Search results

If all of your assets were placed in those trusts and attract income tax when the beneficiaries withdraw then that would be fine. If, however, you have other assets which are not in trust then they should be treated the same way. They will have transferred from you to another person and so...

Legally it is different but in the logic should it be? Do work for money - get taxed. Do nothing for money - don't get taxed. Surely you can see how that doesn't make sense and is a situation that only exists because those with all the money shaped the laws that made it the case out of...

If you think they're going to park the bus why wouldn't you play an extra forward to get at them? Especially at home

It's my money, I've paid tax on it and if I chose to pay the workmen cash in hand so they don't pay tax who are the government to tell me I shouldn't? In fact, why don't I just gift him the money as a nice gesture and if he then chooses to do some work for me just as a friend what's the problem?

Moore Hyam Fadz Rose Kane Sheaf Hamer Maatsen O'Hare Gyok Godden Wilson, Dabo, Kelly, Allen, Jones, Walker, Tavares. Dropping Dabo because I feel Kane and Maatsen are better attacking outlets. Also want to go two up top at home as I feel we should be looking to be on the front foot. Bench...

Progressive inheritance tax would be a better means than the flat one, although the biggest problem is the ultra-rich just putting their money where it can't be got at. I'm thinking of the possibility of changing it from treating it as inheritance to income, so rather than it being a tax paid...

But your son hasn't earned it has he? The business I work for has earned the money before they pay me, so why should I pay tax on it? When a workmen does a job for me why should he pay tax on the money seeing as I've already paid tax when I earned it? It seems that we're at a bonkers situation...

You've fallen hook, line and sinker for the 'everyone benefits' line. It benefits those who have the most ability to pay the most. The people most likely to lose out will be those who have modest assets, the people most likely to gain are those with lots. It is more than an imperfect solution -...

People who own houses of that value aren't rich (they just aren't poor) but that is an argument over what the limit should be, which isn't really what I'm focusing on - it's more the way the system works. You are correct about rich people protecting their assets in trust etc and not paying...

You're assuming they've earned it. While many will what about those that have inherited said wealth from rich parents? Are you suggesting those that don't have big, expensive houses haven't worked hard? You seem to be pretty happy with individuals with large resources accessing better medical...

He does go back towards the fan and confront him. You could easily argue he would have a right to and was probably very restrained in the circumstances but if you get a poor tackle on the pitch and then confront your opponent chances are you'd get a yellow for it so I imagine it's along the same...

It's a complete con to protect the assets of the rich. If you own a multi-million pound house then that counts towards the cap. If you get a misely sum from the council it doesn't. Utter joke of a proposal.

Even I didn't think she was that heartless! Pretty sure it goes against the Geneva Convention

You couldn't be more wrong. I think most people don't think like me. In fact I'm almost certain they don't. But that doesn't necessarily make me wrong and after years of having opinions that differed but ending up being right about the outcome more often than not I just learnt to trust my...

I'm more bothered about how things actually operate, not how people think they do. Why would I want to think like people that are wrong?

Love it. Fair play on making that rather dull affair interesting

That was thing that I thought of too, but thought it a bit bad taste in the circumstances, so glad you did it instead. Hope she is safe and well (but I'm not putting any money on it)

Which just goes to show why they should be ignored because they're taking something that is not it's main purpose and making it the forefront of their argument. It may well be that mask wearing will stop spread more than vaccine, but it's telling that they make no mention of the severity of...

I'm not saying it's the only reason but it does seem like their transfer policy isn't based on building a team designed to win things but individuals that have a big name. The things you're talking about are true, but where have they brought in other options? Defensively they seem to skimp to...

I'm not saying the report does, just that there is a logical argument that solely in terms of transmission masks could be as effective. Only stupid people would take that sentence as being anti-vax (so, anti-vaxxers), because I'm solely talking about spreading the disease, not the effects of...