Join the Labour Party and save your country!

1…330331333335336…482

Comments

  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Although it's not what everyone is worried about.
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • Longshot
    Longshot Posts: 940
    ben6899 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Although it's not what everyone is worried about.
    What the Jewish community is concerned about is having a PM who actively dislikes them (or seems to) and the future consequences of that.

    You may feel they're being silly but would you dismiss such fears as easily if they were being voiced by the west indian or asian community?

    Also, it's wrong to dismiss this as Daily Mail scaremongering. When Labour MPs are quitting the party over this precise issue, I'd suggest there's more foundation to it than that.
    You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    Guess what, man who believes in jewish conspiracy theories now believes a conspiracy for the tories to sell off the entirety of the NHS.
    _
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Although it's not what everyone is worried about.
    What the Jewish community is concerned about is having a PM who actively dislikes them (or seems to) and the future consequences of that.

    You may feel they're being silly but would you dismiss such fears as easily if they were being voiced by the west indian or asian community?

    Also, it's wrong to dismiss this as Daily Mail scaremongering. When Labour MPs are quitting the party over this precise issue, I'd suggest there's more foundation to it than that.
    I didn't say they were being silly, I said they were being fed lies in a bid to influence political outcomes. And yes, I would.

    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • Longshot
    Longshot Posts: 940
    ben6899 said:

    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Although it's not what everyone is worried about.
    What the Jewish community is concerned about is having a PM who actively dislikes them (or seems to) and the future consequences of that.

    You may feel they're being silly but would you dismiss such fears as easily if they were being voiced by the west indian or asian community?

    Also, it's wrong to dismiss this as Daily Mail scaremongering. When Labour MPs are quitting the party over this precise issue, I'd suggest there's more foundation to it than that.
    I didn't say they were being silly, I said they were being fed lies in a bid to influence political outcomes. And yes, I would.

    So you believe that Labour's own MPs are quitting based on lies told to them by the Daily Mail rather than their own experiences? Really?
    You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Although it's not what everyone is worried about.
    What the Jewish community is concerned about is having a PM who actively dislikes them (or seems to) and the future consequences of that.

    You may feel they're being silly but would you dismiss such fears as easily if they were being voiced by the west indian or asian community?

    Also, it's wrong to dismiss this as Daily Mail scaremongering. When Labour MPs are quitting the party over this precise issue, I'd suggest there's more foundation to it than that.
    I didn't say they were being silly, I said they were being fed lies in a bid to influence political outcomes. And yes, I would.

    So you believe that Labour's own MPs are quitting based on lies told to them by the Daily Mail rather than their own experiences? Really?
    No, I think there has been an issue with anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. And islamophobia. And homophobia. And all in between. Just like in the Tory Party and the Lib Dems (and of course the Brexit Party, but I believe they openly advertise it!).

    And it's being dealt with to varying degrees of success.

    I don't think that it lies.

    I do believe that when communities - in this case, Jewish - are fed information that kosher slaughter will be banned and the current community security arrangements will have a line drawn under them... I believe that is all lies. Generated by someone, somewhere in order to jump on the Corbyn hates the Jews bandwagon.

    Do you disagree?
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • Longshot
    Longshot Posts: 940
    ben6899 said:

    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Although it's not what everyone is worried about.
    What the Jewish community is concerned about is having a PM who actively dislikes them (or seems to) and the future consequences of that.

    You may feel they're being silly but would you dismiss such fears as easily if they were being voiced by the west indian or asian community?

    Also, it's wrong to dismiss this as Daily Mail scaremongering. When Labour MPs are quitting the party over this precise issue, I'd suggest there's more foundation to it than that.
    I didn't say they were being silly, I said they were being fed lies in a bid to influence political outcomes. And yes, I would.

    So you believe that Labour's own MPs are quitting based on lies told to them by the Daily Mail rather than their own experiences? Really?
    No, I think there has been an issue with anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. And islamophobia. And homophobia. And all in between. Just like in the Tory Party and the Lib Dems (and of course the Brexit Party, but I believe they openly advertise it!).

