminal enterprise.Roger said:"Is there any reason why someone would invest in the tax haven of Panama rather than Jersey or The Isle of Man?"
"Only for secrecy. It's almost impossible for British tax authorities to investigate"
I feel some Thomas More coming on...
NORFOLK Then your reasons must be treasonable!
MORE Not "must be"; may be.
NORFOLK It's a fair assumption!
MORE The law requires more than an assumption; the law requires a fact.
My gorgeous palace for a hermitage,
My gay apparel for an almsman's gown,
My figured goblets for a dish of wood,
My scepter for a palmer's walking staff
My subjects for a pair of carved saints
and my large kingdom for a little grave.”0 -
I agree with Keiran Pedley on this.
Where have the cases about Ted Cruz potentially being ineligible got to?0 -
The problem with this article is that it assumes the Republicans will literally choose anyone but Trump. However, by all accounts the Republican hierarchy are even more afraid of Cruz as candidate than they are at the thought of Trump being President. Cruz's policy positions make Trump's comments on abortion and mass construction look positively sane. He's not that different from Sarah Palin and he's not nearly as good-looking.
Therefore, if the votes do fall as Keiran suggests, Trump will surely be the unenthusiastically endorsed nominee in order to stop Cruz.
The only way I can see Trump being stopped under this scenario is if a late surge from Kasich brings him into play. But he's got a lot to do if he's to manage that.0 -
Much discussed here recently as regards Scotland's enthusiasm to remain within the EU compared with England. But what about the contrary argument ..... by joining the English in voting to LEAVE, the Scots would thereby place themselves in a position to demand a second Independence Referendum on such a fundamental issue concerning their future.0
-
I like the picture in the thread header. I should have guessed that it said 'trusted' but my first thought was that it said 'busted'.0
-
Are there many hermitages there in the French Riviera ? I havent been there for a decade or so, must have changed a lotRoger said:
“I'll give my jewels for a set of beads,Indigo said:
Yes yes But it's all just smear and innuendo unless there is evidence of a criminal enterprise.Roger said:"Is there any reason why someone would invest in the tax haven of Panama rather than Jersey or The Isle of Man?"
"Only for secrecy. It's almost impossible for British tax authorities to investigate"
I feel some Thomas More coming on...
NORFOLK Then your reasons must be treasonable!
MORE Not "must be"; may be.
NORFOLK It's a fair assumption!
MORE The law requires more than an assumption; the law requires a fact.
My gorgeous palace for a hermitage,
My gay apparel for an almsman's gown,
My figured goblets for a dish of wood,
My scepter for a palmer's walking staff
My subjects for a pair of carved saints
and my large kingdom for a little grave.” 0 -
On the day the new Star Wars DVD comes out, Admiral Ackbar (well, Eric Bauersfeld) has died:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35965835
And to get rid of the corny puns in advance, no it's not a trap!0 -
Not half as desperate as the crooks you adoreIndigo said:
"Prime ministers father used some legal tax avoidance vehicles before the PM was born, and for which the is no evidence the PM profits from or indeed has any connection to"Roger said:FTax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010. (They're saying he hasn't paid tax in 30 years)
So advantage Corbyn
If that's your election winner, the left are more desperate than I thought.0 -
Quote not working, @peter_from_putney
If they vote leave, what's the excuse for such a thing? Sturgeon's scenario was if the UK as a whole votes to leave but Scotland doesn't.0 -
Mr Herdson has previously assured us that Kasich has no chance of securing the nomination, absolutely none whatsoever.ydoethur said:The problem with this article is that it assumes the Republicans will literally choose anyone but Trump. However, by all accounts the Republican hierarchy are even more afraid of Cruz as candidate than they are at the thought of Trump being President. Cruz's policy positions make Trump's comments on abortion and mass construction look positively sane. He's not that different from Sarah Palin and he's not nearly as good-looking.
Therefore, if the votes do fall as Keiran suggests, Trump will surely be the unenthusiastically endorsed nominee in order to stop Cruz.
The only way I can see Trump being stopped under this scenario is if a late surge from Kasich brings him into play. But he's got a lot to do if he's to manage that.0 -
Yes and no.Plato_Says said:If we take the reported numbers protesting as c22k, with a population of only 300k ish - it's quite a percentage.
Pulpstar said:I think Panama will bring down the Iceland PM personally. Everyone expects it of third world tinpot despots - but Gunnlaugson is surely gone soon !
Given a smaller population it's easier to get a higher proportional turnout. It's still entirely possible, nay likely, that everyone coming out to protest would have been against him anyway before any of this.0 -
The sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?Moses_ said:
LOLDecrepitJohnL said:
Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?peter_from_putney said:
Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.Moses_ said:It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax evasion or is it avoidance? Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation though?
