A Political Thread pt. 2

[ncurd]

What's the issue with people having to pay tax where they buy and sell the goods as opposed to where they declare profits? People have rightly been arguing this for years and the minimum is to make sure the top economies don't have a race to the bottom.

Means places like where I once worked can't open a head office in Guernsey (which was the owners moving out there and working at home) whilst all their employees and trading was done in the UK.

It's been a long time coming and unsure how it will end in tears as I can't see amazon suddenly shutting up shop in all these places.

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

As said above, it's been a long time coming and the idea that these companies would abandon a country that made them actually pay taxes on profits earned in that country is laughable, that was only a stick they could use when threatening to declare their profits somewhere else. Take away that stick and the only other option is to pull out entirely, which would make no sense as that would hurt them far more than paying the taxes on the profits.

If I have to see 1/3rd of my income vanish instantly through taxes then the likes of Amazon can deal with 15%.

 

[Bada-Bing!]

What's the issue with people having to pay tax where they buy and sell the goods as opposed to where they declare profits? People have rightly been arguing this for years and the minimum is to make sure the top economies don't have a race to the bottom.

Means places like where I once worked can't open a head office in Guernsey (which was the owners moving out there and working at home) whilst all their employees and trading was done in the UK.

It's been a long time coming and unsure how it will end in tears as I can't see amazon suddenly shutting up shop in all these places.

G7: Rich nations back deal to tax multinationals

G7 finance ministers have agreed to work together to create a "level playing field" on global taxation.

www.bbc.co.uk

Well how companies are taxed in the UK depends on where the company is resident.

A company will generally be UK tax-resident if it is incorporated in the UK or, in the case of a non-UK incorporated company, if the central management and control of its business is in the UK.

Non-UK tax-resident companies are liable to corporation tax if they trade in the UK through a 'permanent establishment'. This includes a fixed place of business for trading operations and may include some agents in the UK.

It gets more complicated with Group structures which these massive companies the likes of Amazon, Microsoft etc trade through.

Today's decision should help, but doesn't stop these companies registering one of their companies abroad or getting around the rules somehow and diverting their profits to a lower tax resident jurisdiction. Just sets a minimum in the G7 and EU. A step in the right direction as long as other G20 countries follow suit and they force the likes of Bermuda and the Cayman Islands to start charging these companies for tax.

 

[ncurd]

Snip

Cheers

 

[Bada-Bing!]

Is this why DJT took down his blog website?

 

[ncurd]

Ollie Robinson: PM Boris Johnson supports Oliver Dowden's comments that ECB 'has gone too far'

Prime Minister Boris Johnson backs comments made by Culture Secretary Oliver Dowden that the England and Wales Cricket Board "has gone over the top" in suspending bowler Ollie Robinson.

www.bbc.com

Okay this one is a bit light the touch paper but why the **** are politicians getting involved? Robinson tweets that are so bad no publications seams willing to actually publish their content or discuss their content. He did make them a long time ago but obviously didn't delete them or inform about them contradictory to probably any basic social media policy that would of been in place in any of the contracts he's signed. So he'd been given a fairly basic suspended pending an investigation (which would happen in any job). The ECB made him read out a statement and supported him throughout the match. Also those who know anything about Cricket that despite how well he bowled it was always likely he'd play the one test whilst they gave Overton or Stone a chance in the second test because that's kind of how its being run at the moment and he was extremely unlike to feature in the India series when IPL players became available. When the investigations done he'll probably have to go on a 'course' and that'll be the end of it.

Is it just me or does this feel all a bit regulation and people are throwing their arms in the air due to nonsense.


Minor point: A pox on the journalist who sat on this waiting for his international debut. Should of been out in the open long before the first day of a test.

 

[Which Tyler]

Minor point: A pox on (gutter) journalists.

FTFY

 

[BiggusLaddus]

Minor point: A pox on the journalist who sat on this waiting for his international debut. Should of been out in the open long before the first day of a test.

Couldn't agree more.

The key question for me is whether he has already been punished for it or not. I believe he lost his county contact at the time, but was that because of this or other things?

If he got away with it at the time and never thought it might be sensible to go back and delete, then frankly he's an idiot and deserves some form of punishment now.

But whatever the rights and wrongs, politicians should keep their noses out.

 

[ncurd]

Couldn't agree more.

The key question for me is whether he has already been punished for it or not. I believe he lost his county contact at the time, but was that because of this or other things?

If he got away with it at the time and never thought it might be sensible to go back and delete, then frankly he's an idiot and deserves some form of punishment now.

But whatever the rights and wrongs, politicians should keep their noses out.

Basically he was went a bit nuts at that age and was burning the candle at both ends. My understanding is his original contract was dropped because of a failure to commit to training etc. https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/spo...ches-discipline-leading-exit-robinson-1837446

If he was sacked for the tweets and Yorkshire didn't disclosure them it begs the question, why his next country wasn't informed or the ECB still. Tis why there needs to a proper investigation.

