I’m not saying I agree with this, but just to explain what is happening.

Companies pay tax on profits. The idea being that if I make metal widget that I sell for £1 then just flat taxing me at (for example) 20% would mean I owe 20p tax.

Now if I bought the metal from my widget from a Sunderland refinery, and they charged me 50p for the metal to make the widget then my £1 widget is actually only worth 50p, and that 20p tax starts looking fairly high. If I paid someone 30p to sell it for me then that 20p tax puts the widget down to worthless and I’ll not bother making it, depriving the taxman his 20p.

The plan therefore is to tax profits. After paying the refinery, my 50p profit is taxed at the 20% making it less likely that I’ll get in a position where I don’t make it, unless it really is unprofitable.

The issue with this is that if I owned the refinery as well then there’s nothing to stop me selling the metal at £1 so effective profits are £0, or negative with employee costs. Tax obligations £0. Now move the refinery to a tax haven, or sell at cost it to my “warehouse supplier” based in the Caymans who then sell it to the widget factory for the maximum amount means I’ve exported all my profits. The product doesn’t ever have to go near the Caymans.

This is what I understand Starbucks does, with their Swiss division selling the beans at outrageous prices to make the coffee shops a loss.

What’s the solution? I assume taxing takings but that could destroy small businesses who have been doing this correctly or business that runs on fine margins.

Theys

Hence why i would talk about suspending while investigating not immediate dismissal.

Its all about priorities. If they are a liberal party moreso than a Union party then they would want to avoid even the appearance of being anti-socially liberal. Because they don’t it shows that they really don’t care about their appearance of being a liberal party and it’s just a side hussle to keep the edge quiet. It would be dropped if it interfered with their main objectives (whatever they are).

I guess if this were reversed, so if this was an anti-labour unions group, and if a senior member was suspended for talking about wanting the Union to collapse then people would be up in arms that they are allowing any anti-union group to live inside Labour. But you’d be okay with that as long as they said they were investigating?

Sorry, but as far as I’m concerned being part of that group earns a suspension with a review, not the other way around.

Normally it would make them a lot less exciting, however if these are just rebranded Clevos then it should help a lot more people. Good stuff!

Millenials complained about it a lot, to the point where millennial is short hand for “lazy” for a lot of older generations.

Gen X made films mocking company culture and shitty work environments.

The youth today aren’t the first to complain, they aren’t the first to be called lazy, and they won’t be the last. Fuck the older folks who call any of them lazy.

If you want a socially liberal party then being a part of a group that looks to mock and belittle minorities should be unacceptable.

Having a high profile token sacrifice, and seeing how much demand for blood remains is not a socially liberal policy.

Are they a Clevo reseller?

Indeed, we all learn about the great plastic recycling scam at some point.

It should come as no surprise, because they are not a liberal party. Labour are first and foremost a workers union party, and no matter how many BAME or LGBTQ+ policies they put out, they can all be easily overturned or replaced because not everyone in the party either believes in it, as its not a founding principal.

If you want a Liberal Labour party, then we would need to establish one, but trying to change an organisation as large as this is going to be an uphill battle.

I guess the other way would be to create a Labour Against non-White British group as a honeypot to oust applicants, but as we can see from this it’s slow process. An entire group for discussing how to fuck over voters, and they only decide to suspend one?

No, its called Swindon.

Gen Z are lazy and don’t want to work.

Millennials are lazy and don’t want to work.

Gen X are lazy and don’t want to work.

Boomers are lazy and don’t want to work.

Only one of these groups were hippies and were work shy, as a generation. 🤷

Ha, you think that the backups even arrive to replace/repair? They’ll break down in transit!

That would be amazing. Cybertruck cops? They’ll be letting everyone go when the trucks breaks down.

Great, I wish it would come here too. There are a lot of locations where parking in cycle lanes, blocking pavement access for pedestrians (I’d hate to think how on earth wheelchairs are supposed to get around).

When I shared this sentiment previously, car owners were enraged because they poorly chose oversized vehicles, or “didn’t have any other option”.

Except perhaps pushing for better public transport instead of inconveniencing everyone else…

Is there no better option than Signal? Shame.

Good.

Can we do it next? Perhaps even reform the whole of our government structure in the process, devolving the rule of England into regions like Scotland, Wales and NI already have?

Leave the commons for purely limited scope national policies.

A bit of random pitch variance might make football interesting

It would require more than that…

God, listening to folks bitching about LibDems because they were the scapegoat for the Tories decades ago is just saddening.

They have literally been the only party that have offered actual change to our voting system. Sometimes I dream of what a different state we would be in if that referendum had passed.

Congratulations, good luck keeping this rabble under control! 🎉