    And it's being dealt with to varying degrees of success.

    I don't think that it lies.

    I do believe that when communities - in this case, Jewish - are fed information that kosher slaughter will be banned and the current community security arrangements will have a line drawn under them... I believe that is all lies. Generated by someone, somewhere in order to jump on the Corbyn hates the Jews bandwagon.

    Do you disagree?
    No. I don't. To clarify, the Jewish people that I work with haven't mentioned the kosher ban or anything similar - I'd give them credit that they're too smart to fall for that. They are however still concerned about Corbyn.
    You can fool some of the people all of the time. Concentrate on those people.
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    longshot said:

    ben6899 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Although it's not what everyone is worried about.
    What the Jewish community is concerned about is having a PM who actively dislikes them (or seems to) and the future consequences of that.

    You may feel they're being silly but would you dismiss such fears as easily if they were being voiced by the west indian or asian community?

    Also, it's wrong to dismiss this as Daily Mail scaremongering. When Labour MPs are quitting the party over this precise issue, I'd suggest there's more foundation to it than that.
    I didn't say they were being silly, I said they were being fed lies in a bid to influence political outcomes. And yes, I would.

    So you believe that Labour's own MPs are quitting based on lies told to them by the Daily Mail rather than their own experiences? Really?
    No, I think there has been an issue with anti-Semitism in the Labour Party. And islamophobia. And homophobia. And all in between. Just like in the Tory Party and the Lib Dems (and of course the Brexit Party, but I believe they openly advertise it!).

    And it's being dealt with to varying degrees of success.

    I don't think that it lies.

    I do believe that when communities - in this case, Jewish - are fed information that kosher slaughter will be banned and the current community security arrangements will have a line drawn under them... I believe that is all lies. Generated by someone, somewhere in order to jump on the Corbyn hates the Jews bandwagon.

    Do you disagree?
    No. I don't. To clarify, the Jewish people that I work with haven't mentioned the kosher ban or anything similar - I'd give them credit that they're too smart to fall for that. They are however still concerned about Corbyn.
    Reassuring - maybe they can speak with the prominent bloke who wrote that piece for the Guardian!

    And I respect that. Genuine intrigue - what do they worry he'll do?
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    I disagree that labour are 'dealing' with it, unless by that you mean trying to brush it under the carpet.

    I believe the senior leadership team believe in some "international capitalist" conspiracy theories that are staple anti-semitic tropes.

    Hating 'finance' and anti-semitism often go hand in glove.
    _
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    rick_chasey said:

    I disagree that labour are 'dealing' with it, unless by that you mean trying to brush it under the carpet.

    I believe the senior leadership team believe in some "international capitalist" conspiracy theories that are staple anti-semitic tropes.

    Hating 'finance' and anti-semitism often go hand in glove.

    I did say to varying degrees of success.
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    Sure but you think the intent to fix it is there. I don't.
    _
  • kingstonian
    kingstonian Posts: 2,847
    rick_chasey said:

    I disagree that labour are 'dealing' with it, unless by that you mean trying to brush it under the carpet.

    I believe the senior leadership team believe in some "international capitalist" conspiracy theories that are staple anti-semitic tropes.

    Hating 'finance' and anti-semitism often go hand in glove.



    Spot on.

    Last night's interview was just the most recent of many, many opportunities that Corbyn has had to apologise for the impact this anti-semitic environment has had on many Jewish members of the party he leads, and he didn't take it. He is either unable or unwilling to stamp it out - both are shocking traits in someone wanting to be the political leader of our country.
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,866
    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Because he believes capitalism is bad, top of the capitalist tree are banks, banks are controlled by the jews and top of the banking tree are the Rothschilds.

    Andrew Neill knew exactly what question to ask him and how to frame it. Corbyn is too principled to just tell the obvious lie and make it go away which indicates how deeply he feels about the subject.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    Well yes. And people expect that to garner votes? I should hope not.
    _
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,549
    edited November 2019
    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    So if I have that right: raising it didn't change receipts beyond background variation and lowering the rate only created one bumper year because of one-off deferrals from the previous year. Hmm.

