Which country does Ratcliffe think we’re being colonised by? Is it by any chance Islamistan?
I presume if you look at immigration over the last 20 years, it's probably been more Christian than the local population (UK 46% Christian), with people from Poland (72%), Romania (85%), Ukraine (85%), Ireland (85%) and Nigeria (46%). (Although the people who immigrate aren't necessarily representative of the whole population. They will usually be younger. Often more middle class.)
As I regularly say when we receive data on tiny changes in a very big number:
What are the levels of uncertainty on the GDP figures? If +/-1%, then declaring a 0.1% increase is nonsense on stilts.
The month to month figures are nonsense to place any weight in, the quarterly ones need to be taken with a pinch of salt, but 1.3% annual is piss poor and below OBR and IMF predictions.
It certainly is a bit feeble, but isn't it up on 2024 (1.0%) and 2023 (0.3%)?
Well 2024 was going pretty well until Rachel from Accounts got in and torpedoed cosumer confidence.
The one bright spot was production was up 1.7% but construction has fallen off a cliff.
Probably because it's too wet.
London has a problem in that you can really only build flats and London flats are currently subject to a house price crash that is hidden from view (prices are about 20% down compared to 2020).
It’s more when you consider inflation too, see links below, but then with the service charges why would anyone buy an uncapped liability. Same with a caravan on a holiday park or a McCarthy and Stone old people’s home.
The recent changes to ground rent are tinkering around the edges.
These stories seem to be the tip of the iceberg. People need to realise their home is worth what someone will pay for it not what Foxtons tell them.
Service charges are for maintenance and other communal costs, the freeholder isn't legally allowed to profit from them. I had a leasehold flat with share of freehold, so managed by the residents, myself included eventually for several years until I escaped. If competently managed a flat will have lower shared maintenance costs than a similar sized house, my service charge for a 2 bed flat was £1200/annum over 10+ years with a one-off surcharge of £3k for a new roof on the block.
OAP accommodation are different, high supported living charges etc and caravan parks, from what I've heard, are the wild west ("your caravan has suffered an unfortunate accident, but I've got a good deal on an almost new one")
Having been there and done that, the biggest downsides with flats are your fellow residents, BTLs who don't pay service charges, do nothing about their anti-social tenants, people too lazy to put their binbags in the bins, clear up after themselves, think there's a refuse fairy who collects old mattresses etc etc
and if you do get coerced into helping with the building management it gets even worse, the service charge limits aren't index-linked, limits are still £250 one off or £100/annum long running service per flat. So for a 20 flat block any maintenance costing more than £5k or £2k pa needs a section 20 consultation. That's a full tendering and evaluation process with 20 stakeholders, 3 stages, consultation periods, the works.
Which country does Ratcliffe think we’re being colonised by? Is it by any chance Islamistan?
The English immigrant Ratcliffe colonised Scotland and destroyed Grangemouth.
Given where a lot of PL funding, his supporter base comes from he's clearly not thought it through has he?
He's one of a number of initially successful businessmen who tend to be egotistical by nature meaning political parties give them leeway in return for backing.
The likes of Sugar, Branson, Dyson, Martin, spring to mind immediately.
May be the sanest is Caldwell.
One very noticeable fact is the response by Labour which would not have happened last week.
Farage and Davey have responded as you'd expect.
Silence it seems from the Tories? Although that may just be that the 3 day a week part time leader was tucked up on the sofa and her x feed administrator was out on the piss
They have all responded including Kemi despite your continual misogyny
"Switzerland to vote on far-right proposal to cap population at 10 million Referendum on immigration limit could threaten EU agreements and cripple economy, say Swiss businesses"
"Switzerland to vote on far-right proposal to cap population at 10 million Referendum on immigration limit could threaten EU agreements and cripple economy, say Swiss businesses"
I'm sensing some signs of fight from Starmer. Maybe its just that he knows his time is coming to an end, so he feels he might as well start saying what he really thinks.
Picking a fight with Ratcliffe is smart politics - hes a tax dodging billionaire, who led Man Utd to their worst league finish since the 70s.
As I regularly say when we receive data on tiny changes in a very big number:
What are the levels of uncertainty on the GDP figures? If +/-1%, then declaring a 0.1% increase is nonsense on stilts.
The month to month figures are nonsense to place any weight in, the quarterly ones need to be taken with a pinch of salt, but 1.3% annual is piss poor and below OBR and IMF predictions. Things like construction are doing badly, construction, that thing the government want to be building a squillon homes.
1.3% annual growth needs the context of European growth over 2025 as our closest comparators:
Germany: 0.2% France: 0.9% Italy: 0.7%
I agree growth has been weak, but it's not a uniquely UK problem.
Nor is it worse than previous periods: 1.1% in 2024, 0.3% in 2023, 1.2% average across 2020-2022 (annual figures lumpy given COVID), 1.3% in 2019.
We need to go back nearly a decade to 2014-2017 when growth was meaningfully higher (averaging over 2.5% pa).
So we should rejoin the EU to reach their levels of growth? Okey!
When we were in the EU we grew faster. Leaving the EU has seen us grow at EU like levels. It's one of the paradoxes of Brexit - like how Brexit gave us EU style politics.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
As I regularly say when we receive data on tiny changes in a very big number:
What are the levels of uncertainty on the GDP figures? If +/-1%, then declaring a 0.1% increase is nonsense on stilts.
The month to month figures are nonsense to place any weight in, the quarterly ones need to be taken with a pinch of salt, but 1.3% annual is piss poor and below OBR and IMF predictions. Things like construction are doing badly, construction, that thing the government want to be building a squillon homes.
1.3% annual growth needs the context of European growth over 2025 as our closest comparators:
Germany: 0.2% France: 0.9% Italy: 0.7%
I agree growth has been weak, but it's not a uniquely UK problem.
Nor is it worse than previous periods: 1.1% in 2024, 0.3% in 2023, 1.2% average across 2020-2022 (annual figures lumpy given COVID), 1.3% in 2019.
We need to go back nearly a decade to 2014-2017 when growth was meaningfully higher (averaging over 2.5% pa).
So we should rejoin the EU to reach their levels of growth? Okey!
When we were in the EU we grew faster. Leaving the EU has seen us grow at EU like levels. It's one of the paradoxes of Brexit - like how Brexit gave us EU style politics.
Being in the EU doesn't mean that your growth has to align with a common EU growth rate. Free trade should increase everyone's growth, but other differences will remain.
Tommeh writing (well, his name is attached to it) in the Jerusalem Post in defence of Epstein. Not sure a) defending Epstein or b) allowing TR to do it does much for the Post's reputation, such as it is.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
It's potentially interesting, as the EU seems to have started to recognise (rather belatedly) the dangers of deindustrialization, and this is an attempt to address that. The policies, though, have the potential to be self contradictory.
..The Act is envisaged as part of the Commission’s Communication on the CID originally with the declared aim of accelerating both decarbonisation and the reindustrialisation of the European economy (it certainly assumes that recent deindustrialisation trends will be reversed). The CID Communication identified six business drivers for a ‘thriving European industrial ecosystem’: (1) affordable energy; (2) boosting demand for clean products; (3) financing; (4) circularity and access to materials; (5) global markets and international partnerships; and (6) skills and quality jobs. ..
There's some merit is having a specific buy European policy for industrial products, and they recognise the importance of energy prices (which is a bit better than our own Ed Miliband), but they also seem to be putting the decarbonisation cart ahead of the cheap energy horse, so the whole thing could run into the sand.
