politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Night hawks is now open

Alanbrooke said:

@Charles FPT

"Needs a name. How about the Kingdom of Hanover?"

All the "vons" would love it they could be aristocracy again ;-)

The football league would be the best in the world.

brits could be on the winning side of a world cup.

Best music - german classical and brit pop.

More Nobel prizes than anyone else

Brits get professionalism, germans get a sense of humour


power up the Quattro Hermann ...... :-)

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

@Charles FPT

"Needs a name. How about the Kingdom of Hanover?"

All the "vons" would love it they could be aristocracy again ;-)

The football league would be the best in the world.

brits could be on the winning side of a world cup.

Best music - german classical and brit pop.

More Nobel prizes than anyone else

Brits get professionalism, germans get a sense of humour


power up the Quattro Hermann ...... :-)

Bring back Prussia I say!

We had out chance and fluffed it Mr Eagles. If primogeniture had allowed Queen Victoria's eldest child to succeed to the throne the UK and Germany would have had the same monarch. Her eldest child Victoria would have handed the british throne to her son Kaiser Wilhelm. So no world war 1, no rise of communism, no world war 2 and probably no Labour Party.

Queen and Empress Viktoria is buried in Potsdam outside Berlin.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

@Charles FPT

"Needs a name. How about the Kingdom of Hanover?"

All the "vons" would love it they could be aristocracy again ;-)

The football league would be the best in the world.

brits could be on the winning side of a world cup.

Best music - german classical and brit pop.

More Nobel prizes than anyone else

Brits get professionalism, germans get a sense of humour


power up the Quattro Hermann ...... :-)

Bring back Prussia I say!

We had out chance and fluffed it Mr Eagles. If primogeniture had allowed Queen Victoria's eldest child to succeed to the throne the UK and Germany would have had the same monarch. Her eldest child Victoria would have handed the british throne to her son Kaiser Wilhelm. So no world war 1, no rise of communism, no world war 2 and probably no Labour Party.

Queen and Empress Viktoria is buried in Potsdam outside Berlin.

If only Cameron had been PM in Queen Victoria's day he would have made sorted out that primogeniture stuff out like he has now.

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Alanbrooke said:

@Charles FPT

"Needs a name. How about the Kingdom of Hanover?"

All the "vons" would love it they could be aristocracy again ;-)

The football league would be the best in the world.

brits could be on the winning side of a world cup.

Best music - german classical and brit pop.

More Nobel prizes than anyone else

Brits get professionalism, germans get a sense of humour


power up the Quattro Hermann ...... :-)

Bring back Prussia I say!

We had out chance and fluffed it Mr Eagles. If primogeniture had allowed Queen Victoria's eldest child to succeed to the throne the UK and Germany would have had the same monarch. Her eldest child Victoria would have handed the british throne to her son Kaiser Wilhelm. So no world war 1, no rise of communism, no world war 2 and probably no Labour Party.

Queen and Empress Viktoria is buried in Potsdam outside Berlin.

If only Cameron had been PM in Queen Victoria's day he would have made sorted out that primogeniture stuff out like he has now.

or alternatively George IV could have married Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia ;-)

TheScreamingEagles said:

davidthecon said:

Oi Eagles!

You will appreciate/suffer like me at this news.

I'm extremely unhappy! A friend of mine got to see a screening of 'Man of Steel' tonight.

Comment was: 'It's like the Avengers movie but even better'.

That cannot be possible......can it?

And I thought Into Darkness couldn't be beat this year!

It can't be right.

I've never enjoyed Superman that much, I did like Smallville though

Socrates said:

Credit to Labour for responding in the right way:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22813893

They were terrible in power, of course, but every party is allowed to reinvent themselves in opposition.

davidthecon said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

davidthecon said:

Oi Eagles!

You will appreciate/suffer like me at this news.

I'm extremely unhappy! A friend of mine got to see a screening of 'Man of Steel' tonight.

Comment was: 'It's like the Avengers movie but even better'.

That cannot be possible......can it?

And I thought Into Darkness couldn't be beat this year!

It can't be right.

I've never enjoyed Superman that much, I did like Smallville though

I totally agree. The last 3-4 series of Smallville were especially excellent. The previous Superman movies on the other hand, all sucked a big one. But my friend who saw this tonight is not prone to ultra raving without cause. I'm starting to quiver...a bit.

MonikerDiCanio said:

Socrates said:

Credit to Labour for responding in the right way:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22813893


They were terrible in power, of course, but every party is allowed to reinvent themselves in opposition.

" The Guardian says it has obtained documents showing that the secret listening post had access to the Prism system, set up by America's National Security Agency (NSA), since at least June 2010. "

No doubt this all started under the Labour government in which Cooper , her husband , Edward Miliband , and his brother were prominent and well-informed ministers.

Hertsmere_Pubgoer said:

It has been going on for years. Both sides of politics are equally guilty of facilitating it.

MonikerDiCanio said:

Socrates said:

Credit to Labour for responding in the right way:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22813893


They were terrible in power, of course, but every party is allowed to reinvent themselves in opposition.

" The Guardian says it has obtained documents showing that the secret listening post had access to the Prism system, set up by America's National Security Agency (NSA), since at least June 2010. "

No doubt this all started under the Labour government in which Cooper , her husband , Edward Miliband , and his brother were prominent and well-informed ministers.

Scott_P said:

@PickardJE: Interesting that John Mills, Labour's donor at heart of tax row, is brother of David Mills, Tessa Jowell's husband http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2013/06/when-labours-new-super-donor-was-ticked-off-for-selling-faulty-lucky-panda/

@PickardJE: Mills, Labour's "tax-efficient" donor, was sacked as deputy chairman of the London Docklands Development Corporation

DavidL said:

We seriously need some new, simpler and less avoidable tax laws: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/10106945/Vodafone-defends-paying-no-corporation-tax-two-years-in-a-row.html

Vodaphone has apparently paid no corporation tax for 2 years. I mean come on, this is ridiculous. It is one thing to have competitive CT rates, it is another when our largest companies are able to make tax optional and choose not to. I am disgusted to have a Vodaphone contract.

Alanbrooke said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Brooke, did she have an elder daughter who got the German throne?

Mr Dancer

Edward VII came to the throne after Queen Victoria, but he was the second child. The first child was princess Victoria who married Crown Prince Friedrich of Prussia. Friedrich was very much a reformer who admired the British system and wanted to push through a liberalisation of the German consitiution.

His father Wilhelm I lived until well into his nineties so Friedrich didn't come unto the throne until 1888 when unfortunately he was suffering from terminal throat cancer. Empress Viktoria ( as QV's daughter was then ) didn't get much of a run. Friedrich was succeeded by his and Viktoria's son Wilhelm II ( Kaiser Bill ). One of the great what ifs of German history is if Friedrich had had a full reign would war have been avoided ?

As an aside the UK and Prussia have the same tune for their national anthem - God save the King\Queen and Heil Dir im Siegerkranz. So everyone was happy.

Alanbrooke said:

DavidL said:

We seriously need some new, simpler and less avoidable tax laws: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/10106945/Vodafone-defends-paying-no-corporation-tax-two-years-in-a-row.html

Vodaphone has apparently paid no corporation tax for 2 years. I mean come on, this is ridiculous. It is one thing to have competitive CT rates, it is another when our largest companies are able to make tax optional and choose not to. I am disgusted to have a Vodaphone contract.

I'm afraid multinats are now just taking the piss. They want all the benefits of an open market, with enforceable laws, copyright, security of payment etc. but want to make bugger all contribution tothe cost of keeping it that way. Their Boards hide behind share holder value and fiduciary duty bollocks and they rip off their host countries. Labour allowed this to get out of hand and the Coalition has done nothing significant to reverse it. It's time to find some nasty bastard tax inspectors and issue them with Marigolds and then send some Directors to jail.

davidthecon said:

A friend of mine moved to Malta a couple of years ago and he pays a set amount of tax per year on all the business he does there. (I think it's €17,000). He's trading in Foreign exchange mainly.

I don't know the details of how it all works but apparently it doesn't matter if he makes a shedload of profit or a loss.

I'm amazed a system like that even exists within the EU, why aren't we doing it?

Oi Vodafone, give us 250 million and get on with it?

surbiton said:

davidthecon said:

Socrates said:

Credit to Labour for responding in the right way:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22813893

They were terrible in power, of course, but every party is allowed to reinvent themselves in opposition.

