Clegg - Tax the wealthy

#1
What is the point of this useless fart? Just back off holiday he launches himself into the fray with this sort of pronouncement: BBC News - Wealthy should pay more tax, says Nick Clegg

Some wishy-washy Liberal woman was interviewed on Radio 4 this morning about it - she professed to being the Treasurey bod for the Liberals and she knew absolutely **** all about the stirrings of her beloved leader's addled mind.

What quicker way would there be to completley snuff out any hope of this country recovering than by penalising the very folk who are largely keeping it afloat in the first place? Knob.

Methinks it is time to sack Clegg as Deputy Prime Minister, and see what happens next.
 
#2
What's the point in levelling new taxes at the wealthy? They'll just find a way to dodge them like they do already!
Probably a better idea just to make them pay the taxes we have in place at the moment.
 
#3
What is the point of this useless fart? Just back off holiday he launches himself into the fray with this sort of pronouncement: BBC News - Wealthy should pay more tax, says Nick Clegg

Some wishy-washy Liberal woman was interviewed on Radio 4 this morning about it - she professed to being the Treasurey bod for the Liberals and she knew absolutely **** all about the stirrings of her beloved leader's addled mind.

What quicker way would there be to completley snuff out any hope of this country recovering than by penalising the very folk who are largely keeping it afloat in the first place? Knob.

Methinks it is time to sack Clegg as Deputy Prime Minister, and see what happens next.
I think he's just saying anything to get himself noticed now, a-la Gordon Broon toward the end.
 
#5
Conference season soon, so he needs something, anything, to rally the troops.
It'll be like a scene from League of Gentlemen I fear.

"You know I've got this gun don't you!? Now I'm gonna speak, and you're gonna clap!"
 
#6
What is the point of a Deputy Prime Minister anyway?
 
#7
Conference season soon, so he needs something, anything, to rally the troops.
Perhaps it's more a case of sheer panic at the thought of what's likely to happen to the Lib Dems at the next election. Since entering coalition with the Tories, they've lost a lot of their left wing to Labour, including Arrse's own Whet/Sven (does anybody know if he's still alive?).

The Lib Dems have been trailing UKIP and, with no House of Lords to get elected to, rather a lot of them are likely to be joining Lembit Opik on the z list celebrity circuit in a couple of years. The peasants are revolting and Cleggy knows it.

Taking a leaf out of Labour's book, he appears to be trying to rally the troops before a common enemy - the evil rich. Be interesting to see if anybody manages to ask Nick a few questions about his new policy wheeze:-

How many people would he like to see forced to sell their homes because of this?

Will MPs be exempt from this tax, as they are exempt from other property taxes?

Labour introduced confiscatory tax policies in the 1970s. It was a catastrophe. Where does Nick think Dennis Healy went wrong?

There has been a 50% increase in French applicants for banking jobs in London since Comrade Hollande stated he would impose 75% tax rates. How would Nick prevent that happening in the UK?

Answers on a postcard to the Home for Bewildered Matelots in Portsmouth.
 
#9
#10
What is the point of a Deputy Prime Minister anyway?
It was a cunning plan to get the Lib Dims on board so they felt they had some control over the train set.
This is not the cleverest plan Clegg has come up with amd all it does is bring the Con Lib relationship into more of a focus, its not working.
 
#12
...
There has been a 50% increase in French applicants for banking jobs in London since Comrade Hollande stated he would impose 75% tax rates. How would Nick prevent that happening in the UK?

Answers on a postcard to the Home for Bewildered Matelots in Portsmouth.
That's the plan, it's a Frog invasion, something must be done of Mayfair will stinking of garlic, all the soft cheese will disappear from Harrods and even a Saudi prince won't be able to find a rent boy for love or money. All key Lib-Dem priorities.
 
#14
That's the plan, it's a Frog invasion, something must be done of Mayfair will stinking of garlic, all the soft cheese will disappear from Harrods and even a Saudi prince won't be able to find a rent boy for love or money. All key Lib-Dem priorities.
Baaaaaaa Bloody foreigners. Coming over here and nicking all our rent boys etc etc
 
#15
So taxing the uber-wealthy is more likely to work, than say, not pissing billions up against the wall in "benefits"? As already pointed out, very rich people can afford luxuries like accounts, offshore bank accounts and the like. They also have the option to leave taking substantial amounts of their taxable income with them in many cases.
 
#16
How strange - when I posted this thread it was entitled 'Clegg - Attention seeking twat' or some such. Clearly failed the Political Correctness test somehow. Anyway, as I was saying, Mr Clegg is an attention seeking twat, and judging from the above, I'm not the only one who thinks so.
 
#17
Attacking the rich is rather like abusing bankers; guarantees applause from the non thinking and the chattering classes alike, doesn't affect your voter base much, there are more unemployed than rich people.

Also 'the rich' is suitably nebulous, who are they? MPs like to portray themselves as working professionals, although most would come under the category of 'the rich', Clegg's background looks suspiciously 'rich'; Westminster, Cambridge, a gap year as a skiing instructor, all the hallmarks of your average working class hero.

The concept of actually doing something about genuine loss leaders, overseas aid, NHS tourism, asylum seekers, pikeys, etc, seems to give the average MP an attack of the vapours, far easier to abuse groups that are ill defined and unlikely to cause too much trouble, Mr Clegg is in no way an average MP.

Back in the 30s I suspect that he would be blaming the Jews for the state of the reich, and for the same reasons, soft target, and appeals to the hard of reasoning.
 
#18
I think he's just saying anything to get himself noticed now, a-la Gordon Broon toward the end.
On the subject of Gordon Brown,as he is now disclosed as having extra-parliamentary "ernings" of some 900 Grand,of which (allegedly) no or little tax is paid),can he be included in the members wealthy to have their assets taxed?.

PS 900 Grand made outside of his parliamentary duties and only 3 attendances at the House did not prevent Cyclops claiming some £20,000 in expenses in air fares(first class)? from Scotland to London.
 
#19
Surely, this is entirely in line with Conservative policy as announced by both Prime Minister and Chancellor? We are, after all, all in it together. Aren't we?

If it's been sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk then I'm probably pissed.
 
#20
Obviously Clegg hasn't read Taxes 101 as attributed to some American professor - below:

BAR STOOL ECONOMICS or Taxes 101

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten
comes to $100.

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something
like this:


The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
total equals $100.00

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day
and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw
them a curve.

'Since you are all such good customers, he said, I'm going to reduce the
cost of your daily beer by $20.

Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the
first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what
about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the
$20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that
from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end
up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would
be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he
proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.!

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $20, 'declared the sixth man. He pointed to
the tenth man, 'but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I
got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'*

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get
anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat
down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill,
they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between
all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our
tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit
from a tax reduction. Tax them too much , attack them for being wealthy, and
they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking
overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics, University of Georgia
 

Similar threads

Top