politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Forget Paul Ryan, it’s Cruz or bust for the NeverTrump camp

Hilarious market

peter_from_putney said:

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 turnout

.... and what would that forecast be Mr. FB?

Perhaps 50-55% or thereabouts...... It all strikes me as a situation where a great many people genuinely do not know on the merits whichof the numerous arguments of a very complicated multi faceted situation to believe or give weight to.... And therefore blanking it and hiding it in the mental"too difficult drawer"....and simply disengaging. The chances of these people getting off their bottomsto traipse down the pollingstation on a nice summers evening are slight.

SouthamObserver said:

Roger said:

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/

Interesting and you really think this is a non story?

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.

Never confuse a huge story with a huge event (if it is: I remain to be convinced there).

The former depends on what the public and media find fascinating; the latter depends on its influence on history. Quite a lot of work has been ongoing for years to tighten up on banking secrecy internationally; no-one in the media's cared beyond the financial pages. The leaks might have given that process a bit of a boost but once all the celeb-interest is mined out of them, the world will carry on much as before.

One aspect nobody seems to have mentioned yet is the impact this will have on Panama itself. Panama has no currency of its own and uses the US dollar. With no lender of last resort its banks are forced to maintain eye-wateringly high reserve ratios - they simply cannot be allowed to fail. Thus Panama has some of the world's most well capitalised but nonetheless risky banks. Banks which rely massively on trust and reputation to survive. I'm guessing the whole issue of trust and reputation in Panama and its financial services industry has taken a massive hit this week. A run on Panamanian banks would see the country sink.

Patrick said:

One aspect nobody seems to have mentioned yet is the impact this will have on Panama itself. Panama has no currency of its own and uses the US dollar. With no lender of last resort its banks are forced to maintain eye-wateringly high reserve ratios - they simply cannot be allowed to fail. Thus Panama has some of the world's most well capitalised but nonetheless risky banks. Banks which rely massively on trust and reputation to survive. I'm guessing the whole issue of trust and reputation in Panama and its financial services industry has taken a massive hit this week. A run on Panamanian banks would see the country sink.

Is all the money held in Panama though? I might misremember, but I think they said on R4 this morning that much of the actual money passed through the Panamanian firm is held in other territories, such as the British Virgin Islands.

It was very kind of Branson to patriotically brand a whole set of islands...

JosiasJessop said:

Patrick said:

One aspect nobody seems to have mentioned yet is the impact this will have on Panama itself. Panama has no currency of its own and uses the US dollar. With no lender of last resort its banks are forced to maintain eye-wateringly high reserve ratios - they simply cannot be allowed to fail. Thus Panama has some of the world's most well capitalised but nonetheless risky banks. Banks which rely massively on trust and reputation to survive. I'm guessing the whole issue of trust and reputation in Panama and its financial services industry has taken a massive hit this week. A run on Panamanian banks would see the country sink.

Is all the money held in Panama though? I might misremember, but I think they said on R4 this morning that much of the actual money passed through the Panamanian firm is held in other territories, such as the British Virgin Islands.

It was very kind of Branson to patriotically brand a whole set of islands...

Just like the Channel Islands UK politicians complain amount.....is the money deposited in Jersey & Guernsey:

1) Stored in a HUGE warehouse you can see from space, or
2) Funnelled into the City of London.....

richardDodd said:

Roger..has the Butler forgotten to bring your brekky this morning..you seem a little tetchy....

Peasant.

The butler does not "bring your brekky"

Standards clearly falling in PB households ..

SkyNews
Military dog who lost leg in Afghanistan to receive animal equivalent of Victoria Cross https://t.co/HfDMjXSTiI https://t.co/eD7URGiPmi

Even a cat has one

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner


https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

richardDodd said:

JQ..its me peasant upbringing guv..I am ever so sorry...and desperately humble

Indeed so.

You have much to be "desperately humble" about ..

david_herdson said:

peter_from_putney said:

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.

Mr Herdson has previously assured us that Kasich has no chance of securing the nomination, absolutely none whatsoever.

Do you have the quote for that?

I seem to remember you were arguing that Kasich had a slight chance the other day (which he does, imo).

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

IIRC Lib Dems read the Mail most.

ydoethur said:

Roger said:

ydoethur said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Moses_ said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

peter_from_putney said:

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/

Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.

Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?

LOL
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 sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?

Hooray, quote working again.

