retrospective tax changes retrospective tax changes
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Posts 1 to 10 of 11
  1. #1

    I Am Legend

    BrilloPad has reached the peak. Play again?


    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    103,255

    Default retrospective tax changes

    does this mean I can retrospectively change my vote?

  2. #2

    Lord of Ruin

    Diver is NOT a disguised employee

    Diver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    22,873

    Default

    I wish!

    I'd have voted for Maggie again
    Confusion is a natural state of being

  3. #3

    Godlike

    Peoplesoft bloke is a permanent contractor


    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,066

    Default

    On a point of order, and whilst I categorically don't agree with the VED increases, this isn't any more "retrospective" than when any other government has increased VED.

  4. #4

    Banned

    Cyberman has no reputation


    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    4,892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peoplesoft bloke View Post
    On a point of order, and whilst I categorically don't agree with the VED increases, this isn't any more "retrospective" than when any other government has increased VED.

    I am sure that you would never disagree with taxes being raised and then raised again. Personally, I would rather HMG start using the taxes they already get in a far more efficient manner. Currently ALL income tax goes to support welfare and benefits of approximately 160 Billion pounds!!

    Just stopping all benefits and making people reapply in person would save Billions as entitlement is checked thoroughly and mass fraud weeded out. They did that in Germany (HERTZ IV in 2005) whilst cutting the amount paid and I would love to see it happen here!! New Lie OUT !!!!

  5. #5

    (_?_)

    HairyArsedBloke is good enough for Jehovah!

    HairyArsedBloke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Pining for the tropics
    Posts
    7,091

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberman View Post
    Just stopping all benefits and making people reapply in person would save Billions as entitlement is checked thoroughly and mass fraud weeded out.
    Most of the savings would come from people dying while they wait for members of the DWP staff to get around to actually doing the work. They are not able to do the work they already have and you want to give them more?

  6. #6

    Banned

    Cyberman has no reputation


    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    4,892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HairyArsedBloke View Post
    Most of the savings would come from people dying while they wait for members of the DWP staff to get around to actually doing the work. They are not able to do the work they already have and you want to give them more?

    ....but at least we would find out how many 'dead' claimants there are.

  7. #7

    (_?_)

    HairyArsedBloke is good enough for Jehovah!

    HairyArsedBloke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Pining for the tropics
    Posts
    7,091

    Default

    The number of benefit claimants is a red-herring. What we need to do is cut the number of government 'workers'.

  8. #8

    Banned

    Cyberman has no reputation


    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    4,892

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HairyArsedBloke View Post
    The number of benefit claimants is a red-herring. What we need to do is cut the number of government 'workers'.

    What about cutting BOTH !!!!

  9. #9

    More time posting than coding

    dinker has no reputation

    dinker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Blighty
    Posts
    352

    Default

    Went into the local Health Authority the other day and found out my GP still had my parents on his books, they`ve only been dead ten years.

  10. #10

    Godlike

    BoredBloke 's job has never been outsourced

    BoredBloke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    whereever the work is
    Posts
    7,156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peoplesoft bloke View Post
    On a point of order, and whilst I categorically don't agree with the VED increases, this isn't any more "retrospective" than when any other government has increased VED.
    When they started taxing cars based on the amount of CO2 the pumped out, didn't they do it on all cars made after a certain date? The important point was that the date was in the future - so the buyer could make the decision at the point of purchase. I don't buy new cars, so without a crystal ball, how was I expected to know which cars NL would deem suitible for use to drive.
    Rule Number 1 - Assuming that you have a valid contract in place always try to get your poo onto your timesheet, provided that the timesheet is valid for your current contract and covers the period of time that you are billing for.

    I preferred version 1!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •