And yet people who are happy with tax avoidance always cite the fact that it's legal, and if we want it changing we should show this by voting for someone who will change it; idealistic naievity at its finest.
Should Gary Barlow return his OBE?
- Thread starter easyrider
- Start date
It is hardly an idealistic novelty to expect the current government to identify and close loopholes that they know full-well make legal tax avoidance possible. They can easily do this with the powers they hold, and indeed sometimes choose not to http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...ts-treasury-at-least-500m-a-year-8899864.html
So yeah, the government is happy to lose half a billion in corporate loopholes, but make a "moral issue" out of individuals like Jimmy Carr etc and promise to close those loopholes that allow individuals to do this. Inconsistency at its finest, and hardly the right message to send out.
So yeah, your post regarding the potential of that being "idealistic naievety" makes little sense.
No I'm not being obtuse, I genuinely think it makes little sense.
Was that link supposed to be useful? So now, shall I write to my MP to complain about this legal loophole that the government refuses to close? Complain with my next vote? Thats democracy in action!
Except of course, it makes **** all difference because writing to one's MP and voting for someone to try and change a specific policy is like urinating into the wind.
How would someone unhappy with the status quo go about getting things changed in relation to this then? If the PM wants to deny all responsibility and pass it onto the Treasury?
Except of course, it makes **** all difference because writing to one's MP and voting for someone to try and change a specific policy is like urinating into the wind.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 31 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 2,545
- Location
- Leyland
Even if everybody paid the exact amount of tax the government demanded of them it wouldnt make a blind bit of difference, the government would still waste it.
If an indivdual can save some cash while acting within the law, good luck to them.
Its upto the government to change the law not the individual to change their morals.
This has been going on since tax was introduced thats why accountants were invented.
Let them carry on. I feel most people who rage when a celeb or big earner get dragged through the media like this are just butthurt because they are not rich and successful and have no genuine concern for the state of the treasuries bottom line.
If an indivdual can save some cash while acting within the law, good luck to them.
Its upto the government to change the law not the individual to change their morals.
This has been going on since tax was introduced thats why accountants were invented.
Let them carry on. I feel most people who rage when a celeb or big earner get dragged through the media like this are just butthurt because they are not rich and successful and have no genuine concern for the state of the treasuries bottom line.
My point was that why should we as individuals care about legal tax loopholes that the government knows about, yet refuses to close?
Until they take action and close those loopholes using the powers they patently have to do so, then they are fair game, regardless of any moral fluffiness BS that people want to attach to it.
Ah ok, I didn't realise you were advocating complete political apathy.
Speaking purely about tax in the context it is being discussed is hardly "advocating political apathy", but then again deep down, under the emotional knee-jerk responses, I'm sure you're well aware of that.
'Not caring about something the government refuses to change' would constitute political apathy to me. I can't really see how you could argue otherwise. In a wider context certainly.
Though if you're then saying that we shouldn't care about it because tax problems are a small issue, I'd find that odd at best.
Though if you're then saying that we shouldn't care about it because tax problems are a small issue, I'd find that odd at best.
Last edited:
I also find it telling that tax avoidance advocaters would cite Alan Sugar or Richard Branson as a role model. Yes they've made a shed load of money by looking after the pennies and avoiding tax. Whoop-de-*******-do. What paragons of virtue they are.
While your statement is undoubtedly true, the fiscal integrity of the United Kingdom is actually rather important and although issues such as the Philippines and Syria are probably more important I see no reason why we shouldn't be able to tackle the issue of tax avoidance at the same time as dealing with other issues.
I have always been cynical about rich people begging for charity & always say put your hand in your own pocket first, Chuck 10% of your worth in & I'll do the same. 
As for Gary Barlow & OBE's I care not one jot about either of them.
As for Gary Barlow & OBE's I care not one jot about either of them.
Paragons of virtue? You are really looking for examples of paragons of virtue?