    So why bother? In the end it was an act of political spite as KG mentioned.

    Longer term we need to stay competitive in attracting investment and entrepreneurs.
    Most entrepreneurs already live here. They don't need to be attracted from anywhere. Maybe we should prioritise them.
    A lot of the top entrepreneurs in the USA are immigrants or 2nd generation. Their previously open economy has often been stated as one of the reasons behind it's long period of economic out-performance
    It was more a comment on Stevo's apparently rather narrow definition of entrepreneur.
    What definition was that?
    To read some of your posts you'd think the only investors in new or growing businesses are from outside the UK. Obviously they are part of it, but a guy starting up a small business with his life savings and a small bank loan secured on his house is also an entrepreneur.
    Clearly the home grown ones dont need attracting here (although the more successful ones should not be scared off or disincentivised). However attracting internationally mobile capital is important - similar to the situation where most UK trade is domestic, but nobody is saying that overseas trade doesnt matter.

    I also include the internationally mobile corporate capital here rather than your rather narrow definition ;) I have commented on this point before including what are the motivations and how there is a choice in many cases, hence the reality of tax competition.
    You'd be more convincing if you were arguing for encouraging competition by assisting start ups specifically, especially in industries which are oligpolistic.

    Unfortunately what you propose ends up benefiting big business much more than their smaller rivals (as they have the economies of scale to maximise their position) and ends up reducing competition.
    That's a completely different type of competition i.e. between enterprises within a particular market, as opposed to between countries for corporate tax revenues. Does that help you to understand it better?
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,549
    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    Saw something recently that Labour’s tax plans will raise £6bn and that is assuming behavioural changes reducing it from a potential £11bn.

    Compared to how much planned spending?
    You will have to expand on that as I really don’t see the relevance

    Just trying to see what they say they will raise compared with what they say they will spend.
    After the proposed Tory brexit I'd like to think that the hole in the finances will be bigger than what labour are proposing sans Brexit #justsaying.
    FTFY.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • kingstonian
    kingstonian Posts: 2,847
    surrey_commuter said:

    rick_chasey said:

    The bigger issue is why Corbyn loves the anti-Semitic conspiracy theories, tbh.

    Because he believes capitalism is bad, top of the capitalist tree are banks, banks are controlled by the jews and top of the banking tree are the Rothschilds.

    Andrew Neill knew exactly what question to ask him and how to frame it. Corbyn is too principled to just tell the obvious lie and make it go away which indicates how deeply he feels about the subject.


    Too principled to not tell the obvious lie, but not principled enough to admit his true beliefs.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    Saw something recently that Labour’s tax plans will raise £6bn and that is assuming behavioural changes reducing it from a potential £11bn.

    Compared to how much planned spending?
    You will have to expand on that as I really don’t see the relevance

    Just trying to see what they say they will raise compared with what they say they will spend.
    After the proposed Tory brexit I'd like to think that the hole in the finances will be bigger than what labour are proposing sans Brexit #justsaying.
    FTFY.
    You don’t think they will?

    Oh dear
    _
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    So if I have that right: raising it didn't change receipts beyond background variation and lowering the rate only created one bumper year because of one-off deferrals from the previous year. Hmm.

    So why bother? In the end it was an act of political spite as KG mentioned.

    Longer term we need to stay competitive in attracting investment and entrepreneurs.
    Most entrepreneurs already live here. They don't need to be attracted from anywhere. Maybe we should prioritise them.
    A lot of the top entrepreneurs in the USA are immigrants or 2nd generation. Their previously open economy has often been stated as one of the reasons behind it's long period of economic out-performance
    It was more a comment on Stevo's apparently rather narrow definition of entrepreneur.
    What definition was that?
    To read some of your posts you'd think the only investors in new or growing businesses are from outside the UK. Obviously they are part of it, but a guy starting up a small business with his life savings and a small bank loan secured on his house is also an entrepreneur.
    Clearly the home grown ones dont need attracting here (although the more successful ones should not be scared off or disincentivised). However attracting internationally mobile capital is important - similar to the situation where most UK trade is domestic, but nobody is saying that overseas trade doesnt matter.

    I also include the internationally mobile corporate capital here rather than your rather narrow definition ;) I have commented on this point before including what are the motivations and how there is a choice in many cases, hence the reality of tax competition.
    You'd be more convincing if you were arguing for encouraging competition by assisting start ups specifically, especially in industries which are oligpolistic.

    Unfortunately what you propose ends up benefiting big business much more than their smaller rivals (as they have the economies of scale to maximise their position) and ends up reducing competition.
    That's a completely different type of competition i.e. between enterprises within a particular market, as opposed to between countries for corporate tax revenues. Does that help you to understand it better?
    Which one benefits the consumer? Hmm?
    _
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,549
    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    Saw something recently that Labour’s tax plans will raise £6bn and that is assuming behavioural changes reducing it from a potential £11bn.

    Compared to how much planned spending?
    You will have to expand on that as I really don’t see the relevance

    Just trying to see what they say they will raise compared with what they say they will spend.
    After the proposed Tory brexit I'd like to think that the hole in the finances will be bigger than what labour are proposing sans Brexit #justsaying.
    FTFY.
    You don’t think they will?

    Oh dear
    What makes you think you're right?
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,549
    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    So if I have that right: raising it didn't change receipts beyond background variation and lowering the rate only created one bumper year because of one-off deferrals from the previous year. Hmm.

    So why bother? In the end it was an act of political spite as KG mentioned.

    Longer term we need to stay competitive in attracting investment and entrepreneurs.
    Most entrepreneurs already live here. They don't need to be attracted from anywhere. Maybe we should prioritise them.
    A lot of the top entrepreneurs in the USA are immigrants or 2nd generation. Their previously open economy has often been stated as one of the reasons behind it's long period of economic out-performance
    It was more a comment on Stevo's apparently rather narrow definition of entrepreneur.
    What definition was that?
    To read some of your posts you'd think the only investors in new or growing businesses are from outside the UK. Obviously they are part of it, but a guy starting up a small business with his life savings and a small bank loan secured on his house is also an entrepreneur.
    Clearly the home grown ones dont need attracting here (although the more successful ones should not be scared off or disincentivised). However attracting internationally mobile capital is important - similar to the situation where most UK trade is domestic, but nobody is saying that overseas trade doesnt matter.

    I also include the internationally mobile corporate capital here rather than your rather narrow definition ;) I have commented on this point before including what are the motivations and how there is a choice in many cases, hence the reality of tax competition.
    You'd be more convincing if you were arguing for encouraging competition by assisting start ups specifically, especially in industries which are oligpolistic.

    Unfortunately what you propose ends up benefiting big business much more than their smaller rivals (as they have the economies of scale to maximise their position) and ends up reducing competition.
    That's a completely different type of competition i.e. between enterprises within a particular market, as opposed to between countries for corporate tax revenues. Does that help you to understand it better?
    Which one benefits the consumer? Hmm?
    Stop changing the subject. Which was tax competition.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,698
    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    So if I have that right: raising it didn't change receipts beyond background variation and lowering the rate only created one bumper year because of one-off deferrals from the previous year. Hmm.

    So why bother? In the end it was an act of political spite as KG mentioned.

    Longer term we need to stay competitive in attracting investment and entrepreneurs.
    Most entrepreneurs already live here. They don't need to be attracted from anywhere. Maybe we should prioritise them.
    A lot of the top entrepreneurs in the USA are immigrants or 2nd generation. Their previously open economy has often been stated as one of the reasons behind it's long period of economic out-performance
    It was more a comment on Stevo's apparently rather narrow definition of entrepreneur.
    What definition was that?
    To read some of your posts you'd think the only investors in new or growing businesses are from outside the UK. Obviously they are part of it, but a guy starting up a small business with his life savings and a small bank loan secured on his house is also an entrepreneur.
    Clearly the home grown ones dont need attracting here (although the more successful ones should not be scared off or disincentivised). However attracting internationally mobile capital is important - similar to the situation where most UK trade is domestic, but nobody is saying that overseas trade doesnt matter.

