Ekona

So CMD released his tax return today. Turns out that, in shock news, British man earns money and pays the right amount of tax. In other revelations, grass green and sky blue.

Tinfoil hat, table 1!

Just do what I do and buy the first car you see, death or glory!

Borg regenerative shielding. Duh!

I could not possibly comment on these wheels or their suitability for a Zed.

I have no idea. I've got dibs on an RX8 if I want it but it needs a rebuild, or I might grab another MX5 just because fun. I might get something ridiculous and strip it right back just for a laugh, like a diesel Volvo estate or summat.

Of course we democratically elected them, did you miss the huge vote last year?! We had an AV vote. Nobody wanted it. That's proper democracy.

So assuming we do away with tax havens, what then? Some companies and people do actually pay the full tax amount on their earnings there, exactly like CMD has. If we remove those havens, the UK coffers will simply not get that tax at all. Better some than nothing. Also, the Olympics were absolutely brilliant. Yes comrade! Come on, of course they are! If you take the risks, you should reap the rewards. Everyone who makes big bucks has made sacrifices to get there, the one exception being inherited money but even then someone at some point had to take a chance.

And the car is gone. I'll miss it, but at least I get my garage back now *hits PH classifieds in search of next project*

I always give Col likes, he talketh much sense! #teamlikeback

No, think of it in percentage terms. If you have three shops in one town, and two are making 95% of the profit and one is just ticking over with 5% and the only reason it was there was to try and wipe Generic Coffee Inc out of town, you might as well just close it. If the extra effort going in isn't worth the payoff, you wouldn't bother, especially if you're hitting another level in tax. I agree Starbucks won't disappear. What they'll do is either scale back investment or alter their arrangements so they play the rules and pay even less tax.

Because you also reduce tax, and if you have a couple of stores that aren't making headline profits then you might as well bin them off, save the hassle.

Why not? If it's the cheapest, I would. It's only a top up, you're mixing it with 9 times as much of the good stuff at least.

Just top it up with any old 5w30 you can get, as long as it's fully synthetic.

Indeed, and if you're fine with the tax they pay then you end up getting stung regardless, just because you like skinny lattes. Or maybe Starbucks would reduce the stores they have, so jobs would be lost and PAYE tax income goes down. Or they source more things from outside the UK to save a few more quid, thus having more money leave the country.

They're still here because it's cheaper than going elsewhere If that changed then yes, they'd have to either leave or increase prices. Starbucks, for example. If they need to find another £500M, there'll just increase the price of their skinny latte by a pound, which means that actually the public are worse off.

Yup, absolutely the same. The rules are the rules, if you don't like them then change them, but then don't be surprised when companies take their business elsewhere.

No issues with it at all. The rules are the rules, and if we change them to start making people pay more tax they'll just take their money elsewhere altogether. If I could be bothered to set something up myself, I'd do it too. So would most people, apart from the very staunch comrades. Cameron has done nothing wrong that I can see.

Like that Please fix the fuel cap though if you get it

So much stuff to do in London that's better than watching cars parked up. Go to a museum, or have a walk along the South bank, or Covent Garden, or take in a gallery. Lots to see and do, sod walking around hoping to spot a car sat there doing bugger all London is amazing. I live so close yet I've barely scratched the surface of things to do.

In the bigger picture though, if the Chinese bring in £100Bn of investment because we let our steel go under, then it's good value. Trident is a different story altogether, I couldn't care how many jobs it saves, I want it for the deterrent more than anything. I didn't know about the UK blocking the Chinese steel levy though, but that's a good example of how we're happy to use the EU rules to help ourselves and it's not always them dictating to us what we do... I don't get the fuss about the leaflet thing, £9M is peanuts and given that there's a glut of anti-EU propaganda around, I'm glad that there's something there to balance it up. I don't think the leaflet itself is much good mind, but the theory behind it is sound. I'd actually like it if the Out had £9M of money to send leaflets round as well, in the same format, to at least give people half a chance at making an informed non-DM influenced decision.

You could, y'know, think about actually driving the bloody thing!

As long as you're aware that will promote oversteer initially and in unstable conditions, it's not a bad way to go.

Agreed. Good cars, but I still think the hype train is carrying them a bit. In a couple of years maybe a V6S could be a reasonable buy, but I'd sit back and watch values for a bit too. With the R8, it depends how long you plan to keep it. If you can buy one that's had the clutch and brakes done, there should be nothing else to do for a good 40k miles aside from routine servicing. Might not cost you anything to run, relatively speaking.

Hooray, common sense prevails!