Comrade Corbyn

I don’t hold to this view that all politicians are charlatans.  Sure their ambition can be as naked as anyone in any other walk of life but during my long career in the Public Sector in many occasions I came up against MPs who were truly fighting the cause on behalf of their constituents.   And from all sides of the House.  

Further I know from relatives who live in Camden that Jeremy Corbyn is very highly thought of   I also admire him for being true to his socialist beliefs little of which I agre with but that’s not the point    

Absolutely right, Strat. Many politicians genuinely want to do some good. But politics is a rough game and to get things done most have to learn and use the tactics that many people find distasteful.

One or two earlier posts have suggested that this is something of a smear campaign because the Conservatives are fearful of the popularity that Corbyn seems to be enjoying. Reading today's Evening Standard which carried the results of polls carried out ahead of the forthcoming borough elections in London, I can see what they are fearful.  If they are to be believed, some big name 'Conservative' boroughs like Wandsworth, Westminster could well be lost. The only group of electors where the Conservative vote is holding is among the 65s and above!

GTB-Buckaroo posted:

Corbyn is just another politician. He, like all the rest will talk the talk and walk the walk, until a wheel comes off and then shall blame the opposition. Our political system is flawed, filled with self serving people who care little for the real working man [or woman, for the sake of balance

I also don’t hold this view. Most politicians have a real conviction and public service duty that far exceeds that of people in many other walks of life... my observation is that some politicians seem to encourage negative unhealthy associates around them... and here Corbyn and Farage have quite a lot in common... though both as professional politicians and individuals with conviction I respect though not necessarily always agree with... and I personally think these two are a bit too idealistic..

Of course as soon as you become a politician you are in the public eye and under scrutiny.  And as much I don’t like the Mail or Murdoch journals — for the record I read the Independent — they still have a crucial role in investigating the conduct of our elected representatives.   

So in this case we now know that Jeremy Corbyn was in Chesterfield at a conference on the alleged date of the meeting. So come on Jeremy - thinking cap on if you can’t remember the actual date(s) you met this gentlemen you must have some recollection of the discussion?

God help us if he does get in at the next election.

The State already takes nearly half my income before I get it and then adds 20 per cent to everything I buy and takes that. And that's under a Torry administration. We will be on our way back to super tax rates under Agent COB.

According to an article in the Guardian last week we are taxed less than many other European states. 

Well that makes me feel better....knowing that most of Europe is taxed even more heavily than me......then again I suppose someone has to pay for the likes of Farage's and the Kinnock's pensions.

thebigfredc posted:

The State already takes nearly half my income before I get it and then adds 20 per cent to everything I buy and takes that. And that's under a Torry administration. We will be on our way back to super tax rates under Agent COB.

And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi while many who work full time (more than full time in many cases) have to choose between heating their homes and eating.

The other issue is that those at the higher end of incomes pay less tax as a percentage of their income, vastly less as a percentage of their disposable income, than those at the lower end.  Its only when you consider income tax in isolation does the tax burden fall disproportionately on the rich.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

Of course as soon as you become a politician you are in the public eye and under scrutiny.  And as much I don’t like the Mail or Murdoch journals they still have a crucial role in investigating the conduct of our elected representatives.   

I do agree with this position Strat, but it has to be "responsible" journalism where this has (in my opinion) crossed from responsible investigative journalism into smearing and "right wing propaganda" rather than news or holding people to account.

I would suggest that much of "tabloid" journalism crosses into sensationalism and even as a politician or other person in the public eye your private life should remain private unless it moves into hypocrisy (not that I'm suggesting political meetings of any kind should be considered private*).  For example a political having an affair is NOT in (imo) in the public interest unless that politician has been preaching about family values.

Note *: personally I think that, with a few exceptions such as meeting constituents and for security matters, a politicians meetings should be diarised and that diary should be open to public scrutiny.  Any meetings held in a formal setting should be minuted even if those minutes are considered confidential.  The irony is that this suggestion would actually protect both the public AND MPs.

So in this case we now know that Jeremy Corbyn was in Chesterfield at a conference on the alleged date of the meeting. So come on Jeremy - thinking cap on if you can’t remember the actual date(s) you met this gentlemen you must have some recollection of the discussion?

I doubt it was Jeremy who remembered he was in Chesterfield...

A meeting with a foreign diplomat, had it been minuted, would have been completely open to scrutiny as it should be.  As the government often tells the population: if you're doing nothing wrong; you've nothing to fear.

Eloise posted 'And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi ...'

And glory be, long may it continue:

Over the last twelve months I got hold of a used REGA Ear and AT W1000 headphones, upgraded the platter on my RP6 to a Groovetracer, swapped out the REGA cart for a Dynavector 10x5 and added a Groovetracer record clamp.

Who knows what the next year will bring...maybe a Supernait 2 and i would love a CD555.

Ray

Eloise posted:

And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi while many who work full time (more than full time in many cases) have to choose between heating their homes and eating.

The other issue is that those at the higher end of incomes pay less tax as a percentage of their income, vastly less as a percentage of their disposable income, than those at the lower end.  Its only when you consider income tax in isolation does the tax burden fall disproportionately on the rich.

<snip>

I'd be be interested to see how one works that out:  Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes, the personal allowance becomes a smaller percentage and VAT is flat rate (and quite a few essentials are lower rate, VAT exempt or zero rated).

People on lower incomes are financially penalised, but I don't see it being the tax system that's responsible for this.

Various data sets have been published on this but the better off surely bear most of the tax burden?

Huge posted:

Eloise posted:

And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi while many who work full time (more than full time in many cases) have to choose between heating their homes and eating.