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.

I really enjoy reading the Guardian. How did a teacher become so embedded in right-wingery? Makbe this site makes people go native? Give or take some punctuation you're becming indistinguishable from Doddy

The lazy assumption that Teachers are left wing? Sir, you sound like Michael Gove. More than twice as many teachers read the Daily Mail as read all left wing newspapers (Guardian, Mirror, TES, Daily Sport*) combined. Moreover we are all fiercely competitive and wish government would get the f*** out of our lives - solidly libertarian sentiments.

And who the heck is Doddy?

*That is a joke, by the way.

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

They've always gone in for fancy dress.

Plato_Says said:

IIRC Lib Dems read the Mail most.

ydoethur said:

Roger said:

ydoethur said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Moses_ said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

peter_from_putney said:

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/

Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.

Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?

LOL
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 sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?

Hooray, quote working again.

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.

I really enjoy reading the Guardian. How did a teacher become so embedded in right-wingery? Makbe this site makes people go native? Give or take some punctuation you're becming indistinguishable from Doddy

The lazy assumption that Teachers are left wing? Sir, you sound like Michael Gove. More than twice as many teachers read the Daily Mail as read all left wing newspapers (Guardian, Mirror, TES, Daily Sport*) combined. Moreover we are all fiercely competitive and wish government would get the f*** out of our lives - solidly libertarian sentiments.

And who the heck is Doddy?

*That is a joke, by the way.

Presumably for the same reason I read the Guardian

Not that I should be churlish. I got my present job through an advert in the Guardian. Problem with advertising there is that so few teachers read it you don't get many applicants in shortage subjects - sometimes not enough to shortlist - unlike in the TES.

Guido Fawkes twists the knife on Guardian hypocrisy - https://t.co/eFprGfMOXH

I think we're all sickened by the selfish and greedy behaviour of a good chunk of the super rich.

From a centre-right perspective, it means a far heavier tax burden on middle earners as well.

Yes, that's the point. I also don't blame Cameron for his father, and I'm not sure I even blame his father. The issue is that governments generally and the British Governments (of all parties) in particular tolerate a system in which people with good advice and certain types of income can entirely avoid tax, which means that everyone else has to pay MUCH more.

Why Britain in particular? Because a number of tax havens come under the British crown, and using them is an integral part of City business. When I came back from working in Switzerland, I went for advice to a reputable IFA on where to put my savings etc., but specified that they should not go to a tax haven or anywhere else that would look suspicious even if it was perfectly legal. He said that was "an unusual request".

Both Brown and Osborne have shown some signs of concern about this, and as a result of their efforts with some support from the US, places like the Channel Islands are at least a bit more transparent. But the basic system remains clearly broken, and it's against the interest on mainstream governments of every colour as well as the vast majority of taxpayers, both individuals and smaller companies.

What seems to be needed in the long run is a global effort to set minimum tax rates, with places that don't comply subject to the sort of financial sanctions applied to Russia and Iran in recent years. (Yes, that means interfering with the sovereignty of the Virgin Islands. Tough.) In the short term, it means weighting taxation to address share of turnover and global income in the country where a company or individual is earning income.

Difficult? Certainly. But a lot of people would vote for a party willing to make a ruthless effort to crack down on this (hello Jeremy, hello Bernie, maybe even hello Donald), and an unwillingness to do it does raise the question of whether the friends and financiers of governing parties are complicit.

Plato_Says said:

IIRC Lib Dems read the Mail most.

ydoethur said:

Roger said:

ydoethur said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Moses_ said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

peter_from_putney said:

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/

Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.

Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?

LOL
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 sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?

Hooray, quote working again.

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.

I really enjoy reading the Guardian. How did a teacher become so embedded in right-wingery? Makbe this site makes people go native? Give or take some punctuation you're becming indistinguishable from Doddy

The lazy assumption that Teachers are left wing? Sir, you sound like Michael Gove. More than twice as many teachers read the Daily Mail as read all left wing newspapers (Guardian, Mirror, TES, Daily Sport*) combined. Moreover we are all fiercely competitive and wish government would get the f*** out of our lives - solidly libertarian sentiments.

And who the heck is Doddy?

*That is a joke, by the way.

There are plenty of people who read the Daily Mail, but also condemn it on social media and tell their friends they hate it.

The Daily Mail understands this perfectly.

perdix said:

ydoethur said:

Roger said:

ydoethur said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Moses_ said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

peter_from_putney said:

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/

Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.

Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?

LOL
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 sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?

Hooray, quote working again.

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.

I really enjoy reading the Guardian. How did a teacher become so embedded in right-wingery? Makbe this site makes people go native? Give or take some punctuation you're becming indistinguishable from Doddy

The lazy assumption that Teachers are left wing? Sir, you sound like Michael Gove. More than twice as many teachers read the Daily Mail as read all left wing newspapers (Guardian, Mirror, TES, Daily Sport*) combined. Moreover we are all fiercely competitive and wish government would get the f*** out of our lives - solidly libertarian sentiments.

And who the heck is Doddy?

*That is a joke, by the way.

"twice as many read the Daily Mail as read all left wing papers........" Not a good indication of the quality of our teachers.

It doesn't say much for the quality of the left wing press either. All those spelling mistakes, for a start. When we read the news, we don't want to have to get our red pens out and continue marking.

Must be a left wing thing. For example, would you believe somebody in this very thread criticised somebody else's punctuation and then forgot to put an 'o' in 'becoming'?

Plato_Says said:

Number Cruncher
Rallings and Thrasher local election forecast:

CON +50
LAB -150
LIB +40
UKIP +40

That would be a disaster for labour.

Nothing beats Kenny Everett here

https://youtu.be/dMHDBL7CNA4

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

He once teased a Brazilian general for the number of medals he wore, suggesting Brazil hadn't done much fighting, only to get the retort, 'at least I didn't get them for marrying my wife.'

NickPalmer said:

Yes, that's the point. I also don't blame Cameron for his father, and I'm not sure I even blame his father. The issue is that governments generally and the British Governments (of all parties) in particular tolerate a system in which people with good advice and certain types of income can entirely avoid tax, which means that everyone else has to pay MUCH more.

Why Britain in particular? Because a number of tax havens come under the British crown, and using them is an integral part of City business. When I came back from working in Switzerland, I went for advice to a reputable IFA on where to put my savings etc., but specified that they should not go to a tax haven or anywhere else that would look suspicious even if it was perfectly legal. He said that was "an unusual request".

Both Brown and Osborne have shown some signs of concern about this, and as a result of their efforts with some support from the US, places like the Channel Islands are at least a bit more transparent. But the basic system remains clearly broken, and it's against the interest on mainstream governments of every colour as well as the vast majority of taxpayers, both individuals and smaller companies.

What seems to be needed in the long run is a global effort to set minimum tax rates, with places that don't comply subject to the sort of financial sanctions applied to Russia and Iran in recent years. (Yes, that means interfering with the sovereignty of the Virgin Islands. Tough.) In the short term, it means weighting taxation to address share of turnover and global income in the country where a company or individual is earning income.

Difficult? Certainly. But a lot of people would vote for a party willing to make a ruthless effort to crack down on this (hello Jeremy, hello Bernie, maybe even hello Donald), and an unwillingness to do it does raise the question of whether the friends and financiers of governing parties are complicit.

A fair series of points there Nick. Thing is though, while people like that policy, they won't vote for Jeremy or Bernard or Donald for other reasons.

What's needed is for a party of boring competence to make this a big issue, not necessarily of fairness even but of efficiency. Then it would be an election winner.

Morning all,

Interesting article, but I don't entirely buy it. If there are rules that allow a second (or more) ballots at a contested convention, then someone will attempt to use them, such is the antipathy to Trump. The politics can go hang. I'm not saying it'll work, but someone will something.

Matthew Goodwin
How Britain's parties have performed since 2015 GE in Rallings & Thrasher local by-election model -> https://t.co/TYXSPJ8rN5

Nice graph

Roger said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

They've always gone in for fancy dress.

He earned most of them the hard way.

The belt on Mrs Xi (?) looks like something she picked up from Primark.

CarlottaVance said:

JosiasJessop said:

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Roger said:

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/

Interesting and you really think this is a non story?

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.

Panama may not have a choice.

Its still pushing water up hill.

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.

Considering the Chinese are neck-deep in the Panama story, that wouldn't be a surprise: they'd have much more control.

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 ...

Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do we

Naturally, no true Scotsman would have any money tied up in Panama. They learnt their lesson after the Darien Scheme.

