Uncategorised The Dude talks to UK Uncut on Twitter. are @ukuncut #ukuncut disonest or stupid? Barclays this time. http://is.gd/HKKKgW which didn’t need a bail-out and which pays a lot of tax. the entire banking system would have collapsed if it wan’t for the bail. And no they don’t pay a lot of tax. Question: does the laffer curve mean anything to you. Is there a point at which you stop regarding “business” as a piggy bank? 2007/2008 Financial sector collapse knocked 6% out of GDP, caused a 1 trillion black hole which we are paying the price Barclays didn’t take the Bail-out. It went to shareholders. Are you dishonest or ignorant? I didn’t say they did, I said the entire banking industry exists because of the tax payer. all business exist “because of the tax-payer” because he’s also a consumer. Barclays didn’t take bail-out, so why picket them? just shows how concentrated wealth is in this country. not right that we should be so dependent on a tiny groups of people Question: Do you pay more tax than you legally owe? if not you’re a rancid hypocrite.waaaa! someone has more than me! waaaaaa! You’re a child. No i pay the tax that is taken out of my pay. I don’t employ a small army of accountants to try and get me out of it. So you think that Barclays, a major international retail & investment bank should just PAYE without using accountants? #stupid I think Barclays should not have an entire division in their HQ coming up with elaborate means to pay less and less tax You do agree businesses which make a loss should be able to set that loss against future year’s tax on profits don’t you? I think the law can be changed to stop the Banks avoiding tax, especially as they have a debt to the public sector they’re not “avoiding tax”. Barclays is carrying forward losses, something ALL grown-up tax regimes allow. no this should be changed for the banks. They have a debt to society, they do avoid tax, they have an entire division to do it, with hundreds of subsidiaries in tax havens. You really are ignorant, aren’t you. How is retrospective taxation different from theft? because the entire banking industry is being support with 1 trillion of our money and I want it back with plans to start selling off the RBS stake, you will, soon. you fail to remember in 2009 that secret papers we leaked to the press showing Barclays secret division. You mean a big international bank seeks to minimise taxes, and you’re expecting me to be 1) surprised & 2) outraged? Meh… well we are, you arn’t. We have differing concerns. Which is why this conversation is utterly pointless. You didn’t answer the question: Do you think business should be allowed to bring forward losses. If not, why not? I did, you didn’t read it. No the banks should not be able to because they have a 1 trillion debt to society The Government BOUGHT a stake + loans, which will be paid back on (ha!) Privatisation of Lloyds & RBS (which you support? No?) but other banks like Barclays benefited through that bail-out so need to pay up too. We will never agree! Yes. There is a bankers’ put. Which needs to be adressed by regulation, but confiscatory, retrospective taxation is not the answer. Do you even know what ‘Bankers’ put’ means? there is just no point arguing with those who misunderstand the basics. Sorry. 2nd March 2011/17 Comments/by Malcolm Bracken http://bracken.uk.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/logo-2.png 0 0 Malcolm Bracken http://bracken.uk.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/logo-2.png Malcolm Bracken2011-03-02 10:50:002017-07-21 01:43:48The Dude talks to UK Uncut on Twitter.