    I also include the internationally mobile corporate capital here rather than your rather narrow definition ;) I have commented on this point before including what are the motivations and how there is a choice in many cases, hence the reality of tax competition.
    You'd be more convincing if you were arguing for encouraging competition by assisting start ups specifically, especially in industries which are oligpolistic.

    Unfortunately what you propose ends up benefiting big business much more than their smaller rivals (as they have the economies of scale to maximise their position) and ends up reducing competition.
    That's a completely different type of competition i.e. between enterprises within a particular market, as opposed to between countries for corporate tax revenues. Does that help you to understand it better?
    Which one benefits the consumer? Hmm?
    Stop changing the subject. Which was tax competition.
    The argument that tax competition is only one factor to consider when setting rates.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,549
    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rick_chasey said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    rjsterry said:

    Stevo_666 said:

    rjsterry said:

    So if I have that right: raising it didn't change receipts beyond background variation and lowering the rate only created one bumper year because of one-off deferrals from the previous year. Hmm.

    So why bother? In the end it was an act of political spite as KG mentioned.

    Longer term we need to stay competitive in attracting investment and entrepreneurs.
    Most entrepreneurs already live here. They don't need to be attracted from anywhere. Maybe we should prioritise them.
    A lot of the top entrepreneurs in the USA are immigrants or 2nd generation. Their previously open economy has often been stated as one of the reasons behind it's long period of economic out-performance
    It was more a comment on Stevo's apparently rather narrow definition of entrepreneur.
    What definition was that?
    To read some of your posts you'd think the only investors in new or growing businesses are from outside the UK. Obviously they are part of it, but a guy starting up a small business with his life savings and a small bank loan secured on his house is also an entrepreneur.
    Clearly the home grown ones dont need attracting here (although the more successful ones should not be scared off or disincentivised). However attracting internationally mobile capital is important - similar to the situation where most UK trade is domestic, but nobody is saying that overseas trade doesnt matter.

    I also include the internationally mobile corporate capital here rather than your rather narrow definition ;) I have commented on this point before including what are the motivations and how there is a choice in many cases, hence the reality of tax competition.
    You'd be more convincing if you were arguing for encouraging competition by assisting start ups specifically, especially in industries which are oligpolistic.

    Unfortunately what you propose ends up benefiting big business much more than their smaller rivals (as they have the economies of scale to maximise their position) and ends up reducing competition.
    That's a completely different type of competition i.e. between enterprises within a particular market, as opposed to between countries for corporate tax revenues. Does that help you to understand it better?
    Which one benefits the consumer? Hmm?
    Stop changing the subject. Which was tax competition.
    The argument that tax competition is only one factor to consider when setting rates.
    But nothing to do with the tangent that Rick was going off on.
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,698
    Didn't realise you were modding tonight. ;)
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Stevo_666
    Stevo_666 Posts: 58,549
    rjsterry said:

    Didn't realise you were modding tonight. ;)

    Nah, just pointing out his attempt to change the subject. Don't need to be a mod to do that :)
    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    edited November 2019
    most business owners are more concerned about taxes on capital gains than income surely
    _
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    Capitalists want capital innit
    _
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,866
    rick_chasey said:

    most business owners are more concerned about taxes on capital gains than income surely

    If you were valuing a business would you not be interested in net profit?

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 72,738
    surrey_commuter said:

    rick_chasey said:

    most business owners are more concerned about taxes on capital gains than income surely

    If you were valuing a business would you not be interested in net profit?

    valuations of amazon, uber etc suggest otherwise.....
    _
  • surrey_commuter
    surrey_commuter Posts: 18,866
    rick_chasey said:

    surrey_commuter said:

    rick_chasey said:

    most business owners are more concerned about taxes on capital gains than income surely

    If you were valuing a business would you not be interested in net profit?

    valuations of amazon, uber etc suggest otherwise.....
    I asked about you valuing a business

Categories