Sturgeon's £10bn deal with firm owned by "grossly corrupt" Chinese construction giant

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14403389.Sturgeon_s___10bn_deal_with_firm_owned_by__quot_grossly_corrupt_quot__Chinese_construction_giant

Ha Ha Ha , Toom Tabard takes time off from the cauldron to indulge in her obsessive hatred of Scotland. Everybody knows corrupt is spelt T O R Y.

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

JosiasJessop said:

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Roger said:

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/

Interesting and you really think this is a non story?

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.

Panama may not have a choice.

Its still pushing water up hill.

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.

Considering the Chinese are neck-deep in the Panama story, that wouldn't be a surprise: they'd have much more control.

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 ...

Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do we

Naturally, no true Scotsman would have any money tied up in Panama. They learnt their lesson after the Darien Scheme.

Sturgeon's £10bn deal with firm owned by "grossly corrupt" Chinese construction giant

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14403389.Sturgeon_s___10bn_deal_with_firm_owned_by__quot_grossly_corrupt_quot__Chinese_construction_giant

Ha Ha Ha , Toom Tabard takes time off from the cauldron to indulge in her obsessive hatred of Scotland. Everybody knows corrupt is spelt T O R Y.

It appears that Scottish education is in a worse state than I feared ...

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

He once teased a Brazilian general for the number of medals he wore, suggesting Brazil hadn't done much fighting, only to get the retort, 'at least I didn't get them for marrying my wife.'

Isn't that slightly unfair on him? He served with fair distinction in WWII, as I recall.

LOL, not that old chestnut.

Why is it wrong?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Philip,_Duke_of_Edinburgh#Naval_and_wartime_service

Even allowing for connections, it appears he did quite well.

Plato_Says said:

Matthew Goodwin
How Britain's parties have performed since 2015 GE in Rallings & Thrasher local by-election model -> https://t.co/TYXSPJ8rN5

Nice graph

Excellent material. If Labour fail to turn this flatlining into a substantial lead (say 8-10 points) by mid-term then Tories are safe IMHO.

Alanbrooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

JosiasJessop said:

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Roger said:

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/

Interesting and you really think this is a non story?

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.

Panama may not have a choice.

Its still pushing water up hill.

Considering the Chinese are neck-deep in the Panama story, that wouldn't be a surprise: they'd have much more control.

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 ...

Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do we

Naturally, no true Scotsman would have any money tied up in Panama. They learnt their lesson after the Darien Scheme.

Sturgeon's £10bn deal with firm owned by "grossly corrupt" Chinese construction giant

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14403389.Sturgeon_s___10bn_deal_with_firm_owned_by__quot_grossly_corrupt_quot__Chinese_construction_giant

I'm still scratching my head as to what these deals are.

Is it a kind of Scottisg PFI arrangement ?: And why does the hoots haggis party not want to use its local suppliers ?

Alan, simple , it is a bit like George's deals with the Chinese , it is borrowing money , except ours will not be used for nuclear power stations and excessive electricity prices. Kind of beats the paltry sum Westminster allows them to borrow by a country mile.

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

JosiasJessop said:

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Roger said:

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/

Interesting and you really think this is a non story?

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.

Panama may not have a choice.

Its still pushing water up hill.

Considering the Chinese are neck-deep in the Panama story, that wouldn't be a surprise: they'd have much more control.

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 ...

Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do we

Naturally, no true Scotsman would have any money tied up in Panama. They learnt their lesson after the Darien Scheme.

Sturgeon's £10bn deal with firm owned by "grossly corrupt" Chinese construction giant

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14403389.Sturgeon_s___10bn_deal_with_firm_owned_by__quot_grossly_corrupt_quot__Chinese_construction_giant

I'm still scratching my head as to what these deals are.

Is it a kind of Scottisg PFI arrangement ?: And why does the hoots haggis party not want to use its local suppliers ?

Alan, simple , it is a bit like George's deals with the Chinese , it is borrowing money , except ours will not be used for nuclear power stations and excessive electricity prices.

Paying bribes, by the looks of it......

CarlottaVance said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

JosiasJessop said:

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Roger said:

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/

Interesting and you really think this is a non story?

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.

Panama may not have a choice.

Its still pushing water up hill.

Considering the Chinese are neck-deep in the Panama story, that wouldn't be a surprise: they'd have much more control.

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 ...

Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do we

Naturally, no true Scotsman would have any money tied up in Panama. They learnt their lesson after the Darien Scheme.

