Jetpilot

And it actually costs a large large sum of money to avoid tax, offshore accounts etc

I'm the first to admit am a hippocrit, as much as I find the concept of getting money for doing nothing (ie: investment) a odd situation, I'm actively looking to put our savings into as profitable investment portfolio as possible....And if I can build up a big enough portfolio to let me retire by 45-50, great. But surely if every did this who's actually going to any real 'work'....Unless you can find cheap labour from near by countries Swings and roundabouts though isnt it, for every one person that might want to retire early, there are probably some who prefer to work (run a company), i have a couple of friends, one under 40 who was offered 34 million for a company he started 8 years ago but he loves what he does and the other (late 40's) could happily sit back on guessing £200-£300k a year whilst others run his business but he enjoys "business", so doesnt want to retire, he actually tried semi retirement but he said he got bored as hell.

I agree, if someone has had a the ability to achieve a lot of wealth then fair play to them. I also dont like the phrase 'make them pay more' as that is anti-enterprise and actually if they are not taking tax loopholes (which is a different issue) then buy having a higher earning level they are already paying more, its how %s work. I totally agree with you. Personally, I would love to drug test people getting benefits and if they fail then they don't get any. I don't think that taxpayers should be paying for junkies habits. Benefits should be for buying food, paying bill and clothing. I do agree with helping people get off drugs who genuinely want to, however those who take methadone and also use junk shouldn't get a penny or any help. They don't want to help themselves then why should the taxpayer care. I do agree that some people can genuinely end up in a rut and these are the people we should be helping. I have seen his happen to a family member who lives in harrogate, the cost of living has went so high, she had some really ill health which lost her her job, and now her kids are struggling to have dinners. People like these do need help. Junkies and thiefs don't deserve a penny. I am sure this will cause controversy on here, but i dont see any reason why any benefits are paid in cash, they should have an automatically credited debit card they can use to buy the essentials, food, clothes, pay bills, but not cigarettes/drink/drugs/ and a host of other things i would class as luxury items, i guess it probably works for the government on drink and fags as they end up getting most of that money back in duty & vat

Good old social media. I think the problem these days is we have too much info, fed to us in the interest of presenting election special broadcasts. Not so long ago people would have never known about, vote share, even poll numbers etc, unless you really digged, now its all presented in colourful graphs at our very fingertips. A few years ago all people would have known was conservatives have the majority seats and that would have been that, on the most part.

Still grinning, enough said and thanks for tools, what is the torque setting for beating the tyre fitter Andy mentioned 135+ i think Gm, i was about 115-120.

The only reason i bought an exhaust is because of the sound, so its money well spent, wasnt interested in any minimal performance gains it might or might not give. You can always get good returns on selling exhausts too, so its not dead money so to speak One of my last times out at Castle Combe a mate was in his upreved 350z, there was absolutely nothing in it on acceleration.

but a lot of people voted tactically to keep SNP out. And you know this? Its supposition at best because it suits your argument to the Tories being in power. If you knew (and others) tactical voting would take place why didnt Scotland just vote Labour and you would have had a much more suitable government in power. It wouldn't have made any difference. If the whole of Scotland voted Labour there would still be a Conservative majority Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk It was hearsay based on the suggestion people tactically voted to get the conservatives in perhaps knowing Labour wasnt going to fair well to the Snp. Its all conjecture anyway, the Cons got a reasonable majority for whatever reason. About the only credible thing out of Paddy Ashdowns mouth on question time was about the voting system, know we have multi party politics rather than 2 party politics, it doesnt work.

You may want to narrow it down a bit buddy, 18s or 19s preferred, multispoke (bbs lm style) or a simpler design (volk te37 or nismo lmgt)

well people never moan when it goes the way you want Exactly this. Its a lot easier to lay the blame at someone elses door and say, the murdoch press are responsible than say, ed milliband and labour were shite and in reality the tories were a better option which is why people voted that way. I dont doubt for one minute that there were a few tactical votes thrown out, but I simply cannot believe that the whole country was orchestrated to place their votes where necessary for the tories to have gained a reasonable majority.