 

[Reiser99]

It one of the most debated topics recently with the advent of social media and historical posts. How accountable should people be for what they have written in the past, especially when they were younger?

Some people that argue that everyone makes mistakes that when people are younger they will make mistakes. For me that is a load of crap. People are responsible for their actions, especially once they are an adult and time doesn't absolve them of responsibility. Yes there are some mistakes that aren't serious and can maybe be forgiven for youth, racist and offensive content is not one of those for me. Now some people also say that people may no longer have those same views. Well in that case, they knew what they had written before hand and they should own up to it. Not hope it is never discovered and then apologise if it is. Unless someone has owned up to what they said voluntarily then I struggle to believe their views have changed that much.

The next question really what is a proportional punishment for what transpired in the past. Again for me personally it should be the same as if they had just wrote it. It is the content that is being punished, not the time it was written. I've always thought time limits on transgressions is ridiculous. If you committed a crime/infringement etc... then you should be punished regardless.

In the case of Ollie Robinson, I've not seen what he's read, but people on here have said it is at the more extreme end of offensive content. He seems to have hoped it would stay buried rather than voluntarily admitting and apologising and only apologises when he's caught. None of that suggests his views have changed massively. For me he deserves everything he gets.

As for Dowden and Johnson they are just jumping on the right wing nonsense that suggests people shouldn't be punished for their past, trying to score political points. It's pathetic, but will probably work on some.

Finally, I think most journalists are amoral and it is one of the scummiest professions on the planet.

 

[ncurd]

I think there is some fair jot for saying stupid crap as a kid even as an adult. I've said some stupid crap, I also own my stupid crap, I'm honest with people about apologise for behaviour and do try to keep learning (this especially true to trans people who I was highly insenitive about in the past, section 28 was a pain and probably meant an entire generation or two had to educate themselves in thier 20's when confronted with LGBTQ+ people and beyond. However yes I agree it looks like Robinson tried to bury his head in the sand and not acknowledge his mistakes in regards to this just the stuff that was known more publicly and that's pretty damning.

 

[McTallshort]

It one of the most debated topics recently with the advent of social media and historical posts. How accountable should people be for what they have written in the past, especially when they were younger?

Some people that argue that everyone makes mistakes that when people are younger they will make mistakes. For me that is a load of crap. People are responsible for their actions, especially once they are an adult and time doesn't absolve them of responsibility. Yes there are some mistakes that aren't serious and can maybe be forgiven for youth, racist and offensive content is not one of those for me. Now some people also say that people may no longer have those same views. Well in that case, they knew what they had written before hand and they should own up to it. Not hope it is never discovered and then apologise if it is. Unless someone has owned up to what they said voluntarily then I struggle to believe their views have changed that much.

The next question really what is a proportional punishment for what transpired in the past. Again for me personally it should be the same as if they had just wrote it. It is the content that is being punished, not the time it was written. I've always thought time limits on transgressions is ridiculous. If you committed a crime/infringement etc... then you should be punished regardless.

In the case of Ollie Robinson, I've not seen what he's read, but people on here have said it is at the more extreme end of offensive content. He seems to have hoped it would stay buried rather than voluntarily admitting and apologising and only apologises when he's caught.

When should he apologise then? You write something stupid on twitter and then come out straight away and publicly apologise? Given that he was barely a county cricketer at the time, who would have given a toss? Or do you wait until your county debut? Or after you take 100 wickets? or as soon as you make England you come out and say "9 years ago I put something offensive on Twitter" .

I mean who would actually do that?

 

[Welsh Exile]

I dunno about this to be honest. Yeah, he said some stupid **** as a young man but he's since apologised and he doesn't hold those views anymore which is the most important thing. An apology and maybe get him in some awareness programme or something is fine. No need to go so full on in my opinion.

Similar to the Argentinian rugby players. Just need to make sure they don't hold these views anymore and get them raising awareness or whatever and apologise obviously. Teenagers say stupid crap all the time to seem big or funny or whatever. Sometimes they say it because they're stupid, sometimes they say it because they really believe it and sometimes they say it when they don't really believe it but want to impress mates or whatever.

At least there's a public recognition of wrongdoing on the accused party in this scenario. What concerns me more is the people who are smarter and know not to spout their views on social media but still hold racist or homophobic opinions. That is where the fight has to be taken, not to people who acted immaturely as teenagers and have since realised the errors of their ways.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

I dunno about this to be honest. Yeah, he said some stupid **** as a young man but he's since apologised and he doesn't hold those views anymore which is the most important thing. An apology and maybe get him in some awareness programme or something is fine. No need to go so full on in my opinion.

Similar to the Argentinian rugby players. Just need to make sure they don't hold these views anymore and get them raising awareness or whatever and apologise obviously. Teenagers say stupid crap all the time to seem big or funny or whatever. Sometimes they say it because they're stupid, sometimes they say it because they really believe it and sometimes they say it when they don't really believe it but want to impress mates or whatever.