Sturgeon's £10bn deal with firm owned by "grossly corrupt" Chinese construction giant

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14403389.Sturgeon_s___10bn_deal_with_firm_owned_by__quot_grossly_corrupt_quot__Chinese_construction_giant

I'm still scratching my head as to what these deals are.

Is it a kind of Scottisg PFI arrangement ?: And why does the hoots haggis party not want to use its local suppliers ?

Alan, simple , it is a bit like George's deals with the Chinese , it is borrowing money , except ours will not be used for nuclear power stations and excessive electricity prices.

Paying bribes, by the looks of it......

Now you , A TORY , are accusing the government of being corrupt , back to your stirring and reading CHQ propaganda.

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

He once teased a Brazilian general for the number of medals he wore, suggesting Brazil hadn't done much fighting, only to get the retort, 'at least I didn't get them for marrying my wife.'

Isn't that slightly unfair on him? He served with fair distinction in WWII, as I recall.

Not to the extent of deserving more medals than Wavell or Charles Upham.

Philip is technically still a serving officer of the RN so picks up all the Jubilee medals, the same as anyone else (quite remarkably, he has both the George VI Coronation medal and the Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee medal). Inevitably, that adds up to quite a lot, on top of, for example the Atlantic Star, Burma Star, Africa Star, Italy Star, 1939-45 Star and so on.

malcolmg said:

Now you , A TORY , are accusing the government of being corrupt , back to your stirring and reading CHQ propaganda.

It comes to something when the SNP Fantasy Time Machine 'Norwegian Oil Fund' backs a company that the real Norwegian Oil fund won't invest in:

A lengthy report published by the Norwegian ethics council in October 2014 found that it is likely that China's railway minister was bribed to secure contracts for CRG, and that there was an "unacceptable future risk of corruption". Civil servants were likely to have been paid off for railways and housing projects - two areas in which the Scottish Government agreement highlights as possible areas of cooperation with the subsidiary.

CRG was implicated in one of China's largest corruption cases, uncovered after 40 people were killed in a crash between high-speed trains in 2011 in the industrial city of Wenzhou, the document reveals.

Pulpstar said:

Plato_Says said:

Number Cruncher
Rallings and Thrasher local election forecast:

CON +50
LAB -150
LIB +40
UKIP +40

Is there a NEV for that lot ?

Con 31 / Lab 30 / LD 16 / UKIP 12.

LD 16 looks high to me. It might be what by-elections suggest but fighting a full set of elections is a different deal. That said, *targetting* gains may not be that different from by-elections, if starting at a low base.

ydoethur said:

Roger said:

Nick

"Yes, that's the point. I also don't blame Cameron for his father, and I'm not sure I even blame his father. The issue is that governments generally and the British Governments (of all parties) in particular tolerate a system in which people with good advice and certain types of income can entirely avoid tax, which means that everyone else has to pay MUCH more."

How can you not blame a very wealthy person for trying to avoid tax? Do you really need the government to teach you morality? Shouldn't you take some responsibility for your own behaviour?

(Of course Junior has no esponsibility for the actions of his father)

While it is annoying that wealthy people avoid tax, it is much more annoying that we have a 1,000 page tax code that is so opaque avoiding tax becomes easy. The German tax code is less than 300 pages. Guess which country it's easier to avoid tax in.

That is why, to coin a phrase, I agree with Nick that clamping down on it, by tax reform for preference, would be popular and a good move. The problem is that the only people advocating it at the moment are written out of politics by the public for other reasons.

The Gov'ts job is not to be a moral arbiter, it's to make law - and good law which brings in tax, and compels individuals and companies to pay what is due.
A ratchet effect - as with benefits always takes place though, very easy to add more law; very hard to get rid of misformed law. Gordon Brown's tax film industry tax dodges spring to mind, Osborne at least tries.

Pulpstar said:

Plato_Says said:

Number Cruncher
Rallings and Thrasher local election forecast:

CON +50
LAB -150
LIB +40
UKIP +40

Is there a NEV for that lot ?

Con 31

Lab 30

LD 16

UKIP 12

More ammunition for the LEAVE side here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/04/health-tourists-cost-uk-taxpayers-nearly-6billion-in-eight-years/

...and evidence that Nicky Morgan's claims about young people feeling 'European' and being the 'Easyjet generation' are hot air

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/04/04/uk-jobs-wildly-popular-with-europeans--but-few-brits-want-to-mov/

david_herdson said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

He once teased a Brazilian general for the number of medals he wore, suggesting Brazil hadn't done much fighting, only to get the retort, 'at least I didn't get them for marrying my wife.'

