Grandad.Malky Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 It's not a "granny tax", that is just spin from the left wing press. . I will give you the Mirror but what about the other three The Daily Mail says the chancellor has "picked the pockets of pensioners". The Express says 5m of them have been "robbed". And the Sun says that, while he has saved Wallace and Gromit with his film incentive, he has put too much money in "the wrong trousers". The most brutal assessment is in the Mirror, where Mr Osborne and David Cameron are the subject of a mocked-up picture showing them wearing hoodies and carrying a baseball bat. "Mugged", says the headline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Overall Posted March 22, 2012 Author Share Posted March 22, 2012 Thanks, that's cleared it up some.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptowngirl Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Or, in other words....... Pensioners will not recieve on penny above what they currently receive, but Wayne Rooney will receive an additional £700,000 per year for no extra effort. But, Hey! we're all in it together! It's just that some are standing on the shoulders of others. Actually nothing could be further from the truth. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1347677/Top-footballers-like-Wayne-Rooney-dodge-millions-tax-cashing-loophole.html Top footballers have been avoiding tax for years and one of the measures in the budget is to clamp down on these dodgers. So Mr Rooney will be paying considerably more tax in future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Do you consider The Daily Mail left wing? No, of course not, but they, like much of the media, have put "granny tax" in inverted commas, so where did it originate? I'm not a political person btw, in fact I'm anti party politics, so have no agenda. Just dislike the way these things get distorted. It's not a tax at all, as you will know. I apologise if I did offend anybody's party affiliations though, and take back my unintended slur. Oh no, wait, I don't give a toss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
green Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 No, of course not, but they, like much of the media, have put "granny tax" in inverted commas, so where did it originate? I'm not a political person btw, in fact I'm anti party politics, so have no agenda. Just dislike the way these things get distorted. It's not a tax at all, as you will know. I apologise if I did offend anybody's party affiliations though, and take back my unintended slur. Oh no, wait, I don't give a toss. It originated on twitter within minutes of the budgets paperwork being made available. Gransnet (im not making this up) kicked up a huge fuss yesterday and twitter was abuzz with their comments. The press picked it up, and had a field day with their front pages together. Once upon a time you could ensure what the headlines would be after a budget.....the internet has changed this now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 It originated on twitter within minutes of the budgets paperwork being made available. Gransnet (im not making this up) kicked up a huge fuss yesterday and twitter was abuzz with their comments. The press picked it up, and had a field day with their front pages together. Once upon a time you could ensure what the headlines would be after a budget.....the internet has changed this now. There main interest is still sensationalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Actually nothing could be further from the truth. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1347677/Top-footballers-like-Wayne-Rooney-dodge-millions-tax-cashing-loophole.html Top footballers have been avoiding tax for years and one of the measures in the budget is to clamp down on these dodgers. So Mr Rooney will be paying considerably more tax in future. So, the government know that the richest and most privileged in our country are avoiding paying tax left, right, and centre, as the majority are struggling to buy the basic necessities and pay the bills. And what is there answer to this? Drop the taxes for the rich! Absolutely disgusting. So, they're finally going to tackle tax avoidance are they? Great - let them do this FIRST before even thinking about handing the rich a tax cut. Oh no, too late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mapleboy Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 So, the government know that the richest and most privileged in our country are avoiding paying tax left, right, and centre, as the majority are struggling to buy the basic necessities and pay the bills. And what is there answer to this? Drop the taxes for the rich! Absolutely disgusting. So, they're finally going to tackle tax avoidance are they? Great - let them do this FIRST before even thinking about handing the rich a tax cut. Oh no, too late. Did you honestly expect anything else from the Tories? What was it Thatcher said? "Where there is discord may we bring harmony..." Yeah, right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 So, the government know that the richest and most privileged in our country are avoiding paying tax left, right, and centre, as the majority are struggling to buy the basic necessities and pay the bills. And what is there answer to this? Drop the taxes for the rich! Absolutely disgusting. What's your chief requirement for a taxation system? Should it maximise returns by being low enough to encourage economic activity and high enough to take advantage of said activity? Or should there be some other objective? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Vader Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 What's your chief requirement for a taxation system? Should it maximise returns by being low enough to encourage economic activity and high enough to take advantage of said activity? Or should there be some other objective? There is no evidence that reducing the 50p tax will bring in more revenue whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.