When will it stop?
- Thread starter noseall
- Start date
Sponsored Links
D
Doggit
Not the issue John.
Let's suppose the government owns and is in charge of, say, the railway network, or the NHS, or the motorways, or the police forces, or the army.
When things go well, it will preen itself and take the credit.
When things go badly it will deny being in charge.
Who do you think is in charge of the tax laws?i
When things go well, it will preen itself and take the credit.
When things go badly it will deny being in charge.
Who do you think is in charge of the tax laws?i
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 25 Jan 2017
- Messages
- 4,726
- Reaction score
- 64
- Country
Well that is one way to avoid the argument. I must remember that one for next time if I am backpedalling in a discussion with Doggit.
If!
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,439
- Reaction score
- 540
- Country
These laws are not drafted in isolation, they often use external help in the form of experts who then use that knowledge to help their clients avoid tax.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/apr/26/accountancy-firms-knowledge-treasury-avoid-tax
The so-called "big four" accountancy firms are using knowledge gained from staff seconded to the Treasury to help wealthy clients avoid paying UK taxes, a report by the influential Commons public accounts committee says.
Another one of Doggit ideas that we need more commercial acumen in Government being exposed as folly.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/apr/26/accountancy-firms-knowledge-treasury-avoid-tax
The so-called "big four" accountancy firms are using knowledge gained from staff seconded to the Treasury to help wealthy clients avoid paying UK taxes, a report by the influential Commons public accounts committee says.
Another one of Doggit ideas that we need more commercial acumen in Government being exposed as folly.
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,633
- Reaction score
- 2,194
- Country
There are some badly drafted statutes, but before critiquing the process and concluding its incompetence, you might consider the rather huge and well established process for interpreting them. A process that can make even laws drafted in the 1800 still relevant today.
back on topic, to me a terrorist acts in the name of a cause, belief or ideology. So far, I haven’t seen anything to support that.
I also think the problems in America aren’t caused by easy access to firearms, but more a lower value associated with life. Partly religious, partly a frontier culture, partly capital punishment.. If it’s ok to kill ‘bad’ people, people will justify their killing spree if only to themselves.
back on topic, to me a terrorist acts in the name of a cause, belief or ideology. So far, I haven’t seen anything to support that.
I also think the problems in America aren’t caused by easy access to firearms, but more a lower value associated with life. Partly religious, partly a frontier culture, partly capital punishment.. If it’s ok to kill ‘bad’ people, people will justify their killing spree if only to themselves.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,439
- Reaction score
- 540
- Country
Well in Nevada it will be considered as terrorism.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-law-act-police-stephen-paddock-a7978456.html
The label is only important because it shapes the narrative.
I think they are.
There is no reason to suppose that the proportion of violent nutters is any greater in the US than elsewhere.
But a violent nutter armed with a rice pudding is far less danger than a violent nutter armed with automatic weapons and hundreds of rounds of ammunition.
Firearms deaths by country per 100,000 population
UK 0.23
US 10.54
45 times greater!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate
You know what happened in Australia.
In 2014, 35 people were victims of firearms homicide,[41] compared to 98 people in 1996.[42]
Suicide deaths using firearms more than halved over the ten years, from 389 deaths in 1995, to 147 deaths in 2005
Guess when gun control was tightened.
Indeed: Americas mass shootings and vast numbers of deaths are directly due to their firearm policy.
The gun lobby are always using the, 'its the nutters not the guns that cause the deaths...' argument
have a look at the gun violence archive for a shocking insight into the numbers
http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
There might not be a reason (although there probably is) but that doesn't mean it is not the case.
There are certainly a greater number of violent nutters in some parts of the world compared with Britain.
It's on the news.
- Joined
- 1 Apr 2016
- Messages
- 13,439
- Reaction score
- 540
- Country
Sponsored Links