The other issue is that those at the higher end of incomes pay less tax as a percentage of their income, vastly less as a percentage of their disposable income, than those at the lower end.  Its only when you consider income tax in isolation does the tax burden fall disproportionately on the rich.

<snip>

I'd be be interested to see how one works that out:  Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes, the personal allowance becomes a smaller percentage and VAT is flat rate (and quite a few essentials are lower rate, VAT exempt or zero rated).

People on lower incomes are financially penalised, but I don't see it being the tax system that's responsible for this.

Nice riposte on my behalf Huge. Only next time try to not use a capital for the first letter of the word following the colon.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

Various data sets have been published on this but the better off surely bear most of the tax burden?

And so we should!

Interesting that a thread purporting to express concern about Corbyn's loyalty/ threat to national security turns into a whinge about taxation - the mask slips!

thebigfredc posted:

Huge posted:

Eloise posted:

And yet you still have money to "waste" on HiFi while many who work full time (more than full time in many cases) have to choose between heating their homes and eating.

The other issue is that those at the higher end of incomes pay less tax as a percentage of their income, vastly less as a percentage of their disposable income, than those at the lower end.  Its only when you consider income tax in isolation does the tax burden fall disproportionately on the rich.

<snip>

I'd be be interested to see how one works that out:  Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes, the personal allowance becomes a smaller percentage and VAT is flat rate (and quite a few essentials are lower rate, VAT exempt or zero rated).

People on lower incomes are financially penalised, but I don't see it being the tax system that's responsible for this.

Nice riposte on my behalf Huge. Only next time try to not use a capital for the first letter of the word following the colon.

If the expression following the colon can stand alone as a full sentence, then, even in British English it is permissible to use a capital, particularly when used to emphasise where there is a separate nature of the two sentences: but there are several forms of this rule.

(In  American English a capital is almost always used after a colon, unless the following expression is in the form of a list).

Back on topic I think right now Jeremy Corbyn sees this as being to his distinct advantage particularly following the Tweet of a particular Tory MP.   

Surely it is Income Tax as a definitive article; whatever precedes it? If we are talking about UK Income Tax rather than the generic principle of course.

Bruce

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

Surely it is Income Tax as a definitive article; whatever precedes it? If we are talking about UK Income Tax rather than the generic principle of course.

Bruce

I think you mean a proper noun!

However we're getting to a digression from the previous digression from the original subject of Corbyin's interaction with a Czech spy!

Ok, so its a 'norm' in Yank twang and 'permissible' in contemporary slack English. Why not just use a full stop. Dickens must be rolling in his grave.

thebigfredc posted:

Ok, so its a 'norm' in Yank twang and 'permissible' in contemporary slack English. Why not just use a full stop. Dickens must be rolling in his grave.

Because a full stop separates two sentences that are potentially unrelated.  A full colon indicates that two expressions (the first of which is a full sentence and the second of which may be a full sentence) are linked, the second being an expansion, explanation or conclusion derived from the first (in addition, there may be other reasons for using a colon but I'm not entirely sure on the full list of reasons).

That usage isn't contemporary slack English, it's present in formal English from at least 50 years ago.  On further thought, it may however now actually be archaic!

Huge posted:

I'd be be interested to see how one works that out:  Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes, the personal allowance becomes a smaller percentage and VAT is flat rate (and quite a few essentials are lower rate, VAT exempt or zero rated).

People on lower incomes are financially penalised, but I don't see it being the tax system that's responsible for this.

Yes, Income tax rates escalate at higher incomes - but income tax only makes up 25% of tax revenues; national insurance another 19%.  Most taxes have a ceiling or are paid equally by rich and poor alike.

So yes - looking at income tax alone: figures from IFS ( https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9178 ) show the top 1% do pay 27% of income tax; the top 50% of earners pay 90% of income tax; but that is only 1/4 of the tax burden.

Looking at tax as a whole however paints a different picture - the Equalities Trust using figured from the IFS (https://www.equalitytrust.org....r-income-tax-richest) suggest the those in the top 10% of earning pay an average of 34% of their income in tax.  That pales in comparison to those in the bottom 10% who pay an average of 42% of their income in tax.

From the Equalities Trust report: "Council tax and VAT hit the poorest particularly hard, with the poorest 10% of households paying 7% of their gross income in council tax, compared to just 1.5% for the richest, and 12.5% of gross income paid in VAT (5% for rich)"

Huge posted:

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

Surely it is Income Tax as a definitive article; whatever precedes it? If we are talking about UK Income Tax rather than the generic principle of course.

Bruce

I think you mean a proper noun!

However we're getting to a digression from the previous digression from the original subject of Corbyin's interaction with a Czech spy!

Indeed. That is Comprehensive School education for you!

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

Huge posted:

Bruce Woodhouse posted:

Surely it is Income Tax as a definitive article; whatever precedes it? If we are talking about UK Income Tax rather than the generic principle of course.

Bruce

I think you mean a proper noun!

However we're getting to a digression from the previous digression from the original subject of Corbyin's interaction with a Czech spy!

Indeed. That is Comprehensive School education for you!

You seem to have done very well on it: Mr Corbyn would approve!

Jeremy Corbyn went to Grammar School.  

Corbyn for me sort of represent a Jekyll & Hyde character.  He likes to present to the public as a holier than thou  socialist, but on the other hand he attracts extreme ways eg his supporters using menacing tactics against other Labour candidates, his association with the IRA (we only have his word as to the reason for his meetings} and now contact with Chechoslovakian (Soviet) Intelligence.  If someone dug deeper to his past and past acts I would not be surprised that more  anomolies would appear which would be in contrast to the political 'persona' he attempts to show to us.