Lord Duckhunter

The EEC ship sailed a long time ago.

Funny story from Ian Ridley on talksport today. Said as a young reporter he asked for an interview with Fergie, he had never met him before but Fergie agreed to meet him on Monday morning at 7am. Ridley turned up and made some comment about how early it was. Fergie said "I get to work at 6.30 every day, I don't need much sleep". Ridley making polite conversation said "a bit like Maggie Thatcher then". To which Fergie lost it, went red and shouted at him "do NOT compare me to that bloody woman"

That was one of my must unbelievable. My Brother in law who is an Arsenal fan saw it on Soccer Saturday and texted me "good luck getting out ok" after he saw 2 penos in last 5 minutes. Milwall's a strange one now-a-days, we never had contact with a Milwall fan until the guard checking our ticket on the train on our way home.

Careful, that was Mrs T's approach. Perhaps we are "all Thatcherites now" after all.

You do realise that while we remain part of the EU, we can not scrap VAT. If you want the British people to set their own VAT rates, put a big X next to UKIP next time you enter the polling station.

No surprise in was invented by the French. Whilst we are in the EU the standard rate is not allowed to fall below 15% and the EU must approve any cut in VAT. Still some people seem happy to let foreign bureaucrats dictate every aspect of British life, so that wont bother them.

He's completely bonkers. I loved the "who said that bloody Walt Disney", and "if I told you the world was going to end, you'll believe it". I hope they ring him back up tomorrow.

You seem to have accepted the principle that lower taxes don't nessesarily mean less money going into the exchcheur Joensuu, now you are just debating the levels at which maximum revenue can be achieved. Is that really so far from Nigel Farage's position? Pap makes a good point regarding a minimum wage. It is a political gesture designed to con the people into thinking the establishment care about low paid workers.

"BRITAIN faces the prospect of yet another unemployed, angry Scottish person at large" http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport/sport-headlines/angry-scotsman-to-be-released-into-community-2013050867819

The Labour party seem to have tentatively accepted the principle that you can reduce taxes to boost the economy and in the medium to long term bring in more revenue. That's exactly what they're proposing in their call for a cut to VAT. Personally, I think they've picked the wrong tax but unless (and it's a big unless) they're just playing gesture politics, it's not a massive jump from encouraging people to spend by reducing VAT and encouraging them to do so by leaving more of their money in their own pockets.

Is that Guly's wife?

Perhaps you could point me in the direction of another industry which has similar regulations.

I had a real bad feeling about the end of season and I'm glad to admit I was wrong. Cant see Wigan staying up now, they wont get anything at Arsenal defending like that. Sunderland's GD means they should be safe and I'm sure Newcastle will get at least a point at QPR. That leaves Norwich, who need a point from WBA and Man C, and then it's down to goal difference if Wigan beat Villa. Personally I want Wigan to stay up, in the Europa league they're going to struggle next season.

They will pay extra if they earn more. 25% of 100k is more than 25% of 50k. You seem to have fallen for the Establishments line that reducing the tax rate will reduce the tax take, this is not neccesarily the case. When the Torys came to power in 1979 the top rate of tax was 83% and the lowest rate was 33%. By 1988 it was 40% & 25% yet tax contributions went up. The Establishment set tax rates for political or comestic reasons, when the only thing that matters is which rates generates the most income. If you reduce the top rate to 30% and it brings in more money than a 45% rate surely that's a good thing. Although I'm sure there would be plenty of people like you howling about fairness and how individuals like Harry Redknapp had received a tax break, just like there was when Geoffrey Howe reduced it and Labour cuased the commons to be suspended by kicking up such a fuss.

I'm amazed it's taken this long for someone to challenge it. Personally I don't think you can go round dictating how people should run private business. I'm surprised nobody has challenged the Transfer Window, a restraint of trade if ever I saw one.

Therefore any movement of the top rate of tax downwards, providing there is no increase in the lower rate, is actually making the tax system fairer. I am a basic rate taxpayer by the way.

Number 1, I'm not a Tory. And number 2, I've never written anywhere that I support this policy. I was merely pointing out that the "fairest" system is for everybody to pay exactly the same % of their wages. It seems that some people's definition of fair is slightly different than mine. I understand fair to be "the same for everyone".

