Quote from 5haz :

Please refrain from reading what you want to hear as opposed to the actual words.

The irony is strong in this one.

At first you say

Quote from 5haz :

Tax avoidance is a glaring issue that no recent government has done anything to address, simply because it isn't in their personal interests to do so.

Then your next post you say

Quote from 5haz :

They plug loopholes only after the media exposes them.

1. Make your mind up, they either plug them or they don't. or grow a pair and admit when you might have been wrong. I've done it more than once in this thread. It's called being a grown up.

2. Loopholes are exposed when they are used. Details have to be given to prove to mr tax man that the avoidance is legal. It just takes time get the legislation through to fill them. This is why the big accountants hold back on using new loopholes until the old ones are filled. It has nothing to do with the media.

Quote from 5haz :

If I was talking to someone of any importance I might be more thorough, sorry. Just you seemed to imply that the link contained some piece of conspiracy theorist fiction when it was in fact a direct quote.

So now you've gone down the personal insult route? I'm not someone of importance so you don't actually read what I say you just read what you want to see and skip the rest. Thank you for confirming what I have been saying all along.

I too quoted it directly with the subtle difference of putting in bold the part that you seemed to be ignoring. But at least now I know why. I'm not someone of importance so you don't read all I write. Go you!

Quote from 5haz :

Tax avoidance is a glaring issue that no recent government has done anything to address, simply because it isn't in their personal interests to do so.

Wrong, plain and simple wrong. Read a few Budget reports. There is always plenty in them about plugging loopholes. Just because you read it in the paper doesn't mean it's true.

Quote from 5haz :

Looking the world around you is to miss the bigger picture. World changing events can happen while the street outside looks exactly the same.

Just because this state is a supposedly free democracy today doesn't mean there are those in power who want to change that, and they prey on people's ignorance of their intrigue.

The stuff written in the link is David Cameron's speech on the unrest, its the words that actually came out his mouth, did you even look at the link? There's even a video on the BBC of him saying it if that satisfies you.

I spoke about you not reading everything people say earlier and you have just proved my point. How could you possibly ask if I have looked at the link if I quoted part of it in a reply to you? Unless you didn't read all I said, or your brain simply won't let you acknowledge stuff that goes against your argument.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

Right, so it was a Labour rule implemented at a time to make the Tories unpopular. I see politics hasn't changed much.

I think that was the rule for a couple of years before the election but I haven't checked my facts on that one

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

It seems I did get bad advance. Maybe the accountant we use should go back into retirement.

Maybe it's just a misunderstanding. If you want to PM me when you have checked on the details I'll be happy to help.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

And that is why the country is going to the wall. It is run by idiots who couldn't get a job on the open market. Most MPs get given a job they have no idea about. The chap in charge of defence said after he was given the seat that all he knows about the military is what he has seen on the news. And he was in charge of it all now. No wonder they never have the right equipment.

Can't argue with that.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

You're encouraged to claim for things you shouldn't by accountants. But then that is what you pay them for. Ways to avoid tax.

A good accountant will not encourage you to do things that are illegal. He may point out loopholes but that is not illegal.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

Shit, my memory for numbers has got worse. Probably why I'm not an accountant.

We are all good at what we are good at. My thing happens to be numbers.

Quote from 5haz :

Have any valid response to that though? No I didn't think so.

You mean this one?

Quote from menantoll :

I was waiting for that one. The government fills the holes when they are found, then the clever accountants find new holes (or use ones that they already found but were holding back). It is not the governments choice that these super rich manage to avoid some taxes. Even with the avoidance though they still pay a lot more that the average working man. Then there are all the taxes that flymike mentions.

Add on top of that the extra indirect taxes (VAT etc) that the rich pay as they spend more on luxury goods than the poor.

Or this one?

Quote from menantoll :

If "The family shop" are paying less than 1% income tax then they are paying huge fees to the accountants who manage these savings for them (typically 25% of the amount of tax they saved). This doesn't mean the government wants this to happen though. It doesn't mean the government aren't fighting to stop it happening.