Isn't that slightly unfair on him? He served with fair distinction in WWII, as I recall.

Not to the extent of deserving more medals than Wavell or Charles Upham.

Philip is technically still a serving officer of the RN so picks up all the Jubilee medals, the same as anyone else (quite remarkably, he has both the George VI Coronation medal and the Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee medal). Inevitably, that adds up to quite a lot, on top of, for example the Atlantic Star, Burma Star, Africa Star, Italy Star, 1939-45 Star and so on.

So the general was right- he did get quite a lot for marrying his wife! (He wouldn't still be a serving officer if he hadn't married her, and for 70-odd years his duties have been purely ceremonial anyway.)

Nobody disputes he had a distinguished war record. But the point was, he was mocking somebody for having medals some of which he presumably hadn't earned, when he also has medals he hasn't earned in any meaningful sense.

richardDodd said:

I wonder if MG has a drawer full of medals from risking his life serving the UK right through WW2...or any other war conflict..

Old doddery bumping his stupid gums again , why not regale us on hopw you were a miner and had your finger on the nuclear button when you commanded your submarine and assorted other dribble that you post ad nauseum. You get more dittery by the day doddery, unfortunately just as odious and nasty as ever. "Richard" by nature as well as name.

PS;the royal family have hundreds of medals between them all well earned I am sure, much like all those backroom generals/admirals etc.

Alanbrooke said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

JosiasJessop said:

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Roger said:

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/

Interesting and you really think this is a non story?

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.

Panama may not have a choice.

Its still pushing water up hill.

(*) Naturally not including Cameron's dad ...

Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do we

Naturally, no true Scotsman would have any money tied up in Panama. They learnt their lesson after the Darien Scheme.

Sturgeon's £10bn deal with firm owned by "grossly corrupt" Chinese construction giant

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14403389.Sturgeon_s___10bn_deal_with_firm_owned_by__quot_grossly_corrupt_quot__Chinese_construction_giant

I'm still scratching my head as to what these deals are.

Is it a kind of Scottisg PFI arrangement ?: And why does the hoots haggis party not want to use its local suppliers ?

Alan, simple , it is a bit like George's deals with the Chinese , it is borrowing money , except ours will not be used for nuclear power stations and excessive electricity prices. Kind of beats the paltry sum Westminster allows them to borrow by a country mile.

Right, but who is lender of last resort ? It can be the UK govt or you would have had Osborne grinning all over the place. So if it's the people of Scotland it looks like you've all agreed to send £2000 each to the Chinese. Why ?

We are loaded Alan, oil on way back up , soon we will be lighting our fags with twenties.

Wanderer said:

Roger said:

Nick

"Yes, that's the point. I also don't blame Cameron for his father, and I'm not sure I even blame his father. The issue is that governments generally and the British Governments (of all parties) in particular tolerate a system in which people with good advice and certain types of income can entirely avoid tax, which means that everyone else has to pay MUCH more."

How can you not blame a very wealthy person for trying to avoid tax? Do you really need the government to teach you morality? Shouldn't you take some responsibility for your own behaviour?

(Of course Junior has no responsibility for the actions of his father)

Because paying tax is not a question of private morality, it's simply a matter of obeying the law. If the law allows people to pay less tax then it's not immoral for them to take advantage.

If we think this kind of activity is objectionable it is our governments we to need look to.

Isn't it quite possible to obey the letter of the law while also being immoral? I'm sure most massive tax avoiders will consider being called 'immoral' by the powerless as a price well worth paying.

ComRes London Mayoral poll

Sadiq Khan remains ahead of Zac Goldsmith in the race to be Mayor of London. The Labour candidate receives 44% of first round preferences - two points higher than in the last ComRes poll for ITV News and LBC in March. Zac Goldsmith is on 37% - two points lower. While these differences are within the margin of error, it supports the trend that Khan is ahead with a month to go.

After second preferences have been re-allocated, Khan leads Goldsmith 55% to 45%.

http://www.comres.co.uk/polls/itv-news-london-lbc-london-mayoral-poll/

Nothing would entertain me more than Labour coming third in Scotland. Entirely self inflicted. And after all their crowing.

ydoethur said:

Pulpstar said:

david_herdson said:

Pulpstar said:

Plato_Says said:

Number Cruncher
Rallings and Thrasher local election forecast:

CON +50
LAB -150
LIB +40
UKIP +40

Is there a NEV for that lot ?