What's also interesting is this coincides with China actually ge to the point where they reduced carbon emissions in 2025*. Solar plus battery is now so cheap there that it's displacing fossil fuels (even as they continue to build coal fired power stations). EVs now account for over half of their market, and battery power is starting to displace ICE in heavy trucks too.
*By a very small amount, but they did so while growing power consumption significantly.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Yeah fuck Rat cliff. He is welcome to an opinion when he lives here and pays his taxes like the rest of us.
Skeleton pilot Vladylsav Heraskevych not allowed to participate at Milano Cortina 2026 after refusing to adhere to the IOC athlete expression guidelines
Having been given one final opportunity, skeleton pilot Vladylsav Heraskevych from Ukraine will not be able to start his race at the Milano Cortina 2026 Olympic Winter Games this morning. The decision followed his refusal to comply with the IOC’s Guidelines on Athlete Expression. It was taken by the jury of the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (IBSF) based on the fact that the helmet he intended to wear was not compliant with the rules.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has therefore decided with regret to withdraw his accreditation for the Milano Cortina 2026 Games.
Despite multiple exchanges and in-person meetings between the IOC and Mr Heraskevych, the last one this morning with IOC President Kirsty Coventry, he did not consider any form of compromise.
The IOC was very keen for Mr Heraskevych to compete. This is why the IOC sat down with him to look for the most respectful way to address his desire to remember his fellow athletes who have lost their lives following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The essence of this case is not about the message, it is about where he wanted to express it.
Mr Heraskevych was able to display his helmet in all training runs. The IOC also offered him the option of displaying it immediately after the competition when going through the mixed zone.
Mourning is not expressed and perceived in the same way everywhere in the world. In order to support athletes in their mourning, the IOC has put in place multifaith centres in the Olympic Villages and a place of mourning, so that grief can be expressed with dignity and respect. There is also the possibility to wear a black armband during competition under certain circumstances.
During the Olympic Games athletes are also offered a number of opportunities to mourn and express their views, including in the media mixed zones, on social media, during press conferences and in interviews.
The Guidelines on Athlete Expression were the result of a global consultation in 2021 with 3,500 athletes from all around the world. They have the full support of the IOC Athletes’ Commission and Athletes’ Commissions from International Federations and National Olympic Committees.
Mr Heraskevych has been supported by the IOC for the last three editions of the Olympic Winter Games. Each time he was an Olympic scholarship holder. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the IOC also set up a solidarity fund for Ukrainian sport to support the athletes’ preparations for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Yeah fuck Rat cliff. He is welcome to an opinion when he lives here and pays his taxes like the rest of us.
He needs to move back. Just over three quarters of the population of Monaco originate from outside Monaco. This is worse that that celebrated hellhole, London.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Yeah fuck Rat cliff. He is welcome to an opinion when he lives here and pays his taxes like the rest of us.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
Oh great another football stadium project in a country full of football stadiums.
More public money burned on the bonfire of subsidising big business.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
Man U fans should be well aware of the ability of Man U's owners to acquire an asset worth £bns without putting their hands in their own pockets. It may be a good deal for Manchester but there's a lack of transparency as always in these deals.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
Oh great another football stadium project in a country full of football stadiums.
More public money burned on the bonfire of subsidising big business.
I assume you do not know the details of the scheme
This is a huge project with 48,000 jobs, new homes and business opportunities
I'm sensing some signs of fight from Starmer. Maybe its just that he knows his time is coming to an end, so he feels he might as well start saying what he really thinks.
Picking a fight with Ratcliffe is smart politics - hes a tax dodging billionaire, who led Man Utd to their worst league finish since the 70s.
I'm sensing fright. He sounded even more robotic on Tuesday talking to some group or other (featured on BBC news at ten).
Picking a fight with Ratclife on Man Utd might have worked. Ratcliffe's view on immigration, however, is probably more in tune with the general public than most of the NPCs in Westminster can manage. Starmer included.
Tim Shipman's essay on Starmer in the Speccy is just tremendous. Shows up the utter hole at the centre of the project. Policy or philosophy both entirely absent!
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
With respect that's a totally false premise
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
With respect that's a totally false premise
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
100% chance Reform feck it up
Burnham is most effective where he is.
His bed let him lie in it
You and many in labour cannot see a winner when it is in plain sight
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
Oh great another football stadium project in a country full of football stadiums.
More public money burned on the bonfire of subsidising big business.
I'm sensing some signs of fight from Starmer. Maybe its just that he knows his time is coming to an end, so he feels he might as well start saying what he really thinks.
Picking a fight with Ratcliffe is smart politics - hes a tax dodging billionaire, who led Man Utd to their worst league finish since the 70s.
If all the people that Ratcliffe is referring to were to stop going to Old Trafford then the M6, M1 and M5 would be appreciable quieter on match day
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
Oh great another football stadium project in a country full of football stadiums.
More public money burned on the bonfire of subsidising big business.
I assume you do not know the details of the scheme
This is a huge project with 48,000 jobs, new homes and business opportunities
If Man Utd are paying for it I'm game. Happy to give them planning permission. But the historical record of these project is basically disastrous.
They'll be asking the taxpayer to go into their pocket. There are cheaper and better ways of creating a (fictional estimate alert) 48k jobs than paying for a wealthy football club to have a new stadium.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
With respect that's a totally false premise
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
100% chance Reform feck it up
Burnham is most effective where he is.
His bed let him lie in it
You and many in labour cannot see a winner when it is in plain sight
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
That's one way of describing how paying tax at rates up to 45% is fine for the little people but not for those who can easily pay it and still have more left over than anyone can spend in a lifetime.
His disgraceful treatment of Bellingham is inexplicable and based on a bias from his days in Bundesleague
Bellingham is a prima donna who, whilst being a very good footballer, is a risk to the performance of the team as he doesn’t seem able to play for England without it being about “him”. I would rather see a very highly functioning team than one where big name players are shoved in on reputation.
The biggest piece I’ve written for the Spectator - 3,500 words on how Starmer blew it. Packed with new details, telling quotes and analysis - every last bit of it from a Labour source
"Keir has never met a policy that he had a natural view on. That's why he's capable of thinking that ID cards are terrible and then ID cards are wonderful and must be compulsory and then that they mustn't be compulsory."
In response to this morning's GDP figures, Chancellor Rachel Reeves says the UK the "fastest growing G7 economy in Europe" *. “The Government has the right economic plan to build a stronger and more secure economy, cutting the cost of living, cutting the national debt and creating the conditions for growth and investment in every part of the country.”
* The specificity kinda of gives the game away.
No-one dares say that the US is going gangbusters.
Yep. Massive deficit spending does produce growth in the short term.
Not sustainable in the long term obviously, indeed a major problem.
Where's ours?
We have very high energy costs.
It is often overlooked but economies run on energy.
Indeed and a lunatic in charge of the energy portfolio who will make it worse.
Ed Conway wrote a really interesting book on raw materials and, as part of that, visited factories producing products like Nitrogen and Soda Ash in the U.K. key products we need.
In the few years since he wrote the book many of these places had closed down. Energy prices being a major problem.
The religious belief that high energy prices and the consequent discouraging of energy use are required to reach Net Zero is deeply embedded.
As we enter a world where ever increasing amounts of ‘leccy are from wind or solar this is ridiculous.
See the rules on air-con
Ditto the religious belief that making car journeys harder will reduce levels of cars on the roads.....
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Should we all be sensible and move to Monaco where the sun shines and leave boring things like paying tax to people who can't afford the several million it costs to be resident there?
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
With respect that's a totally false premise
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
100% chance Reform feck it up
Burnham is most effective where he is.