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/
Ahh.. Tax avoidance by right bad ... Tax avoidance by left " look squirrel" . What's actually the difference between the Guardian and Cameron's Pops? The Guardian refuse to answer the same questions they demand others themselves answer openly .
0 -
Your attempt to bore my ARSE is a fruitless endeavour. Many have tried and all have failed.peter_from_putney said:Can we expect to see changes, however modest, in JackW's imminent projection of the June EU Referendum voting and turnout?
I rather think so ..... if would simply being too boring to repeat last week's numbers precisely.0 -
I think it's a legitimate question. Would be pretty shocking hypocrisy if true.Innocent_Abroad said:
The sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?Moses_ said:
LOLDecrepitJohnL said:
Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?peter_from_putney said:
Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.Moses_ said:It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax evasion or is it avoidance? Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation though?
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/
Ahh.. Tax avoidance by right bad ... Tax avoidance by left " look squirrel" . What's actually the difference between the Guardian and Cameron's Pops? The Guardian refuse to answer the same questions they demand others themselves answer openly .0 -
Well that's a surprise, not.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/04/over-half-of-party-member-respondents-to-our-survey-have-no-confidence-in-the-feldman-review.htmlCertainly, there is nothing real in the proposals to boost ownership by the members of the Party itself. The review could solve one of these problems by dropping the MCA scheme and going for federations instead. Wider debate on wider and deeper ownership – directly elected board members, for example – won’t come under this leadership.
0 -
I thought you had got over your "extermination of the left" obsession.Innocent_Abroad said:
The sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?Moses_ said:
LOLDecrepitJohnL said:
Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?peter_from_putney said:
Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.Moses_ said:It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax evasion or is it avoidance? Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation though?
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/
Ahh.. Tax avoidance by right bad ... Tax avoidance by left " look squirrel" . What's actually the difference between the Guardian and Cameron's Pops? The Guardian refuse to answer the same questions they demand others themselves answer openly .
No one proposes banning or exterminating anyone or anything, they just pointed out the hypocrisy of one organisation that uses offshore arrangements to optimise its tax arrangements throwing stones at someone else who is alleged to have done the same.0 -
Thanks.Indigo said:
I am no expert here, but I imagine the problem is going to be one of identification of the relevant accounts as much as anything else. If you have a regime which allows shell companies to be formed without even needing to show any ID (as I beleive is also the case in Delaware), and that company is controlled by the current holders of bearer shares, and I think there is no legal requirement to list directors or hold general meetings, you are going to have a tough time following the money.JosiasJessop said:Now a question: would it be possible for (say) the UK to ask Panama to freeze accounts belonging to terrorists and/or criminals? I'm guessing not.
I wish I had so much money that tax avoidance would be worthwhile! Its the sort of hassle that's worth putting up with. (Although surely ISAs and the like are 'simple' tax avoidance?)
Say we were told we could avoid 10% of tax on our earnings by a technically legal mechanism that is against our own moral code. How many of us would do it?
And how many of us would just close out eyes, lost in the incomprehensible terminology, and just tell our accountant to get us a good deal?0 -
Blairmore holdings. ....and the Carroll trust. ......anyone?0
-
Hooray, quote working again.Innocent_Abroad said:
The sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?Moses_ said:
LOLDecrepitJohnL said:
Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?peter_from_putney said:
Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.Moses_ said:It's good that these Panama Papers have exposed this tax evasion or is it avoidance? Interesting that the Guardian should be jumping up and down in indignation though?
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/
Ahh.. Tax avoidance by right bad ... Tax avoidance by left " look squirrel" . What's actually the difference between the Guardian and Cameron's Pops? The Guardian refuse to answer the same questions they demand others themselves answer openly .
The irony of the Grauniad, of course, is that without its - ahem - efficient tax arrangements it would have gone out of business years ago because almost nobody reads it. It looks though as if its final demise is approaching rapidly, tax arrangements or no. Personally I shall be rather sorry when that happens, as it is always useful to know what its 124 readers are thinking. All you have to do then is think the opposite and you'll usually be right.0 -
Latest ARSE4EU Referendum Projection Countdown:
33 minutes 33 seconds0 -
You'd need to ask someone who *is* expecting the Chancellor to dial 999.Moses_ said:
What law has "next door" broken or fraudulent activity undertaken requiring the fraud squad?DecrepitJohnL said:Tax and Panama -- I'm not expecting the Chancellor to send the Fraud Squad next door but has whichever minister is in charge of collecting tax said anything?
0 -
RUBIO RISING
Back into 90 / 130 for GOP Nom !0 -
Who did you have in mind ? Outside my family the list of people I adore is remarkably shortmalcolmg said:
Not half as desperate as the crooks you adoreIndigo said:
"Prime ministers father used some legal tax avoidance vehicles before the PM was born, and for which the is no evidence the PM profits from or indeed has any connection to"Roger said:FTax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010. (They're saying he hasn't paid tax in 30 years)
So advantage Corbyn
If that's your election winner, the left are more desperate than I thought. 0 -
"To assume a Ryan nomination is possible we have to allow ourselves to believe that after 6 months of voters going to the polls – overwhelmingly backing Donald Trump and Ted Cruz in the process – that somehow someone that didn’t even run can emerge the winner. "
True. Which does strike me as unlikely too.
