It was a poor answer given that there were plenty of better ones available to him, but the bottom line is he doesn't need to stand because he can be a lot more effective without having to conform and lend credibility to our rotten and broken parliamentary system
Question Time
- Thread starter EC1
- Start date
No offence Warbler . I'm up for a healthy debate and if Im wrong I'll fall on my sword but Russel Brand criticises the bankers in the square mile but the companies who have funded his ventures are the same people who he wants to monster now .There was in an article recently exposing him as a total hypocrite . His funding partners are the very persons he professes to hate
That was his cop out and is terrible. Ok hes admitted hes against democracy but farage stands and his party stands. So do the greens. The one and only reason he doesnt stand is that there are not enough morons who would vote for him. simple as that. How can the system be broken when he is given every opportunity to stand and others have and will make an impact doing so? Its not exactly the right timing to say that fringe candidates cant be elected is it?
its total rubbish
geldof has a thick accent and is very articulate.
its total rubbish
geldof has a thick accent and is very articulate.
The city contributes an enormous amount in tax. Per working head it must be infinitely more than any other industry. It is hugely successful. This country is the world leader in one of the worlds biggest sectors. Perhaps the biggest. Like it or not, its absolutely true.
The sector paid an estimated amount
of total taxes, (including both taxes
borne and taxes collected), in the region
of £65.0bn, or 11.7% of total UK
government tax receipts. This is 3.2% higher than our estimate of the
contribution of the UK financial services sector in 2012 (£63.0bn; 11.6% of the
total UK government tax receipts
this is before the obvious massive revenue and employment generated by those who have the FS industry as clients let alone the clear spending power of the employees.
As an aside the very competitiveness and wide availibility of solutions contributes to the fact that the Uk is the easiest country in the world in which to obtain credit for businesse (world bank survey). In the sector i specilaise in there are over 50 different active lenders. That is enormously important
So when hes closed it down or driven it out, who is going to make up the gap? and who will that hit? And what will happen to those that need tax revenues? The firemans £500k pension pots?
The sector paid an estimated amount
of total taxes, (including both taxes
borne and taxes collected), in the region
of £65.0bn, or 11.7% of total UK
government tax receipts. This is 3.2% higher than our estimate of the
contribution of the UK financial services sector in 2012 (£63.0bn; 11.6% of the
total UK government tax receipts
this is before the obvious massive revenue and employment generated by those who have the FS industry as clients let alone the clear spending power of the employees.
As an aside the very competitiveness and wide availibility of solutions contributes to the fact that the Uk is the easiest country in the world in which to obtain credit for businesse (world bank survey). In the sector i specilaise in there are over 50 different active lenders. That is enormously important
So when hes closed it down or driven it out, who is going to make up the gap? and who will that hit? And what will happen to those that need tax revenues? The firemans £500k pension pots?
Last edited:
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
Would any of you accept the possibility that it might have been a profoundly honest answer that he gave? That he feared, if elected, he would eventually find himself corrupted by the power that comes with being in parliament? That he would "become like them".
We all know of once honourable and authentic politico's who when elected were transformed into something nasty and different. Maybe Brand is aware of this, and aware of the corrosive effect that power and the politics game can have on a man's principles and conscience. Could be that he genuinely fears he could be polluted by it all. Perhaps he speaks the truth.
We all know of once honourable and authentic politico's who when elected were transformed into something nasty and different. Maybe Brand is aware of this, and aware of the corrosive effect that power and the politics game can have on a man's principles and conscience. Could be that he genuinely fears he could be polluted by it all. Perhaps he speaks the truth.
That would come as news to jeremy corbyn and dennis skinner on the far left in parliament. I think it would be a real insult to many politicians from all sides who have used their position to advance worthwhile causes they believe in.I remember well Jack Ashley who did loads of work for the deaf for instance. I also do not believe for a minute my mp , vince cable, is "corrupted". Zalk goldsmith next door in richmond promotes the green agenda tirelessly. Most could earn far more outside parliament and wield power in unions and industry with probably more freedom.
does the green mp feel corrupted?
its complete bollocks
does the green mp feel corrupted?
