Squatters Rights Axed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kevinb

[quote author=Swanny link=1346417633/18#18 date=1346920316]http://www.davidicke.com/images/stor...66325080_n.jpg

---

Having more than one home if you have paid for it isn't a crime. Same as having one or more cars or motorbikes which I'm sure people on this forum have.
Wouldn't you be upset if someone just came up and sat on or got in your property?
[/quote]


You do know the Camerons have been squirreling money away in offshore tax havens for years? The same as the comedians he would have us scorn, so by avoiding tax, he has saved money, that otherwise would have gone into the economy, therefore ripping us off, therefore stealing from us, as he would have us believe. http://robertleather.wordpress.com/2...morally-wrong/

There is a huge legal difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion.

Of course you are right Graeme – evasion is illegal under current legislation and avoidance is not. Just because something is legally ok doesn’t mean to say that it is not morally wrong. Human torture is still legal in many states.

Like millions of ordinary workers, I earn a modest wage of which excluding NI contributions, 20% tax is deducted at source. In contrast, thousands of the richest UK residents who can afford good accountants are members of off-shore tax avoidance schemes, paying as little as 1% tax on there earnings.

Lord Ashcroft, the biggest financial contributor to PM Cameron’s Tories since the party was formed, has avoided paying millions in tax. This does not surprise me and is par for the course. But surely even the most fanatical right-wing of the party must be embarrassed at Cameron’s claim that, “We are all in this together?” I wonder why he has never repeated those words. :-?

I completely agree Ken and the law makers should put it right. We all try and avoid paying tax though and while its legal and as you say, morally wrong, its not the problem of the individuals its a problem with the law.

We will have to agree to disagree on that one Graeme – until the law is change (a big if) I’m delighted that the greedy wealthy individuals are named and shamed.

If they are not prepared to pay their fair share in tax, why should they have the right to a lavish lifestyle at our expense and enjoy all the benefits the state provides?

They won’t be calling their wealthy accountants when their mansions get robbed, they will ring 999.

I just don't see value, other than political advantage, to place blame on individuals whoever they are if they haven't broken the law. You need to change the law to make it fair. If its wrong to break the law and also wrong to not break the law, then we just end up at confused.com.

Graeme, political advantage? I'll slag em whatever party they belong to. With respect if you can't see what message this sends out and why it angers so many hard-pressed ordinary tax-payers then so be it.

If the present administration showed the same political will on tax avoidance as they have in cutting public services, It would no longer be an issue.

I'm not disagreeing with you Ken in terms of what the end result should be, I just don't think shouting about it will make any changes to the ways of the world - it needs a change in the law to make it happen.

That's democracy - if we make enough noise we just might bring about change. Who do the lawmakers represent? (Or should anyway)

I'd rather sit by my PC and enjoy an engaging chat with you than sit through the soaps on TV. 8-)

You aint been to the H&C for a while?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monday21

That's democracy - if we make enough noise we just might bring about change. Who do the lawmakers represent? (Or should anyway)

---

Exactly, at the end of the day its the democratically elected who makes the law.