http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/07/alistair-darling-shock-tax-bankers
What do you think then? I will some my opinion up in one word:
Good.
Poll: Darling announces one-off shock tax to 'break bonus culture'
- Thread starter Naffa
- Start date
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/07/alistair-darling-shock-tax-bankers
What do you think then? I will some my opinion up in one word:
Good.
Utter idiocy, but then what else do we expect from labour.
It won't raise any significant revenue.
It will damage the UK's status as a financial centre.
It will again show Labour thrive on the politics of jealousy.
Taxation should not be used for cheap points scoring.
It won't raise any significant revenue.
It will damage the UK's status as a financial centre.
It will again show Labour thrive on the politics of jealousy.
Taxation should not be used for cheap points scoring.
Totally stupid.
It's going to end up with banks relocating offices outwith the UK, and we'll loose out as a country whilst the people that make these big bonuses won't be harmed at all (as they shouldn't be).
We are so much in debt that they are looking for every little thing they can do to raise token amounts of money whilst not actually looking for major savings which will cut into a debt levels.
It's going to end up with banks relocating offices outwith the UK, and we'll loose out as a country whilst the people that make these big bonuses won't be harmed at all (as they shouldn't be).
We are so much in debt that they are looking for every little thing they can do to raise token amounts of money whilst not actually looking for major savings which will cut into a debt levels.
Come again?If there is one thing Darling is NOT known for, it's being populist.
There is no other good reason for it... And if you think this is not a blatant appeal to the masses (which sadly will work because people are irrational, stupid and jealous) then can you explain what you think it will actually achieve?
Remember, Darling is the muppet who proposed the 50% income tax band.... Which will hardly raise any revenue and is jealousy politics again.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 4,534
- Location
- UK
In terms of achievement, I think that there needs to be a change in culture. How can it be right that the banks get pumped full of investment, curtsey of the tax payer and then they see the money going out on £11.4bn of bonues, in the case of Goldman Sachs?
I have no envy, nor desire to own copious amounts of money.
The 50% rate also makes it massively complicated to plan how someone should best withdraw money from a business, as there are now 8 different effective rates that could apply depending on subtly different circumstances.
So much for tax simplification, which they keep talking about.
In terms of achievement, I think that there needs to be a change in culture. How can it be right that the banks get pumped full of investment, curtsey of the tax payer and then they see the money going out on £11.4bn of bonues, in the case of Goldman Sachs?
Ah, but we're not propping up Goldman Sachs.
So why do we care what bonuses they get?
(Devil's advocate, I'm not sure what I think either way)
We propped up the banking industry. Had it not been for the investment into RBS and Lloyds, the banking industry as a whole could have collapsed. You are aware that this is a one off tax? It's not becoming an annual tax, it's just a one off 'shock tax' (a term I've never come across before). People are going to have to pay it regardless, it creates no incentive to move away as they wouldn't have to pay it again.
i dont really care how much bonus they get tbh. if their employers feel they have earned it and can justify it then cool, thats all that matters.
so what if it is 10s of thousands, or hundreds of thousands.
if the banks are paying back what they owe on time to the agreed schedules that are in place, who cares?
stupid darling!
so what if it is 10s of thousands, or hundreds of thousands.
if the banks are paying back what they owe on time to the agreed schedules that are in place, who cares?
stupid darling!
Imagine it's due to come in around..oooh.. 10 May 2010 or thereabouts.
Labour must be having a field day right now announcing supa-populist policies right left and centre and watching the Nu-Tories try and keep up
All good fun etc etc
Labour must be having a field day right now announcing supa-populist policies right left and centre and watching the Nu-Tories try and keep up
All good fun etc etc
Peoples lives have been turned upside down by some of the banking **** wits, it's to be expected that people will be upset by the bonuses banded about.
These sort of decisions to appeal to the masses rightly or wrongly is what they all do, regardless of party.
Just like the MP expenses, none of them gave a damn until they were caught out. Then they all came out with nice ways to be popular.
I dont trust any of the slimy ****s. They really need to stick a none of the above box on the next election to stop the BNP gaining more ground.
In terms of achievement, I think that there needs to be a change in culture. How can it be right that the banks get pumped full of investment, curtsey of the tax payer and then they see the money going out on £11.4bn of bonues, in the case of Goldman Sachs?
As above Goldman Sachs is not state owned. I recall they had a short term emergency loan at some point, but that was paid off and there was still money left for bonuses last year. The thing is this will be a ONE OFF tax, labour are not going to get in for another term, and I seriously doubt the tories will keep it implemented. The treasurer of the Conservatives has already said if taxes rise he will take his investment bank abroad.
It also seems rather discriminatory. Might as well ask for a man tax, or people with 6 toes one foot tax.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
/thread
In terms of achievement, I think that there needs to be a change in culture. How can it be right that the banks get pumped full of investment, curtsey of the tax payer and then they see the money going out on £11.4bn of bonues, in the case of Goldman Sachs?
Because we want to make a return on our investment and therefore have to pay the market level of pay and benefits to ensure it doesn't end up filled with crap like every other publicly funded institution?
More complicated system = more jobs in the public sector. Labour, for some reason, think that non-productive public sector welfare jobs are a good thing...
Most of their recent policies (certainly most of the public spending cuts) have been stolen straight from the tories. The others are retarded policies that make no sense but get the proles voting for the party of jealousy.
isnt the point that the employer is essentially the goverment and anyone who pays taxes yet they are going ahead with stupid bonuses anyway.
i doubt the different between an average investment banker and an exceptional one is anything other than how good they network and who they know
No, the government is an investor, not the employer, and it is the bank's obligation to provide the best value for the shareholders.
The government has decided to ignore value and go for popularity, a move that makes no sense, damages the other shareholders, and indeed could put the board in breach of company regulation if they interfered (hence the statement that they would have to quit if overruled).