On that basis may they continue to reinvent themselves for many decades to come.

Give 'em a year back in power and ID cards will be back on the table and CCTV cameras in every home, just to make sure nobody is fiddling their benefits of course. Or would it be to ensure everyone is claiming as much as possible?

And don't forget, EVERYONE is a potential terrorist threat.

Is it only Labour which changes policy ? Did the Tories always have the Minimum Wage as part of their policy ? Or, for that equal rights for gays ? Remember, clause 28 ?

DavidL said:

davidthecon said:

A friend of mine moved to Malta a couple of years ago and he pays a set amount of tax per year on all the business he does there. (I think it's €17,000). He's trading in Foreign exchange mainly.

I don't know the details of how it all works but apparently it doesn't matter if he makes a shedload of profit or a loss.

I'm amazed a system like that even exists within the EU, why aren't we doing it?

Oi Vodafone, give us 250 million and get on with it?

Sounds extremely similar to our non doms to me.

davidthecon said:

DavidL said:

davidthecon said:

A friend of mine moved to Malta a couple of years ago and he pays a set amount of tax per year on all the business he does there. (I think it's €17,000). He's trading in Foreign exchange mainly.

I don't know the details of how it all works but apparently it doesn't matter if he makes a shedload of profit or a loss.

I'm amazed a system like that even exists within the EU, why aren't we doing it?

Oi Vodafone, give us 250 million and get on with it?

Sounds extremely similar to our non doms to me.

The thing is he lives there full time. And runs his business completely from Malta itself.

I think the concept of telling companies to pay more tax than they are legally obliged to, 'because it's morally correct', is nonsense. It suggests a government is impotent in regards to it's tax collecting and basically is begging for it's money. Paying taxes shouldn't be voluntary, rules should be clear and comprehensive so there are no loopholes to exploit.

Big business has used influence on consecutive UK governments to allow them to take the p**s. All 3 major political parties should sit down and agree a system that works so it's set in stone. If the corporation tax rate ends up being lower, fine as long as everyone pays it.

DavidL said:

Anyone who was even close to government and claims not to have known this is, well stretching a point..

DavidL said:

davidthecon said:

DavidL said:

davidthecon said:

A friend of mine moved to Malta a couple of years ago and he pays a set amount of tax per year on all the business he does there. (I think it's €17,000). He's trading in Foreign exchange mainly.

I don't know the details of how it all works but apparently it doesn't matter if he makes a shedload of profit or a loss.

I'm amazed a system like that even exists within the EU, why aren't we doing it?

Oi Vodafone, give us 250 million and get on with it?

Sounds extremely similar to our non doms to me.

The thing is he lives there full time. And runs his business completely from Malta itself.

I think the concept of telling companies to pay more tax than they are legally obliged to, 'because it's morally correct', is nonsense. It suggests a government is impotent in regards to it's tax collecting and basically is begging for it's money. Paying taxes shouldn't be voluntary, rules should be clear and comprehensive so there are no loopholes to exploit.

Big business has used influence on consecutive UK governments to allow them to take the p**s. All 3 major political parties should sit down and agree a system that works so it's set in stone. If the corporation tax rate ends up being lower, fine as long as everyone pays it.

You think our own non doms don't live here full time?

Cameron said in a speech recently that he is a low tax Conservative but not a no tax Conservative. He really should speak out about Vodaphone. I hope he does.

TheScreamingEagles said:

DavidL said:

We seriously need some new, simpler and less avoidable tax laws: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/10106945/Vodafone-defends-paying-no-corporation-tax-two-years-in-a-row.html

Vodaphone has apparently paid no corporation tax for 2 years. I mean come on, this is ridiculous. It is one thing to have competitive CT rates, it is another when our largest companies are able to make tax optional and choose not to. I am disgusted to have a Vodaphone contract.

Isn't that to do with the 4g investment they made?

ZenPagan said:

Vodafone are playing by the rules indeed. The reason that the politicians are using the moral argument is that they cannot change the rules because companies are choosing to pay the tax in another EU state (Luxembourg I believe for vodafone) and so there is nothing they can do about it without getting the EU to change the inter state taxation legislation at the EU level.