In every budget there are changes to close tax avoidance loopholes. These accountants earn way way more than MP's, HMRC tax experts etc. It's no wonder they win. What happens if HMRC offers silly salaries to attract these people though? You get outcries that a civil servant should never earn that much.

Are neither of those valid. Do you really believe that tax avoidance is a government idea?

Quote from 5haz :

You remind me of me, three years ago. Its quite a big leap from restricting civil liberties to mind control radars, but that kind of subtlety is lost on flippant idiots like yourself.

I agree it's a big leap and probably a bit far so I apologise. Do you honestly believe the stuff written in that link though? Search deep down, look at the world around you. Do you really think it's true?

Quote from 5haz :

Ever heard of tax avoidance? Its rife among big business in the UK, in case you hadn't noticed.

Come on Shaz keep up, we've been discussing this for a few posts now.

Quote from 5haz :

...snip...Well, this sums up the riot sitation ... oquently than I could...

Ready for another belly laugh?


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah


and again


Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


I read that yesterday or the day before. It was written for people like you and the very fact that you have posted it confirms all I thought about you and your posts.

Don't forget your tinfoil hat to stop the government mind radars.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

Sorry, I meant to put that as my family's shop. Currently it is below the 74k mark so we don't get to claim back VAT like a company earning over that does, because money is magnetic. It goes to other money. And the recent changes to company car tax mean we had to get rid of the company van. It was only 800 worth of Escort van (not my van, FYI), but the new tax rules on company vehicles mean you pay tax for what the vehicle was worth new, not it's current value. Thanks Tories, really helps.

It was labour that changed the company car benefit rules not the Tories. Also I think you have either typed this out wrong or someone is giving you wrong advice.

An employee pays tax on the assumed benefit of being given a company car/van for his own personal use (this includes driving it to and from work). The benefit is worked out as a percentage of it's price when new. The percentage used is based on it's carbon emissions with adjustments for if it's a diesel. Edit: if it was a van given to an employee for personal use they would have been better off signing the van as a bonus. Then the emloyee would only pay tax on £800 of benefit

If the van is a company van that is used by anyone in the company only for company business then no one person pays tax to use it.

Can you guess what I do for a living yet?

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

The government won't be fighting too hard or they'll be hurting themselves. I realise the nation needs to jobs big companies bring to raise tax, but there you go. I have no objection to civil servants earning the money the market demands if they are doing an important job (like preventing massive loop holes), when it is a nothing job, they should get paid nothing in kind.

They fight harder than you think they do. The problem is the good accountants have always another loophole up their sleeves.

YOU may not have a problem with the market price being paid for the right man to do the right job but the daily mail etc has a bigger voice than you.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

One of the interesting loop holes is uniforms. As a company owner if you have uniforms you can claim a tax break on cleaning expenses, but most companies (take almost at random, Co-Op) asks staff to clean their own uniforms. So Co-Op enjoys a tax break and the worker uses their wages to pay for it.

This is illegal, claiming a tax break on something you shouldn't. If you KNOW this is happening for sure. Then shop them. I doubt though that you have access to Co-op's tax return.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

That isn't a should as though it is my idea, that is a should as in the law states they should be paying 50% on any earnings over 200k. The money up to that point is only taxed at 20% like everyone earning 0-200k, it used to be 10% from 0-25k and 22% from 25,000.01 through to 200k, but Mr Gordon Brown dropped the 10% tax band to save the rest of the nation 2%. That really helped the poor out.

Your figures are way out.

We pay no tax on the first £7475 we earn
We pay 20% on the next £35000
we pay 40% on the next £115000
we pay 50% on anything over that.

before Brown took the 10% away from April 2008

we paid no tax on the first £5225
we paid 10% on the first £2230
we paid 22% on the next £32370
we paid 40% on anything over that.

He changed it to

we paid no tax on the first £6035
we paid 20% on the next £34800
we paid 40% on anything over that.