His bed let him lie in it
You and many in labour cannot see a winner when it is in plain sight
He's tried twice before and failed
Yesterday's man
Darren Jones is the future
Darren Jones was ridiculed on BBC QT re. Small Boats.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
I never said he’d moved his business out of the U.K. I was replying to Eabhals comment about businesses.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Should we all be sensible and move to Monaco where the sun shines and leave boring things like paying tax to people who can't afford the several million it costs to be resident there?
Aren’t you just a few train stops down in Villefranche ?
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Yeah fuck Rat cliff. He is welcome to an opinion when he lives here and pays his taxes like the rest of us.
Do you voice your opinions about the US?
I have paid tax in the UK, US and Ireland recently. I will, however, refrain from commenting further on the situation in Monaco.
Interesting that Ed Davey polls better than his party. I've criticised him frequently for not making more of the current opportunity, but this would suggest that the Lib Dem time in government is still acting as an anchor on their future prospects, and a different leader might not do so well.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
Is that one of those irregular verbs?
I raise taxes through a democratic mandate. He arbitrarily confiscates.
Kemi calls for the Cabinet Secretary to remain in post until the Mandelson files are released. Smart move to try and stop slippery Keir putting the fix in
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Should we all be sensible and move to Monaco where the sun shines and leave boring things like paying tax to people who can't afford the several million it costs to be resident there?
Aren’t you just a few train stops down in Villefranche ?
I am but as far as avoiding tax is concerened I might as well be camped in the Bigg Market in Newcastle
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
Kemi calls for the Cabinet Secretary to remain in post until the Mandelson files are released. Smart move to try and stop slippery Keir putting the fix in
Kemi obsession disorder
No interest in real life issues at all
Student politics
What's her fixation with noncing in the US a decade and more ago
In response to this morning's GDP figures, Chancellor Rachel Reeves says the UK the "fastest growing G7 economy in Europe" *. “The Government has the right economic plan to build a stronger and more secure economy, cutting the cost of living, cutting the national debt and creating the conditions for growth and investment in every part of the country.”
* The specificity kinda of gives the game away.
No-one dares say that the US is going gangbusters.
Yep. Massive deficit spending does produce growth in the short term.
Not sustainable in the long term obviously, indeed a major problem.
Where's ours?
We have very high energy costs.
It is often overlooked but economies run on energy.
Indeed and a lunatic in charge of the energy portfolio who will make it worse.
Ed Conway wrote a really interesting book on raw materials and, as part of that, visited factories producing products like Nitrogen and Soda Ash in the U.K. key products we need.
In the few years since he wrote the book many of these places had closed down. Energy prices being a major problem.
The religious belief that high energy prices and the consequent discouraging of energy use are required to reach Net Zero is deeply embedded.
As we enter a world where ever increasing amounts of ‘leccy are from wind or solar this is ridiculous.
See the rules on air-con
Where to you get this nonsense? UK electricity generation is going to increase by about 100 TWh over the next 10 years, probably a lot more given what is happening with solar. And that's under the supposed maniac Ed Miliband.
And frankly reducing energy use to lower prices does make basic economic sense. Part of the reason that massive increase in electricity is not going to drive prices down too much is because of increased demand from EVs, AI etc.
The institutional policy, at many levels in government is that energy usage must be driven down.
Reducing electricity prices is seen as harmful to that goal.
This is a classic example of how once you setup a culture, the policies keep on rolling.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
I never said he’d moved his business out of the U.K. I was replying to Eabhals comment about businesses.
I never said that you'd said that he'd moved his business out of the UK. I was discussing the broader issue about businesses.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
Man U fans should be well aware of the ability of Man U's owners to acquire an asset worth £bns without putting their hands in their own pockets. It may be a good deal for Manchester but there's a lack of transparency as always in these deals.
There's a massive risk that, now that the public sector is involved, they'll find themselves tapped up to plug the shortfall when costs escalate - with the threat of it not being completed if they don't do so. It could prove ruinous for Greater Manchester.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
With respect that's a totally false premise
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
100% chance Reform feck it up
Burnham is most effective where he is.
His bed let him lie in it
You and many in labour cannot see a winner when it is in plain sight
He's tried twice before and failed
Yesterday's man
Darren Jones is the future
Darren Jones was ridiculed on BBC QT re. Small Boats.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
With respect that's a totally false premise
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
100% chance Reform feck it up
Burnham is most effective where he is.
His bed let him lie in it
You and many in labour cannot see a winner when it is in plain sight
He's tried twice before and failed
Yesterday's man
Darren Jones is the future
Darren Jones was ridiculed on BBC QT re. Small Boats.
Is that seriously all you've got.
Seriously.
Let's find one pure unadulterated virgin non error person shall we
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from such individuals, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
In the long run, it would be better for the UK if we reduced wealth and income inequality.
Interesting that Ed Davey polls better than his party. I've criticised him frequently for not making more of the current opportunity, but this would suggest that the Lib Dem time in government is still acting as an anchor on their future prospects, and a different leader might not do so well.
Or they might do better, since they wouldn't have been in that government ?
You can't simply assume they'd inherit all of the negatives and not bring any positives of their own.
Another Russian oil refinery burning today after a Ukrainian strike. Second in two days. It looks like whatever reason there was for a recent pause on these strikes has now disappeared.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
That would be an extraordinarily isolationist policy, and would require radical change given the huge about of UK assets owned overseas.
His disgraceful treatment of Bellingham is inexplicable and based on a bias from his days in Bundesleague
Bellingham is a prima donna who, whilst being a very good footballer, is a risk to the performance of the team as he doesn’t seem able to play for England without it being about “him”. I would rather see a very highly functioning team than one where big name players are shoved in on reputation.
Thats complete and utter hogwash
The greatest natural talent since Duncan Edwards
Should be the first name on the team sheet with Kane and the team built around them.
In response to this morning's GDP figures, Chancellor Rachel Reeves says the UK the "fastest growing G7 economy in Europe" *. “The Government has the right economic plan to build a stronger and more secure economy, cutting the cost of living, cutting the national debt and creating the conditions for growth and investment in every part of the country.”
* The specificity kinda of gives the game away.
No-one dares say that the US is going gangbusters.
Yep. Massive deficit spending does produce growth in the short term.
Not sustainable in the long term obviously, indeed a major problem.
Where's ours?
We have very high energy costs.
It is often overlooked but economies run on energy.
Indeed and a lunatic in charge of the energy portfolio who will make it worse.
Ed Conway wrote a really interesting book on raw materials and, as part of that, visited factories producing products like Nitrogen and Soda Ash in the U.K. key products we need.
In the few years since he wrote the book many of these places had closed down. Energy prices being a major problem.
The religious belief that high energy prices and the consequent discouraging of energy use are required to reach Net Zero is deeply embedded.
As we enter a world where ever increasing amounts of ‘leccy are from wind or solar this is ridiculous.
See the rules on air-con
Where to you get this nonsense? UK electricity generation is going to increase by about 100 TWh over the next 10 years, probably a lot more given what is happening with solar. And that's under the supposed maniac Ed Miliband.
And frankly reducing energy use to lower prices does make basic economic sense. Part of the reason that massive increase in electricity is not going to drive prices down too much is because of increased demand from EVs, AI etc.
The institutional policy, at many levels in government is that energy usage must be driven down.
Reducing electricity prices is seen as harmful to that goal.
This is a classic example of how once you setup a culture, the policies keep on rolling.
This made sense when the grid was 70% coal fired.
Is there any evidence for this? And surely reduced energy costs is the result of such a policy. And frankly if it exists it's a sensible policy - investing in a machine or building or lorry that uses less energy, and reduces your costs, is what it is known as productivity growth.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
Exactly so. If we want to raise money from the population more equally then the population has to have the means to pay tax more equally.