At least there's a public recognition of wrongdoing on the accused party in this scenario. What concerns me more is the people who are smarter and know not to spout their views on social media but still hold racist or homophobic opinions. That is where the fight has to be taken, not to people who acted immaturely as teenagers and have since realised the errors of their ways.

Never agreed with you so fully mate

 

[ncurd]

I dunno about this to be honest. Yeah, he said some stupid **** as a young man but he's since apologised and he doesn't hold those views anymore which is the most important thing. An apology and maybe get him in some awareness programme or something is fine.

Similar to the Argentinian rugby players. Just need to make sure they don't hold these views anymore and get them raising awareness or whatever and apologise obviously.

At least there's a public recognition of wrongdoing on the accused party in this scenario.

So all this is essentially, what is happening but they need to investigate it all to make sure he doesn't hold those views rather than acting contrite when caught. So whilst that investigation goes on he's suspended and misses out playing maybe one game (he was never playing in the India series) so what part is.
"No need to go so full on in my opinion."

What if they conduct the investigation and discover he's a pretty racist fucker who just learnt to spread it over social media and they let him carry on playing.

People go on about how kneeling and t shirt campaigns are performative and don't mean ****. So when a group actually takes reasonable action they've gone too far.

Ollie Robinson: ECB has no room for error in investigation, says Jonathan Agnew

The England and Wales Cricket board has no room for error in its investigation into historical racist and sexist tweets by bowler Ollie Robinson.

www.bbc.co.uk

Is pretty fair summary of the ECBs point of view.

 

[Welsh Exile]

So all this is essentially, what is happening but they need to investigate it all to make sure he doesn't hold those views rather than acting contrite when caught. So whilst that investigation goes on he's suspended and misses out playing maybe one game (he was never playing in the India series) so what part is.
"No need to go so full on in my opinion."

What if they conduct the investigation and discover he's a pretty racist fucker who just learnt to spread it over social media and they let him carry on playing.

People go on about how kneeling and t shirt campaigns are performative and don't mean ****. So when a group actually takes reasonable action they've gone too far.

Ollie Robinson: ECB has no room for error in investigation, says Jonathan Agnew

The England and Wales Cricket board has no room for error in its investigation into historical racist and sexist tweets by bowler Ollie Robinson.

www.bbc.co.uk

Is pretty fair summary of the ECBs point of view.

Yeah that's fair. Probably not the best wording so you're right to pull me up on that. I guess I'm saying an apology is enough. I suppose I'm not against the idea of a suspension pending investigation but I'd imagine he's not said anything bad since as surely it would've got flagged up ages ago so this investigation is a formality really and it would be a shame for him if he missed out on more games which I initially thought he would.

You're right, though, I shouldn't have said it was so full on.

 

[Gavin]

Good documentary on how Brexit has impacted a few businessess

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I'm in 2 minds about this, teenagers say all sorts of stupid **** that they then grow out of, I know I have that is probably still floating around the internet somewhere that someone could find. I don't think an adult should be held responsible for something stupid they said as a teenager years and years ago. The flip side is that certain extreme views held as a teenager tend to stick. All the people I knew who held any sort of extreme views as teenagers still hold them, whether that is hardline religious, racist, sexist, homophobic etc. For the most part they are just more careful about when they reveal it. Some did it to be "angsty" and grew out of it but the ones that truly believed it still do.

If he was a full on extreme racist, I very much doubt that has changed.

 

[Not Mike Brown's Sock]

@TRF_Olyy feel free to remove this if it violates any rules but I do think it's important to see the actual tweets for context.

To me, they just seem like a mix of really shitty, unfunny jokes and then some pretty standard (wrongly but that's the reality) crap takes on women from a teen trying to get cheap laughs on the internet.

Nothing really to see here imo if he apologizes.

If they turn out to be his actual beliefs (I'd be surprised given the tweets) then obviously hold him accountable but this is just **** attempts at humour tbh.

The ebola one is an odd one to include I think cause there's no indication he's even talking about a black person but I guess that's the assumption.

 

[ncurd]

@TRF_Olyy feel free to remove this if it violates any rules but I do think it's important to see the actual tweets for context.

To me, they just seem like a mix of really shitty, unfunny jokes and then some pretty standard (wrongly but that's the reality) crap takes on women from a teen trying to get cheap laughs on the internet.

Nothing really to see here imo if he apologizes.

If they turn out to be his actual beliefs (I'd be surprised given the tweets) then obviously hold him accountable but this is just **** attempts at humour tbh.

The ebola one is an odd one to include I think cause there's no indication he's even talking about a black person but I guess that's the assumption.

View attachment 11092

There's also this one which IMO is far worse than any of those, sticking a hash tag at the end doesn't stop a racist joke being racist in nature. It's weird it appears to be the under reported one...

I've heard of multiple using the 'n' word but haven't seen evidence of them. That said where I heard it was from a pundit during the actual match on Sky Sports.


Again though ultimately what the ECB do if they do let him play Thursday without conducting an investigation and discover this isn't some kid being a dick because people can be at that age. Everyone will come down on them like a ton of bricks.