They don't exist except in your fantasy-driven mind, celebrity or otherwise, which is the point I and others have been unsuccessfully trying to drive home. This tax avoidance issue is not one of virtue or morality, it doesn't make you a "bad person", it is simple financial logic based on legal loopholes that the government is fully aware of and doesn't want to seem to do anything about.
Only people such as yourself and easyrider (who started the thread and apparently has all the financial knowledge of a floret of broccoli) are making a big hoo-haa about it being some kind of reprehensible act that is contributing towards all the ills of society.
There are many, many more important things to fix in our society than legal tax avoidance from individuals, which the government itself doesn't seem to be too concerned about other than in PR spurts. They and the tabloid rags make a fuss now and then, and the average bloke on the street who knows next to zero about it other than the sensationalist articles he reads gets riled up about it and comes on to OCUK to post threads.
You're putting words into my mouth.
I haven't expressed whether or not I think it an evil of society. What I've been talking about is how impossible it is for anyone to get the status quo changed if they want too, hence the ironic naeivity of your stated position. I also haven't really mentioned morals, ok the "paragon of virtue" line was crass, granted.
Yes there are far more important things to be fixing. Where should we drawn the line at caring though? Have a ranking system?
I haven't expressed whether or not I think it an evil of society. What I've been talking about is how impossible it is for anyone to get the status quo changed if they want too, hence the ironic naeivity of your stated position. I also haven't really mentioned morals, ok the "paragon of virtue" line was crass, granted.
Yes there are far more important things to be fixing. Where should we drawn the line at caring though? Have a ranking system?
Ok, lets put the bickering aside. 
Its not impossible to get the status quo changed, it will just take time. The government is aware, pressure is mounting, and slowly it will be fixed. That is pretty much inevitable.
As for where we draw the line... I guess it depends what your priorities are. A tax avoidance issue that doesn't even realistically affect anyone here in any meaningful or significant way... or rising unemployment, healthcare and pension crisis, dramatically rising social disorder and casual violence backed up by increasingly weak policing policies which affect pretty much all of us on at least a semi-regular basis.
That's the kind of stuff I personally rate higher than legally allowable tax avoidance.
Its not impossible to get the status quo changed, it will just take time. The government is aware, pressure is mounting, and slowly it will be fixed. That is pretty much inevitable.
As for where we draw the line... I guess it depends what your priorities are. A tax avoidance issue that doesn't even realistically affect anyone here in any meaningful or significant way... or rising unemployment, healthcare and pension crisis, dramatically rising social disorder and casual violence backed up by increasingly weak policing policies which affect pretty much all of us on at least a semi-regular basis.
That's the kind of stuff I personally rate higher than legally allowable tax avoidance.
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
Caporegime
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 28,767
- Location
- Auckland
Overclockers UK Forums > Life > General Discussion > Should Gary Busey become the Godhead?
Ok, lets put the bickering aside.
Its not impossible to get the status quo changed, it will just take time. The government is aware, pressure is mounting, and slowly it will be fixed. That is pretty much inevitable.
As for where we draw the line... I guess it depends what your priorities are. A tax avoidance issue that doesn't even realistically affect anyone here in any meaningful or significant way... or rising unemployment, healthcare and pension crisis, dramatically rising social disorder and casual violence backed up by increasingly weak policing policies which affect pretty much all of us on at least a semi-regular basis.
That's the kind of stuff I personally rate higher than legally allowable tax avoidance.
Cheers, a post I can agree with almost all of, and this is not to bicker back, but I'm sceptical as to whether or not "we" can get these things changed.
Ahh I see what you mean. No , us personally as taxpayers won't really be able to change anything, but the government will have to fix them at some point due to mounting pressure from internal parties, media coverage, and external watchdogs. How long that will take them, and the real reasons behind why they are hesitant in closing them, aren't completely clear. Don't forget the government loves taxes and it loves money, and if you seem them dragging their heels about collecting that money then you can rest assured there's a damn good (and usually slightly furtive) reason for it.