This is one of the biggest failures of New Labour. They should have been focusing on making the population rich enough to pay taxes, rather than being intensely relaxed about the super-rich keeping the proceeds of growth to themselves.
Better news for Starmer with YG where a rally round the leader effect has somewhat improved his favourability. Also note Badenochs net strong or somewhat positive have now equalled Farages, although he has more 'strong positives'
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
Nothing to do with mysogony
She's useless
She lies She has no credible policy She is lazy, Tories have told her that
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, only for as long as Western governments tolerate it, which is as long as its existence does not overly irritate them.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
That would be an extraordinarily isolationist policy, and would require radical change given the huge about of UK assets owned overseas.
Essentially unworkable.
I know, I know. I'm just setting out the conundrum - the end-stage of coddling the rich is not pretty. It's sees 90% of the population with low income, paying no tax, entirely at the whim of an ultra-wealthy highly mobile elite. Only 60% of Scottish adults pay income tax already.
Kemi calls for the Cabinet Secretary to remain in post until the Mandelson files are released. Smart move to try and stop slippery Keir putting the fix in
Kemi obsession disorder
No interest in real life issues at all
Student politics
What's her fixation with noncing in the US a decade and more ago
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
Nothing to do with mysogony
She's useless
She lies She has no credible policy She is lazy, Tories have told her that
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
Nothing to do with mysogony
She's useless
She lies She has no credible policy She is lazy, Tories have told her that
Misogyny
Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejeudice including devaluing women
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Should we all be sensible and move to Monaco where the sun shines and leave boring things like paying tax to people who can't afford the several million it costs to be resident there?
Aren’t you just a few train stops down in Villefranche ?
I am but as far as avoiding tax is concerened I might as well be camped in the Bigg Market in Newcastle
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
Nothing to do with mysogony
She's useless
She lies She has no credible policy She is lazy, Tories have told her that
Yawn
squareroot2, might I suggest a coffee or some other caffeinated product?
His disgraceful treatment of Bellingham is inexplicable and based on a bias from his days in Bundesleague
Bellingham is a prima donna who, whilst being a very good footballer, is a risk to the performance of the team as he doesn’t seem able to play for England without it being about “him”. I would rather see a very highly functioning team than one where big name players are shoved in on reputation.
Thats complete and utter hogwash
The greatest natural talent since Duncan Edwards
Should be the first name on the team sheet with Kane and the team built around them.
It’s absolute shit
Jude Bellingham is a phenomenal player and a decent person too.
He’s delivering week in week out. He does not live off his reputation.
In response to this morning's GDP figures, Chancellor Rachel Reeves says the UK the "fastest growing G7 economy in Europe" *. “The Government has the right economic plan to build a stronger and more secure economy, cutting the cost of living, cutting the national debt and creating the conditions for growth and investment in every part of the country.”
* The specificity kinda of gives the game away.
No-one dares say that the US is going gangbusters.
Yep. Massive deficit spending does produce growth in the short term.
Not sustainable in the long term obviously, indeed a major problem.
Where's ours?
We have very high energy costs.
It is often overlooked but economies run on energy.
Indeed and a lunatic in charge of the energy portfolio who will make it worse.
Ed Conway wrote a really interesting book on raw materials and, as part of that, visited factories producing products like Nitrogen and Soda Ash in the U.K. key products we need.
In the few years since he wrote the book many of these places had closed down. Energy prices being a major problem.
The religious belief that high energy prices and the consequent discouraging of energy use are required to reach Net Zero is deeply embedded.
As we enter a world where ever increasing amounts of ‘leccy are from wind or solar this is ridiculous.
See the rules on air-con
Where to you get this nonsense? UK electricity generation is going to increase by about 100 TWh over the next 10 years, probably a lot more given what is happening with solar. And that's under the supposed maniac Ed Miliband.
And frankly reducing energy use to lower prices does make basic economic sense. Part of the reason that massive increase in electricity is not going to drive prices down too much is because of increased demand from EVs, AI etc.
The institutional policy, at many levels in government is that energy usage must be driven down.
Reducing electricity prices is seen as harmful to that goal.
This is a classic example of how once you setup a culture, the policies keep on rolling.
This made sense when the grid was 70% coal fired.
Is there any evidence for this? And surely reduced energy costs is the result of such a policy. And frankly if it exists it's a sensible policy - investing in a machine or building or lorry that uses less energy, and reduces your costs, is what it is known as productivity growth.
But closing down businesses isn't, and prices have contributed to the demise of manufacturing industry.
In theory renewables - particularly solar - ought to drive down prices. In practice that has not happened here. And large energy uses tend to pay more rather than less for their electricity.
China provides alone example of how a virtuous circle of increasing energy usage, falling prices and increasing renewables can come about. But that has required a decades long plan and extraordinary investment in renewables manufacturing. (And their nuclear build for full sized power stations is also highly efficient - benefitting from the economies of scale we're still at the theory stage for SMRs.)
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
With respect that's a totally false premise
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
100% chance Reform feck it up
Burnham is most effective where he is.
His bed let him lie in it
You and many in labour cannot see a winner when it is in plain sight
He's tried twice before and failed
Yesterday's man
Darren Jones is the future
Darren Jones was ridiculed on BBC QT re. Small Boats.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
With respect that's a totally false premise
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
100% chance Reform feck it up
Burnham is most effective where he is.
His bed let him lie in it
You and many in labour cannot see a winner when it is in plain sight
He's tried twice before and failed
Yesterday's man
Darren Jones is the future
Darren Jones was ridiculed on BBC QT re. Small Boats.
Is that seriously all you've got.
Seriously.
Let's find one pure unadulterated virgin non error person shall we
He was ridiculed re his stupid comments on small boats, to be fair.
Putting that aside he is one of the few Labour cabinet ministers who, I think, has performed well and clearly is part of the future if he wants to be a part of it.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
Ratcliffe, AIUI, hasn't moved his businesses out of the UK. He's just moved himself out of the UK by going to (a.k.a. colonising) Monaco.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
Ratcliffe and Burnham are working together on a 7 billion pound stadium and homes development which, outside of this unnecesary row, is a demonstration of just what labour are missing by excluding Burnham from the chance of a seat in the HOC
Oh great another football stadium project in a country full of football stadiums.
More public money burned on the bonfire of subsidising big business.
I assume you do not know the details of the scheme
This is a huge project with 48,000 jobs, new homes and business opportunities
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
Nothing to do with mysogony
She's useless
She lies She has no credible policy She is lazy, Tories have told her that
Misogyny
Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejeudice including devaluing women
Online - slur, name calling, belittling
I've praised women of all parties, colours religion on here in a short time.
I've passed negative comments about males of Ann parties colours and religions on here in a short time.
The fact that I fundamentally disagree with the fake over the top and ramping up of someone who is in my opinion useless is not mysogony it is a genuinely held view, including by some in her own party
I see far far worse attacks on Angela Rayner that you quite happily wave by
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, only for as long as Western governments tolerate it, which is as long as its existence does not overly irritate them.
Indeed so, its very existence moves the income tax Laffer curve to the left across Europe.
The UK is getting towards a very dangerous situation where the median income is a net receiver of public money. It’s probably already past the point at which an election-winning minority of people are net receivers of public money and can vote for ‘others’ to pay all the tax.
We know how this ends up, exactly the same as any other socialist experiment, which is why Monaco is good at keeping politicians in check across Europe.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from such individuals, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
Except for the first sentence, none of that (unsourced and unsupported) is true. Income inequality has not significantly increased over the past generation - the Gini coefficient has hovered around 0.35 all that time. Pre-tax income inequality has actually declined since the financial crisis from 0.54 in 2007 to 0.51 now.