After an out cry about the poor he changed the no tax bit to £6475 to make up for the bit that the poor lost on the 10% thing. (this was still not fair but I have typed enough)

source http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/rates/it.htm

Last edited by menantoll, Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:42.

Not my idea but I like it:

Quote from someone wrote this 2 years ago :

Ultimately Income Tax is fundamentally unfair - you have to pay the government for letting you work, to pay for public sector things you could afford privately if you didn't pay them and for people who don't work.

Even IF you don't accept that, you're still left with three completely unfair implementations. First, everyone pays the same rate so that the more you earn the more you pay (despite using the same amount of what it pays for). Second, variable rates so that the more you earn the more, proportionally, you pay (despite using the same amount of what it pays for). Third, a flat rate so that everyone pays exactly the same, so that low earners give more of the salary, propotionally, in tax. None are wholly fair (except possibly the last one - since the average person uses the same amount of public sector services paid for by income taxation as the next average person, they should pay the same - but it's completely impossible to implement or get through the Commons as no-one on NMW will possibly ever accept paying the exact same amount of income tax as Wayne ****ing Rooney).

So Income Tax as a concept is unfair and any implementation of it is fundamentally flawed. Which is why it shouldn't exist.

What should exist is a high sales tax (like we already have, as it happens) so that the more things people buy and use, the more they contribute to society. Ronaldo buys another Ferrari to replace the other one he smashed up? £35k into the Exchequer - and that pays for a Band 7 nurse for a year (which is another benefit - instead of being seen as rich, posing wankers, rich, posing wankers become benevolent philanthropists. After all, they chose to buy a Ferrari and pay a nurse's salary).


Of course, there's still issues there. For a start there are the standard sales tax dodges - but in the first few years, everyone has shitloads more money to buy things and doesn't bother trying to dodge it until their outgoings match their salary and it's all old hat. By which time they've paid for hunners more coppers and customs officers. Win. The bigger issue is whether sales tax alone covers HM Government spending - and then we enter the age-old argument of just what HM Government should be spending. Though a good place to start cutbacks would be hardcore porn for ministers' partners and 20% payrises for not turning up to work 3 days in 4...

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

Oh, I'd never say they didn't the poor could run the country. In fact they'd just be as greedy, if not more than the folks who run it now, but worse is they'd not known what to do with the money and go bankrupt in a handful of years (as statistics shows happens to big lottery winners).

But the mega rich always find a way to get out of paying the tax the rest of us mortals have to. And having to pay corporate tax is no substitute that most of them pay less than 1% income tax. For anything over 200k they should be paying 50% income tax. The family shop pays those taxes and creates jobs (okay, so it is only 2 paid jobs so far and one is part time), but doesn't mean we should get out of paying income tax.

If "The family shop" are paying less than 1% income tax then they are paying huge fees to the accountants who manage these savings for them (typically 25% of the amount of tax they saved). This doesn't mean the government wants this to happen though. It doesn't mean the government aren't fighting to stop it happening.

In every budget there are changes to close tax avoidance loopholes. These accountants earn way way more than MP's, HMRC tax experts etc. It's no wonder they win. What happens if HMRC offers silly salaries to attract these people though? You get outcries that a civil servant should never earn that much.

Quote from P5YcHoM4N :

You say rich, I think working class. The rich rarely pay tax because they have accountants to hide their money from the tax man.

Allegedly in 2005, the 54 billionaires in Britain paid a total of £14.7m in income tax. Of this, £9m was contributed by James Dyson. Yeah, they're really paying their share.

I was waiting for that one. The government fills the holes when they are found, then the clever accountants find new holes (or use ones that they already found but were holding back). It is not the governments choice that these super rich manage to avoid some taxes. Even with the avoidance though they still pay a lot more that the average working man. Then there are all the taxes that flymike mentions.

Add on top of that the extra indirect taxes (VAT etc) that the rich pay as they spend more on luxury goods than the poor.