Ok, so if people believe the papers, why didnt any of the polls represent this in Tory votes? Are you saying they read the papers on Thursday and suddenly panicked and voted Tory, or they are just so sneaky they lied about who they were voting for? There is no evidence at all to support your theory, its just an opinion and basically another person saying you dont trust the voting public, except for yourself Whats wrong with a Tory majority?

Wouldnt think they would fit over Brembos if you have them. Min 18's on a Zed imho.

but a lot of people voted tactically to keep SNP out. And you know this? Its supposition at best because it suits your argument to the Tories being in power. If you knew (and others) tactical voting would take place why didnt Scotland just vote Labour and you would have had a much more suitable government in power.

Bike, but wouldnt go near a road on one again, track days all the way

A lock up or rented garage at a block of flats should be pretty cheap pending where you are, gumtree is a good bet for finding cheap rentals. I know Clios are good and very capable in the right hands but i hear they can be pretty unreliable, the last thing you want is to turn up for a trackday and find after a session or two some thing breaks and rights off the rest of the day. I would go for something Japanese, Mx5, even a throw away Rx8 if engine goes, i have some mates who have Micras and they are surpringly good or go down the Mk3 Mr2 option. If its just fun and a bit of fettling, outright performance doesnt really matter imho.

Some poor dude has to put up with that

Angry little thing wasnt she

Er, because its news There may well be a very small % that vote by what the press report, but to believe the whole countries vote is controlled, orchastrated and influenced by the murdoch press is just too much of a conspiracy thoery. I dont even read the papers, I knew where my vote was going, even did a online survey blind of parties and my vote was confirmed. Typically labour to believe the public are influenced so much, basically your saying we are not trusted to vote.

A question was asked last night on question time re the Murdoch press and voting habits. It is simple untrue there is any correlation between what the papers write and the way people vote. There is zero evidence to support it, please dont think a pie chart based on 837k surveys has any relevance if we believed what people say, the polls would have been accurate, they werent even close

She was probably hoping for that labour snp coallition, I reckon she will drum up enough support for another independence vote at some point though, especially if our eu referendum goes ahead and the public vote out.

As you are, I am not going to pretend to understand the worlds financial markets. But, suggesting it would have been better to have just gone "bankrupt" is just nonsense, if people think its tough now, we would be in utter chaos had any goverment let that happen. I have been watching a few interviews and shows and must say i am already getting fed up of the Snp warning the tories that they will be disruptive and the scottish lion has roared, they had their chance for independence, do they really think their few million votes should have any sway on policies.

I can't quite work out if it's meant as such, but that reads to me as "you should try to elect someone who won't give you what you want rather than let someone else elect someone (else) who won't give you what you want". I'm not sure I see the logic there? I see what your saying, but cant believe there isnt one party amongst the pack thats policies wouldnt in some way appeal to even the hardiest of non voters, hence the, "leaders are all as bad as each other" as reason to not vote, in other words, they are choosing not to vote on party policies but on the actual leaders.

Absolutely, but as Ekona says elsewhere, cant believe there isnt one of parties any citizen couldnt side with on the most part with regard to major policies. Labelling them, all as bad as each other, with respect to delivering what they promise is also probably fair comment, but surely someone would prefer a particular party to not be delivering on all of those promises, than another party in government whos policies they dont agree with?

So has this election in particular highlighted the somewhat unfair voting system? Just cant quite get my head around: Snp 4.7% 56 seats Ukip 12.6% 1 seat Libs 7.6% 8 seats Interesting too the Labours vote share went up by 1.5% but lost 26 seats 66% turnout though is pretty sad. I wonder what the actual vote share was in Scotland, snp to labour, seems surprising the independence vote didnt go through, although looks like we may have another very shortly.

Milliweed gone.

Clegg gone too, suspect Milliband later. Pretty drastic election in all.