The main reason an unreasonably high proportion of income tax is now raised from fewer individuals is that the government has taken various measures to soak the rich and benefit the unproductive without raising headline rates (though Gordon Brown of course introduced a top rate of 45%) and he raised the personal allowance well above inflation. In addition, the current government has greatly increased the headline rates of capital gains and dividend taxes, which are disproportionately paid by the most productive.
We should be rolling out the welcome mat to such individuals whether or not they pay tax - even if they don't pay a penny, the wealthy disproportionately invest and spend where they live. This creates jobs and generates tax revenue indirectly, and is why tax havens such as the Cayman Islands or Luxembourg are so much better off than surrounding countries. Far from endangering democracy, the resulting prosperity supports it. And the half-baked politics of greed and envy undermines it.
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
What did Kemi say? I’ve looked around and not found anything. Stride spoke, but agreed with the concerns, not the way it was said.
I’m agreeing with the PB Tories posting it’s a big Labour pile on Ratty simply to change the media narrative. Farage says the same thing everyday, their election candidate Goodwin says even worse.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, only for as long as Western governments tolerate it, which is as long as its existence does not overly irritate them.
Indeed so, its very existence moves the income tax Laffer curve to the left across Europe.
The UK is getting towards a very dangerous situation where the median income is a net receiver of public money. It’s probably already past the point at which an election-winning minority of people are net receivers of public money and can vote for ‘others’ to pay all the tax.
We know how this ends up, exactly the same as any other socialist experiment, which is why Monaco is good to keeping politicians in check across Europe.
During the '50s, a period much lauded by politicians on the right, there was greater income and wealth equality. Some argue that the threat of Communism kept capitalists more invested in ensuring the wealth was spread around.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
I think that anyone has the right to be resentful if they are seeing most of their income being taken in tax (outside of national emergency), and to be hostile towards punitive marginal tax rates.
But, I don't think any rich person has any right to complain, if they see 30-40% of their income going in tax, in a rich world country. Living in a country that is democratic, wealthy, peaceful, with some excellent educational, and cultural institutions, is an immense privilege, and one which you should not resent paying for.
One Minister takes aim at a "posse of old baldies throwing dirt on a brilliant woman for having a bit of chutzpah". They add: "She’s restless, focused, creative and understands the scale of the crisis this country faces."
But someone else who worked with her says: "The only thing you need to know about Antonia is that she has a mock cover of Vogue with her own face on it."
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
Nothing to do with mysogony
She's useless
She lies She has no credible policy She is lazy, Tories have told her that
Yawn
squareroot2, might I suggest a coffee or some other caffeinated product?
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
I think that anyone has the right to be resentful if they are seeing most of their income being taken in tax (outside of national emergency), and to be hostile towards punitive marginal tax rates.
But, I don't think any rich person has any right to complain, if they see 30-40% of their income going in tax, in a rich world country. Living in a country that is democratic, wealthy, peaceful, with some excellent educational, and cultural institutions, is an immense privilege, and one which you should not resent paying for.
Indeed so. Which is why you start to see people complaining once tax rates go above 40%.
1. I think he gets more publicity by being DQed than by racing into 12th or whatever 2. The panel that made the decision includes athletes from other disciplines 3. He can protest at the village and in the press areas, just not on the track 4. Where they did mess up was ejecting him from the games completely and revoking his credentials
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from such individuals, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
Except for the first sentence, none of that (unsourced and unsupported) is true. Income inequality has not significantly increased over the past generation - the Gini coefficient has hovered around 0.35 all that time. Pre-tax income inequality has actually declined since the financial crisis from 0.54 in 2007 to 0.51 now.
The main reason an unreasonably high proportion of income tax is now raised from fewer individuals is that the government has taken various measures to soak the rich and benefit the unproductive without raising headline rates (though Gordon Brown of course introduced a top rate of 45%) and he raised the personal allowance well above inflation. In addition, the current government has greatly increased the headline rates of capital gains and dividend taxes, which are disproportionately paid by the most productive.
We should be rolling out the welcome mat to such individuals whether or not they pay tax - even if they don't pay a penny, the wealthy disproportionately invest and spend where they live. This creates jobs and generates tax revenue indirectly, and is why tax havens such as the Cayman Islands or Luxembourg are so much better off than surrounding countries. Far from endangering democracy, the resulting prosperity supports it. And the half-baked politics of greed and envy undermines it.
But the Gini coefficient was 0.28 when I was born in the seventies. There was a big rise in the mid-eighties. Your analysis is too restricted by just going back to 2007.
Your last paragraph promotes trickle down. Trickle down doesn't work. It's a myth we need to put behind us.
His disgraceful treatment of Bellingham is inexplicable and based on a bias from his days in Bundesleague
Bellingham is a prima donna who, whilst being a very good footballer, is a risk to the performance of the team as he doesn’t seem able to play for England without it being about “him”. I would rather see a very highly functioning team than one where big name players are shoved in on reputation.
Thats complete and utter hogwash
The greatest natural talent since Duncan Edwards
Should be the first name on the team sheet with Kane and the team built around them.
It’s absolute shit
Jude Bellingham is a phenomenal player and a decent person too.
He’s delivering week in week out. He does not live off his reputation.
He’s not delivering week in week out, it’s actually going wrong for him at club level as well as international level. There is something wrong there, and Tuchel spotted it straight away.
These things do happen - there was a cricketer called Peterson who wouldn’t integrate in a dressing room and become with the band of brothers. In football Neymar was the same, and the Brazil dressing room turned against him.
Jude is not being taken to the World Cup. That is what this extension says to me, the employers backing the manager in not taking Jude to the World Cup.
His disgraceful treatment of Bellingham is inexplicable and based on a bias from his days in Bundesleague
Bellingham is a prima donna who, whilst being a very good footballer, is a risk to the performance of the team as he doesn’t seem able to play for England without it being about “him”. I would rather see a very highly functioning team than one where big name players are shoved in on reputation.
Thats complete and utter hogwash
The greatest natural talent since Duncan Edwards
Should be the first name on the team sheet with Kane and the team built around them.
It’s absolute shit
Jude Bellingham is a phenomenal player and a decent person too.
He’s delivering week in week out. He does not live off his reputation.
Let me just widely share something about Jude and his family that Taz will no doubt be aware of but many won't
Aside from the fact he joined Birmingham City at 7 and often played 2 to 3 years in advance of his age range.
He made his debut and breakthrough at 16 in the midst of Covid, the Club near bankruptcy, half of the ground closed due to discovery of contaminated backfill and poor building. A transfer embargo and points deducted.
As bad as it could be.
His parents turned down and refused huge offers from PL and Global academies from age 10.
They could have raked in millions
His dad a copper, his mom a nurse. His brother Jobe some thought better than Jude, they devoted their lives to.
Jude insisted he stayed with his boyhood Club until he could sign a professional contract. The family were offered tens of millions. They refused.
Jude signed his first pro contract on his 17th birthday, 3 days later he joined Dortmund for a reputed £21,000,000.
That money went to the Club he loves and supports. There would be no Club but for that.
Granted he will make millions, his parents will benefit but for years they literally turned away millions.
In this cynical materialistic age that is a massive endorsement of him and his family.
I remain convinced that his aim is to return to England only when his club are in a position to offer him a premiership place.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
I think that anyone has the right to be resentful if they are seeing most of their income being taken in tax (outside of national emergency), and to be hostile towards punitive marginal tax rates.