The question that Ryan backers have to answer is if not Trump because he's too unreliable, and if not Cruz because he's too extreme, then why not Kasich?
Their answer to that may well be 'because he kept losing', and that's not all that unreasonable but then if that is the answer then how does it keep Ryan in play when he didn't even compete? There's no guarantee that he'd have done any better; lots of other establishment candidates entered and finished behind the Ohio governor.
It seems to me that Kieran's logic is sound save for that one point. The NeverTrump brigade have two flawed choices before they get to Ryan or some other non-runner. Skipping Cruz and Trump would upset a lot and reinforce The Party Always Wins but Kasich is still viable.
On a related note, there is a rumour that Kasich is really running for the VP slot. I'm not sure I buy that but if ultimately offered it to either Trump or Cruz, he'd be sensible to take it: a flaky running-mate can damage a presidential bid; it doesn't work the other way round. But whether he wants it or not, his best bet is to compete as hard as possible for the top prize so for the moment his strategy should be the same either way.0 -
It was a joke, not a smear. Followed by a serious question: has whichever minister is responsible for HMRC said anything of great moment, or at all?richardDodd said:Decrepitjohn..Are you suggesting the PM has committed a crime...gosh..what evidence do you have..apart from a smear..
0 -
Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do weJosiasJessop said:
Considering the Chinese are neck-deep in the Panama story, that wouldn't be a surprise: they'd have much more control.Indigo said:
Its still pushing water up hill.SouthamObserver said:
Panama may not have a choice.Indigo said:
I believe Panama is one of the very few, possibly the only, country in which bearer shares are still legal. Makes is pretty hard tax someone when you don't know who is the shareholder of the company from day to day. Attempts have been made to get the to clear it up before, but it's the only industry in the country that makes significant money and they are not about to cast their population back into the dark ages.SouthamObserver said:
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
There have been rumours for a while that China is considering making either HK or Macau a tax haven for international clients. Lots of nice liquidity for them. Be interesting to see what people try an do about a tax haven with a superpower backing it. Infact there already is one, Panama is only 13th on the world Bank Secrecy Index (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Secrecy_Index) The third is the USA, try getting them to tell you about accounts held in the USA by foreigners.
However isn't part of the reason that all these dictators, despots and criminals (*) put their money offshore from their own countries is access? Once it's out of their country it's harder for people in their own country to discover about it, and it's more accessible if the worst comes and they need to flee.
Now a question: would it be possible for (say) the UK to ask Panama to freeze accounts belonging to terrorists and/or criminals? I'm guessing not.
(*) Naturally not including Cameron's dad ...0 -
You can back all the runners on Betfair, including Jeb Bush, Rubio, Scott Walker, Bloomberg and Nikki Haley at about a 2% underround lol0
-
Naturally, no true Scotsman would have any money tied up in Panama. They learnt their lesson after the Darien Scheme.malcolmg said:
Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do weJosiasJessop said:
Considering the Chinese are neck-deep in the Panama story, that wouldn't be a surprise: they'd have much more control.Indigo said:
Its still pushing water up hill.SouthamObserver said:
Panama may not have a choice.Indigo said:
I believe Panama is one of the very few, possibly the only, country in which bearer shares are still legal. Makes is pretty hard tax someone when you don't know who is the shareholder of the company from day to day. Attempts have been made to get the to clear it up before, but it's the only industry in the country that makes significant money and they are not about to cast their population back into the dark ages.SouthamObserver said:
It is a huge story. It increases the likelihood of concerted international action to prevent this kind of avoidance in such opaque jurisdictions. The choice of Panama by avoiders, as opposed to other offshore locations, is one of the fascinating aspects of this.Roger said:
Interesting and you really think this is a non story?Indigo said:The story behind the story of PanamaGate is fascinating.
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
There have been rumours for a while that China is considering making either HK or Macau a tax haven for international clients. Lots of nice liquidity for them. Be interesting to see what people try an do about a tax haven with a superpower backing it. Infact there already is one, Panama is only 13th on the world Bank Secrecy Index (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Secrecy_Index) The third is the USA, try getting them to tell you about accounts held in the USA by foreigners.
However isn't part of the reason that all these dictators, despots and criminals (*) put their money offshore from their own countries is access? Once it's out of their country it's harder for people in their own country to discover about it, and it's more accessible if the worst comes and they need to flee.
Now a question: would it be possible for (say) the UK to ask Panama to freeze accounts belonging to terrorists and/or criminals? I'm guessing not.
(*) Naturally not including Cameron's dad ... 0