Con 31 / Lab 30 / LD 16 / UKIP 12.

LD 16 looks high to me. It might be what by-elections suggest but fighting a full set of elections is a different deal. That said, *targetting* gains may not be that different from by-elections, if starting at a low base.

http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2014/05/27/guest-slot-rod-crosby-the-bell-tolls-for-labour-and-miliband/

Labour have 4 years to improve the situation, but if that is the result, we're starting at a 13% lead for the Tories at the next election.

And surely a new Labour leader is inevitable on those numbers, coupled to a loss of control in Wales, possibly third in Scotland. An awful lot must be riding on London. If that is lost on top of all these it would be surprising were Corbyn not to face an immediate putsch.

MaxPB said:

Jonathan said:

ydoethur said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

Moses_ said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

peter_from_putney said:

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/

Oh Dear! Stones and glass houses, etc.

Stones, glass houses and -- what is the collective noun for Look, Squirrels?

LOL
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 sooner it's banned & its readers exterminated the sooner Britain will be Great again. Or am I missing something?

Hooray, quote working again.

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.

Loads of people read the Guardian. That's not their problem. They are one of the world's biggest websites.

Their problem is that no one pays for it.

Who would have thought that after years of deriding people who paid for news and websites who charged for it they would build up a user base which was comfortable getting it all for free and blocking their adverts at the same time. The sanctimonious gits deserve it and all of those who predicted that it would be The Times that was looking at winding up after they introduced the pay wall should refrain from making further predictions about this.

Adblock is a great invention, I only turn it off for this website and a few other "chosen ones"

Moses_ said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

He once teased a Brazilian general for the number of medals he wore, suggesting Brazil hadn't done much fighting, only to get the retort, 'at least I didn't get them for marrying my wife.'

Isn't that slightly unfair on him? He served with fair distinction in WWII, as I recall.

For the record and balance he was also mentioned in dispatches for his conduct and bravery at the Battle of Jutland.

Eh?!

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

malcolmg said:

Alanbrooke said:

CarlottaVance said:

JosiasJessop said:

malcolmg said:

JosiasJessop said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Indigo said:

SouthamObserver said:

Roger said:

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/

Interesting and you really think this is a non story?

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.

Panama may not have a choice.

Its still pushing water up hill.

(*) Naturally not including Cameron's dad ...

Naturally , we don't want any of the nasty Tory money tied up do we

Naturally, no true Scotsman would have any money tied up in Panama. They learnt their lesson after the Darien Scheme.

Sturgeon's £10bn deal with firm owned by "grossly corrupt" Chinese construction giant

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14403389.Sturgeon_s___10bn_deal_with_firm_owned_by__quot_grossly_corrupt_quot__Chinese_construction_giant

I'm still scratching my head as to what these deals are.

Is it a kind of Scottisg PFI arrangement ?: And why does the hoots haggis party not want to use its local suppliers ?

Alan, simple , it is a bit like George's deals with the Chinese , it is borrowing money , except ours will not be used for nuclear power stations and excessive electricity prices. Kind of beats the paltry sum Westminster allows them to borrow by a country mile.

Right, but who is lender of last resort ? It can be the UK govt or you would have had Osborne grinning all over the place. So if it's the people of Scotland it looks like you've all agreed to send £2000 each to the Chinese. Why ?

We are loaded Alan, oil on way back up , soon we will be lighting our fags with twenties.

If you're lighting them sat beside an oil terminal that might not be a good idea.

Moses_ said:

JosiasJessop said:

ydoethur said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

"Is that a Panama Hat?"

The Queen picks another winner

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2015/10/21/banquet-queen-a.jpg

That bar of medals on Prince Philip's jacket is so long it looks like something out of a comedy sketch show.

He once teased a Brazilian general for the number of medals he wore, suggesting Brazil hadn't done much fighting, only to get the retort, 'at least I didn't get them for marrying my wife.'

Isn't that slightly unfair on him? He served with fair distinction in WWII, as I recall.

For the record and balance he was also mentioned in dispatches for his conduct and bravery at the Battle of Jutland.

Her wasn't even a trinkle in his father's eye when the Battle of Jutland took place ...