But, I don't think any rich person has any right to complain, if they see 30-40% of their income going in tax, in a rich world country. Living in a country that is democratic, wealthy, peaceful, with some excellent educational, and cultural institutions, is an immense privilege, and one which you should not resent paying for.
Indeed so. Which is why you start to see people complaining once tax rates go above 40%.
The marginal rate for a typical graduate on £30K or £40K is 20% IT, + 8% NI, + 9% loan. 37%. Too high.
In response to this morning's GDP figures, Chancellor Rachel Reeves says the UK the "fastest growing G7 economy in Europe" *. “The Government has the right economic plan to build a stronger and more secure economy, cutting the cost of living, cutting the national debt and creating the conditions for growth and investment in every part of the country.”
* The specificity kinda of gives the game away.
No-one dares say that the US is going gangbusters.
Yep. Massive deficit spending does produce growth in the short term.
Not sustainable in the long term obviously, indeed a major problem.
Where's ours?
We have very high energy costs.
It is often overlooked but economies run on energy.
Indeed and a lunatic in charge of the energy portfolio who will make it worse.
Ed Conway wrote a really interesting book on raw materials and, as part of that, visited factories producing products like Nitrogen and Soda Ash in the U.K. key products we need.
In the few years since he wrote the book many of these places had closed down. Energy prices being a major problem.
The religious belief that high energy prices and the consequent discouraging of energy use are required to reach Net Zero is deeply embedded.
As we enter a world where ever increasing amounts of ‘leccy are from wind or solar this is ridiculous.
See the rules on air-con
Where to you get this nonsense? UK electricity generation is going to increase by about 100 TWh over the next 10 years, probably a lot more given what is happening with solar. And that's under the supposed maniac Ed Miliband.
And frankly reducing energy use to lower prices does make basic economic sense. Part of the reason that massive increase in electricity is not going to drive prices down too much is because of increased demand from EVs, AI etc.
The institutional policy, at many levels in government is that energy usage must be driven down.
Reducing electricity prices is seen as harmful to that goal.
This is a classic example of how once you setup a culture, the policies keep on rolling.
This made sense when the grid was 70% coal fired.
Is there any evidence for this? And surely reduced energy costs is the result of such a policy. And frankly if it exists it's a sensible policy - investing in a machine or building or lorry that uses less energy, and reduces your costs, is what it is known as productivity growth.
But closing down businesses isn't, and prices have contributed to the demise of manufacturing industry.
In theory renewables - particularly solar - ought to drive down prices. In practice that has not happened here. And large energy uses tend to pay more rather than less for their electricity.
China provides alone example of how a virtuous circle of increasing energy usage, falling prices and increasing renewables can come about. But that has required a decades long plan and extraordinary investment in renewables manufacturing. (And their nuclear build for full sized power stations is also highly efficient - benefitting from the economies of scale we're still at the theory stage for SMRs.)
The domestic production of renewables technology is a separate issue.
But we have an electricity “market” where higher prices are baked into the design. With a attempts to reduce those prices for domestic users, when the political pain peaks.
Kemi must be livid with Jim Ratcliffe. She had Sir Keir in her sights, and then he came along with this mega-distraction and united the Left.
Ratcliffe is just a filler act before the next elevation of nonce pals development
Kemis on half term now. The x bot is switched on, she'll be back Monday 23rd
I have already told you she has responded, but your misogyny is not a good look at all and feeds into the labour women's complaint of a mans club attiude in labour
Nothing to do with mysogony
She's useless
She lies She has no credible policy She is lazy, Tories have told her that
Yawn
squareroot2, might I suggest a coffee or some other caffeinated product?
One Minister takes aim at a "posse of old baldies throwing dirt on a brilliant woman for having a bit of chutzpah". They add: "She’s restless, focused, creative and understands the scale of the crisis this country faces."
But someone else who worked with her says: "The only thing you need to know about Antonia is that she has a mock cover of Vogue with her own face on it."
Don’t often think of the Civil Service as being more competitive, bitchy and political than actual PMQs.
I would be a lot more sympathetic to Ratcliffe if he wasn't someone who fucked off to Monaco to avoid tax.
Yet we still have to listen to his whining. Isn't he an immigrant himself then?
That's what you get with Labour. The rich fuck off to avoid paying ludicrously high taxes.
See California for more details, where they proposed a ‘billionaire tax’ on unrealised capital gains, and half of the dozen richest people in the state moved to Florida or Texas. It’s not even passed yet but it’s already causing emigration.
Yet they’re the selfish ones for not wanting to give their money to the state 🤷♂️
FPT: The underlying theory is that richer people pay quite a lot of tax because their wealth/income is only possible because the state educates their labour, builds the roads and railways their goods move around on, provide healthcare as their staff age, provide a state pension and and so on. This is even more stark in the UK where we have millions of working people on benefits - an effective subsidy to employers.
There are a number of large corporations and wealthy individuals freeloading on the state in the UK by avoiding taxes. They are acting rationally, but coldly, and I think it’s fair to describe them as selfish as a shorthand for that kind of behaviour. Ensuring they pay their keep is in the interest of us all - particularly small businesses who can't avoid taxes in the same way, and get crowded out, and people like me earning a good wage but paying a 56% marginal rate.
Avoiding taxes is perfectly legal and rational. We pay too much. Jim Ratcliffe is sensible to manage his tax like it. We need to encourage high earners to stay and not stigmatise them.
The fact you clearly pay too much tax from your income doesn’t mean others need to be punished more.
Creating employment creates tax and NI revenues and businesses also pay local taxes to local authorities, corporation tax and all other manner of taxes. They also create work opportunities for smaller businesses and sole traders..
It is not a case of rich employers just taking money. If the state didn’t educate Labour or put in infrastructure then employers would go elsewhere. They don’t have to come here and we’d miss their money. Many employers, like my last company, actively,put back into the community and also give time, free, to go to events to support young people to go into STEM industries. They do this because they want to not because there’s a tax advantage.
We should be cutting taxes and doing more to attract businesses not stigmatising them.
From the latest available DWP statistics reported in November 2025 (covering data around October 2025): • There were approximately 2.2 million working people on Universal Credit.
Many people don’t want more than 16 hours due to loss of not only UC but other benefits such as council tax reduction, housing benefit and many others.
Politicians have created this system. They did so to make people reliant in part on the state. Blame employers all you like.
I pay more tax because people like Ratcliffe make their billions and then dodge paying their taxes. Its estimated he saved £4bn by 'moving to Monaco'.
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
Luckily Monaco exists, as a check on Western governments, that they can’t arbitrarily confiscate ever-increasing amounts of tax from a smaller and smaller number of people.
UK tax rates on the wealthy have not increased. The reason such a large proportion of revenues come from this small group is because such a large proportion of income now accrues to them. This gives them an enormous amount of power, because the nation's finances are entirely dependent on them not slouching off. This is very dangerous for a democracy.
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
Is that true ? From my own perspective, as someone looking sometime in the next few years to retire from and sell a UK engineering business worth high 7 figures, my tax position has become significantly worse in the last decade or so: - corporation tax rate up by a quarter; - dividend taxation rates up by an average of about a fifth; - CGT bill on sale of business likely more than doubled (mostly due to entrepreneur relief value being reduced from max £1.8m to max £60k); - clampdown on salary sacrifice for pension; - new IHT liability if business kept in estate instead; - new IHT liability on pension fund, probably at effective rate of 60% as it will be the only asset triggering clawback of residence nil rate band.
That's before analysing the more subtle impacts of NI and other changes on profitability.