Quote from 5haz :

Using the public purse to help the poor, rather than the rich would be a start.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha, Now I know you are just a looney. What do you think benefits are? Where do you think the money comes from to pay for those benefits? Taxes that the rich people pay?

Quote from 5haz :

Anyone else catch Dave's statement on the disorder, get this...

https://plus.google.com/115169 ... 4705450/posts/3SaicHi6xGB

Evidently Dave and his friends at News Corp etc have got tired of social networking exposing their corruption and lies, and the riots presents a prime opportunity to crack down on it. Only 3 years ago I would've scoffed at anyone who said we we're sliding towards some kind of Orwellian nightmare, now I think the nightmare might be coming true slowly.

A typical example of not reading the words and missing out the ones that don't suit your agenda.

Quote from Dave :

So we are working with the Police, the intelligence services and industry to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.

I've put the bold bit in so that you can't conveniently skip it this time.

Quote from Becky Rose :

Although I was not speaking to you or any other particular person, from what I recall of the views you have expressed I would estimate you somewhere right of centre - but nowhere near the extreme.

In that case I apologise for my comments that were directed at you.

Quote from Becky Rose :

So the argument being put forward by the right wing here (although the political map is an over simplification blah blah blah): Poor people don't have values like rich people do? Well... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44084236/ns/health-behavior/

They're clearly right.

I think you need to up your reading skills Becky. You consider me right wing right? I've been trying to say that it doesn't matter if you are rich or poor. It's the values you are taught and the way you are bought up that counts. Look at David Gilmore's son? He certainly isn't poor.

Now to quote our resident left winger who appears to be saying what you state the right wingers are saying

Quote from 5haz :

...
There's a map somewhere where you can overlay London's deprivation index map with locations of the riots, kind of suggests that this kind of immoral behavior is associated with poorer areas. Perhaps before you go off in a strop you could possibly explain how else this could be if there isn't some kind of link between deprivation and a bad upbringing?...

Are everyone that lives in these area's out rioting? I'm sure you'll find there are plenty that stayed at home watching the telly with as much disgust as others. Then there will be people travelling in from more affluent areas to join in.

What is heart warming is the communities that are gathering together to help clean up afterwards.

Quote from atomant :

going ostrich won't help, has one person been tasered yet...see that's what yah need 10,000 bobbies with 50,000 volts each...

He who has the best offense, generally wins.

Your pm said today "we will do what is necessary" zap em all.

:d

I give up

5haz, you should stop making assumptions about people. The fact my parents taught me good values does not mean we were not poor. It does not mean they were always able to be there for me. It does not mean that they both didn't have to work very hard. They gave a shit and wanted me to grow up with good values.

As for the rest of it there is no point trying to reply as you'll just ignore it and spout the same old bullshit over and over again and quite frankly I'm tired of reading it.

Quote from 5haz :

Its about generations, the majority of the rioters appear to be from the 90s born generations, and these people had parents who were affected by the governments of the 80s. No doubt those who rioted in the early mid 80s and their parents were influenced by the political, financial and social situation of the 60s and 70s. Just because a government is voted out of power, it doesn't mean the legacy of their policies does not last.

"the people have been screwed over in favor of the needs of corporations or career politicians."

Governments have been doing this for hundreds of years not just the last 40. THAT was my point. I'm a child of the 70's, I was taught respect. I was taught that if you want something you work for it. If I got into trouble when I was out I was more afraid of my mother and father finding out than anything else. I will try to teach my daughter the same values.

Quote from 5haz :

A lot of pain, but the suffering would be more fairly distributed. If either way we're going to suffer, then its best that we don't let those who caused the suffering get away with their actions. Perhaps if the financial sector was allowed to get burnt it might come away hurt but wiser for the future. We keep giving these organisations second chances and every time they go and make the same mistakes.

You really have no idea. Half the country out of work? Empty supermarkets? It would be a whole different level of suffering. No exageration. Banks are so much a part of what makes the world work these days that they cannot be simply left to fail. I agree the bankers should have suffered but your solution is just bonkers. Unfortunately it isn't even as simple as taxing them huge amounts as they'll just vote with their feet and UK will be screwed again. It's a mess, no denying that.