Sorry I'm totally confused with your argument. Clearly someone earning 100k paying less of a % out of their earnings than someone someone earning 30K is clearly unfair. Surely the "fairest" method is for everybody to pay the same %. Would you think it fair that the wealthy pay more duty on their pint of beer, or pay VAT at 25%. Perhaps we could have a two tier petrol pump system, those with big cars could top up at more expensive pumps. It's clearly not fair that Harry Redknapp fills up at the same petrol station as me and pays the same price as me. He's a millionaire for gods sake, why should I pay the same duty as him?

We don't know whether UKIP's policies would lead to "economic disaster". We do know that Labour's and now the other 2's have done so. What is so ludicrous about a flat tax? Surely a % is a %. If you earn more, you will pay more. Why should someone on 100k have to pay a higher % than someone on 30K? What is "fair" about that? Tax policy should be designed to bring the most money in, not punish people for earning more. As the Thatcher Government showed, you can lower taxes for the higher paid and generate more money into the revenue. They would merge tax and NI and also take the lowest paid out of tax altogether.

What you appear to be saying is that the people who don't agree with you , don't understand. That although , the majority would vote for withdrawal , they aren't sophisticated enough to understand the consequences. What other elections do you think us plebs should be barred from, local ones? What about the general election, how can we have a vote we may vote for someone you don't consider worthy . This democracy lark is a pain in the balls isn't it, much easier to let clever people like you tell us how to vote . Personally I think your argument for staying in the EU is a load of pony, I think you've been brainwashed by liars and con men. But that's really beside the point. The British people should have their say,and they have been denied it too long.

It should be up to the people to decide, not you, not me, not Nigel Farage and certainly not Ken Clarke. All I hear from the Establishment is how wonderful Europe is, how they are winning the argument, how business is for it. It therefore should be easy to convince the British people, so they should put it to them. They wont of course, never in a month of Sundays.

I think you're getting confused there Pap, that's the exact policy of the Tory party. UKIP's policy is clear, leave the EU.

So you can call UKIP the "nasty party", call their policies xenophobic but nobody can mention the Lib/Dems. Typical Lib/Dem response, shut down the discussion as we know best. I think if you read through the thread there are plenty of examples of people defending UKIP, but surely one of the reasons people are voting for them is the policies of the Establishment parties. Seems rather strange that discussing those Establishment policies should not be posted.

These were my 2, got me into their great music and then everything else I liked flowed from there. If John Lennon said he liked someone, BB King for example, I would check it out. Leon Russell played on Georg's solo stuff so I started checking him out. For me all my music leads back to these 2 albums.

Complete and utter nonsense. Every party has measures to control immigaration, the Lib/Dems even had the crazy policy of regional caps at the last election. How Nazi like is that, immigrants can only work in certain areas of the country. What were they going to have, check points to check peoples papers? "you do not have a permit to delivery this Pizza in this area Pawel" Gordon Brown promised "British jobs for British workers" . The Lib/Dems are a busted flush, they have been found out. People seem to forget, that in an election against Gordon Brown, they actually lost seats. The only reason they got into power was by abandoning their principles in a mad rush for the ministerial limos. They try to be all things to all men, they make promises they have no intention of keeping and they are a bunch of hypocrites. I find it breath taking that they can accuse UKIP of being homophobic when they ran the most disgracefully homophobic by-election in living memory, despite the fact that their candidate was in the closet all along. That pompous ass Lord Oakshot was on Any Questions Friday, summing up exactly what they're like, "please call me Matthew not Lord" (well don't accept the ****ing tittle then, stand for election) and " I've never believed in referendums, they are a "a device for despots and dictators", before going on to brag about his role in calling the EEC in/out one as Woy Jenkins' special advisor. I also wondered how such an important Lib/dem figure was able to keep so quiet over his anti referendum stance during the Lib/Dem inspired AV vote one. If there is any nasty party in politics it's the Lib/Dems. They will do anything, say anything for a bit of personal power. They will not be able to fool the British public again, and I look forward to them returning to their 1970's position of a fringe party with a handful of MP's (only without the Thorpe, Cyril Smith issues).