And with Starmer a dead man walking, a wealth tax, even on the unrealised value of the business, looks like a real possibility.
I love living in the UK but it now has nearly the highest aggregate taxation of successful owner managed businesses in Europe: 25% CT then 39.1% IT on dividends. It would take me about 6 months to move the whole business to one of half a dozen other countries in Europe where its tax bill and mine would be lower, the labour pool is cheaper and no less skilled, and some post-Brexit hassles would go away. I haven't done it because there is more to life than money, but at some point it starts to feel like government is taking the p*ss...
The position Labour inherited was not their fault, but they've had a year and a half to show whether their business/growth friendly noises meant anything and it's not been great...
(Not one I'm following. A Canadian just reminded me of The Littlest Hobo, a sort of Skippy the Bush Kangaroo without the sophisticated Australian actors, minus the kangar, plus a empathetic pooch.)
Comments
https://www.gov.uk/leasehold-property/service-charges-and-other-expenses
Having been there and done that, the biggest downsides with flats are your fellow residents, BTLs who don't pay service charges, do nothing about their anti-social tenants, people too lazy to put their binbags in the bins, clear up after themselves, think there's a refuse fairy who collects old mattresses etc etc
and if you do get coerced into helping with the building management it gets even worse, the service charge limits aren't index-linked, limits are still £250 one off or £100/annum long running service per flat. So for a 20 flat block any maintenance costing more than £5k or £2k pa needs a section 20 consultation. That's a full tendering and evaluation process with 20 stakeholders, 3 stages, consultation periods, the works.
Referendum on immigration limit could threaten EU agreements and cripple economy, say Swiss businesses"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/feb/12/switzerland-to-vote-on-far-right-proposal-to-cap-population-at-10-million
Picking a fight with Ratcliffe is smart politics - hes a tax dodging billionaire, who led Man Utd to their worst league finish since the 70s.
It's great when companies put back into the community. That used to be something nearly all companies did. Unfortunately, the mobility of capital has made it less common. Big tech companies happily take money out of communities and put nothing back, with the company officially being based on the other side of the world or in a tax haven.
https://x.com/Jerusalem_Post/status/2021648657859117462?s=20
So basically every income taxpayer in the country is paying an extra £100 thanks to Jim.
The policies, though, have the potential to be self contradictory.
..The Act is envisaged as part of the Commission’s Communication on the CID originally with the declared aim of accelerating both decarbonisation and the reindustrialisation of the European economy (it certainly assumes that recent deindustrialisation trends will be reversed). The CID Communication identified six business drivers for a ‘thriving European industrial ecosystem’: (1) affordable energy; (2) boosting demand for clean products; (3) financing; (4) circularity and access to materials; (5) global markets and international partnerships; and (6) skills and quality jobs. ..
There's some merit is having a specific buy European policy for industrial products, and they recognise the importance of energy prices (which is a bit better than our own Ed Miliband), but they also seem to be putting the decarbonisation cart ahead of the cheap energy horse, so the whole thing could run into the sand.
What's also interesting is this coincides with China actually ge to the point where they reduced carbon emissions in 2025*. Solar plus battery is now so cheap there that it's displacing fossil fuels (even as they continue to build coal fired power stations). EVs now account for over half of their market, and battery power is starting to displace ICE in heavy trucks too.
*By a very small amount, but they did so while growing power consumption significantly.
https://x.com/iocmedia/status/2021858874702127105
Skeleton pilot Vladylsav Heraskevych not allowed to participate at Milano Cortina 2026 after refusing to adhere to the IOC athlete expression guidelines
Having been given one final opportunity, skeleton pilot Vladylsav Heraskevych from Ukraine will not be able to start his race at the Milano Cortina 2026 Olympic Winter Games this morning. The decision followed his refusal to comply with the IOC’s Guidelines on Athlete Expression. It was taken by the jury of the International Bobsleigh and Skeleton Federation (IBSF) based on the fact that the helmet he intended to wear was not compliant with the rules.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has therefore decided with regret to withdraw his accreditation for the Milano Cortina 2026 Games.
Despite multiple exchanges and in-person meetings between the IOC and Mr Heraskevych, the last one this morning with IOC President Kirsty Coventry, he did not consider any form of compromise.
The IOC was very keen for Mr Heraskevych to compete. This is why the IOC sat down with him to look for the most respectful way to address his desire to remember his fellow athletes who have lost their lives following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The essence of this case is not about the message, it is about where he wanted to express it.
Mr Heraskevych was able to display his helmet in all training runs. The IOC also offered him the option of displaying it immediately after the competition when going through the mixed zone.
Mourning is not expressed and perceived in the same way everywhere in the world. In order to support athletes in their mourning, the IOC has put in place multifaith centres in the Olympic Villages and a place of mourning, so that grief can be expressed with dignity and respect. There is also the possibility to wear a black armband during competition under certain circumstances.
During the Olympic Games athletes are also offered a number of opportunities to mourn and express their views, including in the media mixed zones, on social media, during press conferences and in interviews.
The Guidelines on Athlete Expression were the result of a global consultation in 2021 with 3,500 athletes from all around the world. They have the full support of the IOC Athletes’ Commission and Athletes’ Commissions from International Federations and National Olympic Committees.
Mr Heraskevych has been supported by the IOC for the last three editions of the Olympic Winter Games. Each time he was an Olympic scholarship holder. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the IOC also set up a solidarity fund for Ukrainian sport to support the athletes’ preparations for the Paris 2024 Olympic Games.
More public money burned on the bonfire of subsidising big business.
Am I right and why - Ratcliffe effect or new poll
Or am I misreading the betting which I am not that familiar with
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/aug/19/manchester-united-new-stadium-public-funding
Man U fans should be well aware of the ability of Man U's owners to acquire an asset worth £bns without putting their hands in their own pockets.
It may be a good deal for Manchester but there's a lack of transparency as always in these deals.
This is a huge project with 48,000 jobs, new homes and business opportunities
https://www.trafford.gov.uk/news/2026/old-trafford-regeneration-mayoral-development-corporation-officially-launched
Picking a fight with Ratclife on Man Utd might have worked. Ratcliffe's view on immigration, however, is probably more in tune with the general public than most of the NPCs in Westminster can manage. Starmer included.
Tim Shipman's essay on Starmer in the Speccy is just tremendous. Shows up the utter hole at the centre of the project. Policy or philosophy both entirely absent!
If Burnham had stood in Gorton 20% chance he'd be in Hoc
100% he would not be Manchester mayor
80% chance Reform right now would win mayoral election
100% chance Reform feck it up
Burnham is most effective where he is.
His bed let him lie in it
They'll be asking the taxpayer to go into their pocket. There are cheaper and better ways of creating a (fictional estimate alert) 48k jobs than paying for a wealthy football club to have a new stadium.
Just signed England contract to 2028
His disgraceful treatment of Bellingham is inexplicable and based on a bias from his days in Bundesleague
Yesterday's man
Darren Jones is the future
The biggest piece I’ve written for the Spectator - 3,500 words on how Starmer blew it. Packed with new details, telling quotes and analysis - every last bit of it from a Labour source
"Keir has never met a policy that he had a natural view on. That's why he's capable of thinking that ID cards are terrible and then ID cards are wonderful and must be compulsory and then that they mustn't be compulsory."
I raise taxes through a democratic mandate.
He arbitrarily confiscates.
Smart move to try and stop slippery Keir putting the fix in
In the long run it would be better for the UK economy if we were to automatically strip British Citizenship from those who avoid UK tax, and prohibit them from owning any UK property or businesses, or deriving any income from them. Then they'd actually have a stake in building the economy rather than leeching off it.