Quote from 5haz :

When you see masses of people struck by indignant surpise because a major national problem they were completely ignorant to suddenly rears its ugly head, it gets very difficult not to become condescending. People just don't get it.

Many people have been saying for years that our youth are going to one day be out of control because they are pandered to the whole time. Police are left powerless, school teachers can't even raise their voice any more. Coupled with the reasons you give,yes I agree it's part of it. The only surprise is that it took till now to happen.

So how about some workable solutions that don't involve bankrupting our country?

Quote from 5haz :

Wars and bank bailouts are just the latest in a long list of times the people have been screwed over in favor of the needs of corporations or career politicians.

You think this didn't happen before the 80's Which is when you are saying that people started losing respect which has lead to youths thinking it's acceptable to riot and loot.

Quote from 5haz :

To be honest either way there is no painless way out of this, but I object to the people having to take the responsibility for the financial industry's reckless tactics. They caused this mess and as such should take the fall for it. We've bailed them out and as a result they'll probably never learn and it'll all happen again in a few decades time. At least the people not getting paid would include the people who caused the crisis, and Dave C and his pals really could almost get away with saying "we're all in this together".

You clearly have no idea the state this country would be in if the banks were not bailed out. It pisses me off too that these bankers screwed us over and are now getting bonuses again but I still agree with the bailout. The alternative would have been a whole world more pain that you seem to think based on that paragraph.

Quote from 5haz :

So? It's a valid suggestion, if I went to the trouble of writing a whole manifesto you wouldn't read it anyway, given the way many forumers are already typing the response to the post they wanted to read rather than whats actually written, before they even reach the bottom of said post.

You are the one who said you wanted a intelligent debate and thanks for deciding for me what I would read and what I wouldn't. Arrogant one liner "hints" does not make an intelligent debate. I hope I wont be rising to any more of your bait.

Quote from 5haz :

Not slashing public services would be a start, it might help people value their communities more if their public institutions weren't being run down to pay for wars of questionable importance and banker's bonuses, and if people valued their communities then they would become more desirable and less crime ridden, and perhaps businesses would be more willing to invest in the communities.

I already said this in my previous post.

Did you state earlier that this has been brewing since the 80's? Wars of questionable importance and bank bail outs happened recently. Make your mind up.

So you think that the banks should have been left to fall so that we didn't have to make the cuts in order that the country doesn't go bankrupt? Have you any idea what would have happened if the banks fell? Many many big businesses that employ thousands of people are run on huge overdrafts. If a bank fell the overdraft would no longer be available and hundreds of thousands of people wouldn't get paid. Then you would see some real riots.

And you didn't say that in your previous post. The nearest you said was "Oh and another hint, cutting public services is not the place to start if you want people to value their community." Maybe if you tried actually stating your thoughts on what can be done rather than giving "hints" as if you are trying to teach us. Then you might get some intelligent debate that you say you want.

You make a lot of assumptions there 5haz. You have not seen the whole thread so you have no idea what he is replying to. I posted it for the little story, maybe I should have snipped the rest.

DeadWolfBones, I've known the poster for a number of years and I believe it. You believe what you want.

For the record I don't believe the answer is "send in the army and shoot the chavvy lower class scum" but I also don't believe the answer is to give them more free stuff.

As far as intelligent debate is concerned, I haven't seen any of that in this thread. Mostly it's an attack on and unfounded accusations against Intrepid. 5haz, If I have have missed the bit where you suggested solutions then I apologise and ask that you point it out.

I just thought I'd throw this into the mix. It was posted by a London copper in another forum.

Quote from A London Copper :

Right,

all you leftie scum sympathisers need to shut the **** up RIGHT NOW.

You all bleat on about how there must be some deeper underlying cause and it would be better to understand it.