its complete bollocks
Last edited:
I wouldn't know the detail, but I'm quite sure that's true. Equally, I have a bank account with a company I don't particularly like, and tend to shop in a supermarket I don't have a great deal of time for either. OK I make a point of trying to avoid some businesses, but it's very difficult today to pursue a totally ethical consumption and behavioural pattern. The best thing to do is just admit it, pointing out that there isn't a great deal of alternative. I also think that Brand's principal argument is that the banks and the MNE's should pay more tax, I'v e never quite ehard him seriously advocating a final solution for them. To be honest though, David Cameron has tried makign the same points (until Amazon summoned him to a meeting and reminded him who really runs the UK and that he'd better shut up)
I think he's said he's against parliamentary democracy Clive. There are other democratic models
If you believe that parliament is part of the problem, then you wouldn't endorse it as a solution would you? In event, if he's got a constituency of 9 million tiwtter followers why on earth would he waste his time in parliament where he'll be sub-sumed into a giant bureaucracy and be able to achieve absolutely zilch. Green politics have gone backwards since they had their first MP. David Cameron once flew to Spitzbergen and did a 2 minute piece on a husky sled, but that was it. He's rolled back a lot of the legislation that Labour introduced and caved in on the carbon floor price when the energy companies clubed together and threatened to put the bills up (contrast that with the behaviour of the water companies and try and reconcile the two)
“I say us — obviously I don’t vote as I believe democracy is a pointless spectacle where we choose between two indistinguishable political parties, neither of whom represent the people but the interest of powerful business elites that run the world.”
This is what he said.
because he never votes and is unable to read, he is not aware that there are more than two parties involved in elections.
This is what he said.
because he never votes and is unable to read, he is not aware that there are more than two parties involved in elections.
Osbourne and Cameron have not let go of corporate tax evasion. Its crazy to say that amazon are dictating to him. How? they are not going to close their operations in one of their biggest markets are they? Its is fiendishly difficult to beat though. I know some of the detail from previous work. Frankly a start would be the eu looking at havens within its own community. the problem is a global one and unless you have harmonisation across the globe i cant see a solution. The accounting is too difficult to challenge legally.
All we know is that he used to name Google, Amazon, and Starbucks. Of the three Starbucks were the most vulnerable to boycott. We also know that after a series of speeches Amazon eventually called him to a meeting. He attended, and after that he's never named them once. Coincidence?
If memory serves right, Amazon operate their European division out of Ireland don't they?
Last edited:
Clive, sorry if I am misreading your posts but the Govt (and all EU govts) are far too soft on both the tax situation of the amazons etc and also non-doms..
I've taken to hunting for my food of late and have formed a strategic alliance with next doors cat which ensures that the rats that live in the street are no longer safe from either of us.
ireland and luxembourg are the issues within the eu though. Netherlands to an extent too
trouble is that if you try to enforce here the profit centre will move to lietchenstein or caymans. There isnt an awful lot that can easily be done.
The counter argument is that corporations are in truth controlled by their shareholders who are largely pension funds and our investments. Not entirely justified but it goes to that or to governments.
ethical
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
Sometimes the carrot approach works better than the stick ?
An offer of generous contribution to Conservative Party central office might just have the effect of making unwanted comment and attention "go away" ?
(Every other big bank and big business does it anyway, so why not?).
I think they report a loss everywhere in the world due to loans/ donations they make to their parent in Delaware (or some other low/ no tax haven). The only thing that would hurt them would be consumers turning round and refusing to purchase from them. The only time I can really remember this working however was when Shell got mullered over the Brent Spa, and followed up when their own purchased local police force that shot Nigerian environmental protestors
Grasshopper
Senior Jockey
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 16,050
Maybe you're right, Hamm. I thought I'd seen enough of Brand over the years, to make this kind of judgement on him, but - again - I didn't see QT, and perhaps he did make a rear-end of himself.
The only thing I'd say in mitigation is that it was hardly a format Brand was going to excel in. He is a polarising figure at the best of times, and I suspect had large elements of the audience, as well as the entire panel, ranged against him.
Brand's 'Revolution is Evolution' philosophical position can work well as a comedic vehicle, but when these are juxtaposed against the bland, formulaic platitudes that are the norm form the programme, I can see why he'd start to look like something of a fringe-nutter, who lacks the necessary gravitas to engage in a political discourse, and is therefore way out of his depth.
I can see how he'd come across that way, and I guess I'd be happy to accept that, if it wasn't for the fact that it's only the TH "fringe-nutter" community that appear to have a problem with him.
It takes one to know one, perhaps? :lol:
Last edited:
hmm
I think that anyone who takes him seriously and serves as an apologist for him should be looking at themselves closely. Its not good to be in awe of someone who cannot read and has a mental age of 8.
He doesnt matter but the overall concern is that he is being given serious space for his truly dismal barely thought out views. That is a real dreadful example of dumbing down in the supposed serious media
I think that anyone who takes him seriously and serves as an apologist for him should be looking at themselves closely. Its not good to be in awe of someone who cannot read and has a mental age of 8.
He doesnt matter but the overall concern is that he is being given serious space for his truly dismal barely thought out views. That is a real dreadful example of dumbing down in the supposed serious media
Last edited:
icebreaker
At the Start
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2005
- Messages
- 2,957
It would seem.
It turns out that the disabled man ( whose question has spurred a lot of comment here) is the brother of West Midlands UKIP MEP Jim Carver.
Not saying that he isn't entitled to ask his question, but, it does smell strongly of a "plant" designed to embarrass Bland rather than elucidate the debate.