No interest in real life issues at all
Student politics
What's her fixation with noncing in the US a decade and more ago
Reducing electricity prices is seen as harmful to that goal.
This is a classic example of how once you setup a culture, the policies keep on rolling.
This made sense when the grid was 70% coal fired.
Seriously.
Let's find one pure unadulterated virgin non error person shall we
You can't simply assume they'd inherit all of the negatives and not bring any positives of their own.
Essentially unworkable.
The greatest natural talent since Duncan Edwards
Should be the first name on the team sheet with Kane and the team built around them.
Honestly some of this stuff is just deranged.
This is one of the biggest failures of New Labour. They should have been focusing on making the population rich enough to pay taxes, rather than being intensely relaxed about the super-rich keeping the proceeds of growth to themselves.
Better news for Starmer with YG where a rally round the leader effect has somewhat improved his favourability.
Also note Badenochs net strong or somewhat positive have now equalled Farages, although he has more 'strong positives'
She's useless
She lies
She has no credible policy
She is lazy, Tories have told her that
Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejeudice including devaluing women
Online - slur, name calling, belittling
Jude Bellingham is a phenomenal player and a decent person too.
He’s delivering week in week out. He does not live off his reputation.
In theory renewables - particularly solar - ought to drive down prices. In practice that has not happened here. And large energy uses tend to pay more rather than less for their electricity.
China provides alone example of how a virtuous circle of increasing energy usage, falling prices and increasing renewables can come about.
But that has required a decades long plan and extraordinary investment in renewables manufacturing.
(And their nuclear build for full sized power stations is also highly efficient - benefitting from the economies of scale we're still at the theory stage for SMRs.)
Putting that aside he is one of the few Labour cabinet ministers who, I think, has performed well and clearly is part of the future if he wants to be a part of it.
I've passed negative comments about males of Ann parties colours and religions on here in a short time.
The fact that I fundamentally disagree with the fake over the top and ramping up of someone who is in my opinion useless is not mysogony it is a genuinely held view, including by some in her own party
I see far far worse attacks on Angela Rayner that you quite happily wave by
The UK is getting towards a very dangerous situation where the median income is a net receiver of public money. It’s probably already past the point at which an election-winning minority of people are net receivers of public money and can vote for ‘others’ to pay all the tax.
We know how this ends up, exactly the same as any other socialist experiment, which is why Monaco is good at keeping politicians in check across Europe.
The main reason an unreasonably high proportion of income tax is now raised from fewer individuals is that the government has taken various measures to soak the rich and benefit the unproductive without raising headline rates (though Gordon Brown of course introduced a top rate of 45%) and he raised the personal allowance well above inflation. In addition, the current government has greatly increased the headline rates of capital gains and dividend taxes, which are disproportionately paid by the most productive.
We should be rolling out the welcome mat to such individuals whether or not they pay tax - even if they don't pay a penny, the wealthy disproportionately invest and spend where they live. This creates jobs and generates tax revenue indirectly, and is why tax havens such as the Cayman Islands or Luxembourg are so much better off than surrounding countries. Far from endangering democracy, the resulting prosperity supports it. And the half-baked politics of greed and envy undermines it.
Uniting the left behind unrestricted immigration will lead to a Reform majority.
Stride spoke, but agreed with the concerns, not the way it was said.
I’m agreeing with the PB Tories posting it’s a big Labour pile on Ratty simply to change the media narrative. Farage says the same thing everyday, their election candidate Goodwin says even worse.
But, I don't think any rich person has any right to complain, if they see 30-40% of their income going in tax, in a rich world country. Living in a country that is democratic, wealthy, peaceful, with some excellent educational, and cultural institutions, is an immense privilege, and one which you should not resent paying for.
Mega briefing war this morning on Antonia Romeo:
One Minister takes aim at a "posse of old baldies throwing dirt on a brilliant woman for having a bit of chutzpah". They add: "She’s restless, focused, creative and understands the scale of the crisis this country faces."
But someone else who worked with her says: "The only thing you need to know about Antonia is that she has a mock cover of Vogue with her own face on it."
1. I think he gets more publicity by being DQed than by racing into 12th or whatever
2. The panel that made the decision includes athletes from other disciplines
3. He can protest at the village and in the press areas, just not on the track
4. Where they did mess up was ejecting him from the games completely and revoking his credentials
Your last paragraph promotes trickle down. Trickle down doesn't work. It's a myth we need to put behind us.
TLDR News Report: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJq9QOo8Ak0
Article:https://euroweeklynews.com/2026/02/03/goodbye-visa-and-mastercard-europes-new-payment-system-is-coming/
There is something wrong there, and Tuchel spotted it straight away.
These things do happen - there was a cricketer called Peterson who wouldn’t integrate in a dressing room and become with the band of brothers. In football Neymar was the same, and the Brazil dressing room turned against him.
Jude is not being taken to the World Cup. That is what this extension says to me, the employers backing the manager in not taking Jude to the World Cup.
Aside from the fact he joined Birmingham City at 7 and often played 2 to 3 years in advance of his age range.
He made his debut and breakthrough at 16 in the midst of Covid, the Club near bankruptcy, half of the ground closed due to discovery of contaminated backfill and poor building. A transfer embargo and points deducted.
As bad as it could be.
His parents turned down and refused huge offers from PL and Global academies from age 10.
They could have raked in millions
His dad a copper, his mom a nurse. His brother Jobe some thought better than Jude, they devoted their lives to.
Jude insisted he stayed with his boyhood Club until he could sign a professional contract. The family were offered tens of millions. They refused.
Jude signed his first pro contract on his 17th birthday, 3 days later he joined Dortmund for a reputed £21,000,000.
That money went to the Club he loves and supports. There would be no Club but for that.
Granted he will make millions, his parents will benefit but for years they literally turned away millions.
In this cynical materialistic age that is a massive endorsement of him and his family.
I remain convinced that his aim is to return to England only when his club are in a position to offer him a premiership place.
Truly remarkable
But we have an electricity “market” where higher prices are baked into the design. With a attempts to reduce those prices for domestic users, when the political pain peaks.
I don’t actually like it.
- corporation tax rate up by a quarter;
- dividend taxation rates up by an average of about a fifth;
- CGT bill on sale of business likely more than doubled (mostly due to entrepreneur relief value being reduced from max £1.8m to max £60k);
- clampdown on salary sacrifice for pension;
- new IHT liability if business kept in estate instead;
- new IHT liability on pension fund, probably at effective rate of 60% as it will be the only asset triggering clawback of residence nil rate band.
That's before analysing the more subtle impacts of NI and other changes on profitability.
And with Starmer a dead man walking, a wealth tax, even on the unrealised value of the business, looks like a real possibility.
I love living in the UK but it now has nearly the highest aggregate taxation of successful owner managed businesses in Europe: 25% CT then 39.1% IT on dividends. It would take me about 6 months to move the whole business to one of half a dozen other countries in Europe where its tax bill and mine would be lower, the labour pool is cheaper and no less skilled, and some post-Brexit hassles would go away. I haven't done it because there is more to life than money, but at some point it starts to feel like government is taking the p*ss...
The position Labour inherited was not their fault, but they've had a year and a half to show whether their business/growth friendly noises meant anything and it's not been great...
Manchester mayor says Man Utd co-owner Ratcliffe 'insulting' to claim UK is 'colonised by immigrants'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cdjm3n8yrwnt
(Not one I'm following. A Canadian just reminded me of The Littlest Hobo, a sort of Skippy the Bush Kangaroo without the sophisticated Australian actors, minus the kangar, plus a empathetic pooch.)