Or leaving the EU of course

davidthecon said:

rcs1000 said:

@davidthecon

We have similar arrangements in the UK with a great many non UK citizens. Basically, if you are rich and non British, you can enter into direct negotiations with the Inland Revenue about the exact amount of tax you want to pay.

But surely not if you are running your primary business in the UK and earning your income from it? Does Mr Chelski not abide by the rules for running his footie club and pay tax accordingly? Sorry, bad example, they won't make a profit.

edmundintokyo said:

ZenPagan said:

Vodafone are playing by the rules indeed. The reason that the politicians are using the moral argument is that they cannot change the rules because companies are choosing to pay the tax in another EU state (Luxembourg I believe for vodafone) and so there is nothing they can do about it without getting the EU to change the inter state taxation legislation at the EU level.

Or leaving the EU of course

The obvious thing to do here is to set EU-wide tax rates, but I suppose the British will block it. They'd rather hand their tax revenues over to Luxembourg than hand the power to make sure they get them over to Brussels.

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

edmundintokyo said:

ZenPagan said:

Vodafone are playing by the rules indeed. The reason that the politicians are using the moral argument is that they cannot change the rules because companies are choosing to pay the tax in another EU state (Luxembourg I believe for vodafone) and so there is nothing they can do about it without getting the EU to change the inter state taxation legislation at the EU level.

Or leaving the EU of course

The obvious thing to do here is to set EU-wide tax rates, but I suppose the British will block it. They'd rather hand their tax revenues over to Luxembourg than hand the power to make sure they get them over to Brussels.

Yes: but in that case Starbucks would transfer the intellectual property (brands, etc.) to Panama or Equitorial Guinea. Starbucks UK would license those brands from Starbucks Panama ASA, and would pay royalties back to there. Profits would accrue in this low tax country. This is one area where the EU is an irrelevancy.

Is it really beyond the powers of governments to block the IP loophole? I know they'll always be paying whack-a-mole with creative new tax avoidance techniques but where your IP originates seems like something with some actual facts behind it rather than something you should be able to decide at your whim.

rcs1000 said:

edmundintokyo said:

rcs1000 said:

edmundintokyo said:

ZenPagan said:

Vodafone are playing by the rules indeed. The reason that the politicians are using the moral argument is that they cannot change the rules because companies are choosing to pay the tax in another EU state (Luxembourg I believe for vodafone) and so there is nothing they can do about it without getting the EU to change the inter state taxation legislation at the EU level.

Or leaving the EU of course

The obvious thing to do here is to set EU-wide tax rates, but I suppose the British will block it. They'd rather hand their tax revenues over to Luxembourg than hand the power to make sure they get them over to Brussels.

Yes: but in that case Starbucks would transfer the intellectual property (brands, etc.) to Panama or Equitorial Guinea. Starbucks UK would license those brands from Starbucks Panama ASA, and would pay royalties back to there. Profits would accrue in this low tax country. This is one area where the EU is an irrelevancy.

Is it really beyond the powers of governments to block the IP loophole? I know they'll always be paying whack-a-mole with creative new tax avoidance techniques but where your IP originates seems like something with some actual facts behind it rather than something you should be able to decide at your whim.

What is to stop Starbucks US Inc selling the Starbucks trademark to Starbucks India Pty?

And, what makes it hard to stop is that all these companies always make sure there is at least one country with one operation which genuinely is a franchise (usually in the Middle East), so they can point to the tax man and say "look, this is a standard commercial arrangement with have with all the brand licensees, irrespective of whether they are owned by the parent or not."

JamesKelly said:

Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but here are the Scottish Social Attitudes findings on constitutional preferences -

Independence 35%
Devo Max 32%
Status Quo 24%

35% for independence is pretty damn impressive in a multi-option poll that includes Devo Max as an alternative. It also seems that less than a quarter of the Scottish population want the outcome that the No side are actually campaigning for.

JamesKelly said:

Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but here are the Scottish Social Attitudes findings on constitutional preferences -
( Change vs YA )
Independence 35% (-8)
Devo Max 32% (+3)
Status Quo 24% (+3)

35% for independence is pretty damn impressive in a multi-option poll that includes Devo Max as an alternative. It also seems that less than a quarter of the Scottish population want the outcome that the No side are actually campaigning for.