**** and **** have hit the nail on the head.

This was nicely demonstrated as a colleague and I attended the Balham Kebab Company last night to get some dinner (it was the only place left open, other than grubby chicken places, which were just refuelling stops for the scumbags anyway)

As we walk in (pretty much plain clothes other than our stab vests) a woman was talking to this little Asian kid, must've been about 14.

After he made a comment about a free TV, the conversation went something like this:

Woman - "So did you go out looting then?"
Kid - "No. I was out with my friends in Clapham though"
"Were your friends looting?
"Some of them. Most of them were just smashing stuff up"
"So you friends were out stealing then. Why were they doing it?"
"Free stuff, innit."

He then went on saying that its fun smashing things up, especially cos the police can't do anything. All this was being said as we sat at the table behind him. He hadn't even clocked that we were there, and other people in the shop were starting to giggle as he bleated on about his mates stealing and getting all this free gucci gear, having not realised there were two coppers sat behind him.

Until he said, "the police are outnumbered though innit"

I said to him

"Not tonight, mate."

This was met by a look on his face that said he had just soiled his pants.

All these armchair critics and lefties, apologising for these little shits, take heed. There is no underlying reason. There is no pent up anger about their downtrodden poverty-ridden boredom-filled lives. It is nothing to do with being oppressed and having little hopes and aspirations. The number of houses I have been in where these little criminals live where there is a plasma TV in each room, each of the kids has an x-box and thousands of pairs of gucci trainers.

They're given everything and yet still want more, citing deprivation and oppression all the ****ing time.

It is about greed. Pure and simple. These little turds live to commit crime. It is their raison d'etre. You know why? Because committing crime is seen as cool. It makes them a bad boy, and being a bad boy gets you "respek" amongst their tribe.

They want all this shit but would rather steal it than pay for it.

That, is the simple truth.

Stop apologising for criminals.

Classic "dammed if they do and dammed if they don't"

Lets face it the general forum section on iRacing is extremely hostile. Many people stay away from the general forums so the negativity is amplified. That forum section makes the LFS tyre progress threads look friendly.

Again, sorry bbman, I didn't mean my post to have a go at you really. I'm not that good with the written word.

Quote from bbman :

Yes, I reported the fact that unanimous opinion was that the sample isn't an ingame one... You said it yourself: these are opinions, nowhere did I or anyone else claim the absolute truth... Let's have the freedom to have an opinion, shall we?

It's changed from consensus to unanimous now. Or is it just your opinion that it is unanimous?

I do apologise if I read the below to mean you considered it fact that it was not in game sound. Was you actually questioning the consensus with this statement?

Quote from bbman :

... Why they would present something that probably has no relevance to the final product, no one knows...

I should also maybe have quoted this (or only quoted this) with my post as it was much closer to stating an opinion as fact than your post.

Quote from Töki (HUN) :

Yeah I know ingame sound will be nowhere near close.

Don't take what I say to heart though. This is the internet after all and I was purely making a comment about internet forum behaviour.

Quote from bbman :

Yeah, consensus is that's the base recording they took of the real thing rather than ingame though... Why they would present something that probably has no relevance to the final product, no one knows...

So consensus makes it true does it?

It's amazing how a number of customers who have no more information than the rest of us can post their opinion on something then all of a sudden it becomes FACT!

How many opinions does it take to make it true?

Quote from nathan246 :

ahhh...the kings brothers

I like to call them the Chuckle Brothers

Man there are some impatient people around here.

It's been less than 12 days which is not even 2 weeks, let alone "a few weeks". Who'd have thought it, someone on lfsforum exaggerating about the amount of time taken to give and update/results!

Razvan, have you ever had a new born child to look after? It takes up almost all of your time and energy.

I also have the problem of having a hard drive crash recently and all the tools I used to get the data I need out of the sql files were on that hard drive. Luckily I have back ups of the the start and end sql files but it will take me a while to find the right tools and then extract the data.

Do not worry though. The cash in safe in a Paypal account and I hope to have some results by the end of the month.

I've been a bit busy lately with a new addition to our family a couple weeks ago. I have all the data backed up that I need and will announce something soon.