OldNick

If the Financial times now backs the Tories for the first time since 1987 that tells you something important. They by doing this may feel also that DC's policies are financially correct. In that case Browns scaremongering will be shot down. They haven't gone for Cable, but the tories financial ideas. To the masses it does not mean a lot but it may reinforce or even change a few who are flirting with the Liberals.

It is not about the rich, £1m is not rich anymore. You could not retire on £1m, so if an estate is worth 1m and is split by 2 the may get 500k each. Very nice of course but inflation and time sooon erodes that money after a holidays and giving some away etc. Any property owned has normally been bought long term on a mortgage, that has been paid by with tax paid income. Therefore the government has aleady had its cut, add the fact that (?) they also get vat on the funeral services even in death they are getting another slice to waste. I have never resented paying a fair share, I know that I am one of the victims that whoever is in power will be a target, but it is how they take it and how they waste it is important to me. The ony Liberal policy i would like is the 10k threshold for tax, that would then get to those hardworking people who would gain for actually getting off their a##### and working instead of sitting on them waiting for the state handouts.

Brown and passion, sounds plausible....lol. He is best at bullying his staff when he has had a debate with a 65 year old woman

Now that is a fairer point and I can see your position.Short term it may be that the rates stay as they are and when things pick up the levels coulkd rise. I agree we all have to take some medicine, but in principle inheritence tax is a tax of envy and hits a lot of people not just the super rich.

The price achieved is worse than i had thought. As you say gold is now 1200 $ ours was sold for $256 and $296 an ounce, with an average of $275. Prudent and a man of substance. Interesting but not unsurprising that even with the freedom of information act the info is not released. Not in the public interest apparently.....not in Browns interest IMO

As far as im aware it has not been published, but at the time the market was depressed already without us flooding it

That's the one

Dune do not fall for the rich getting wealthier regarding this. If your estate is worth 20 m the inheritance tax would be in the region of 6-7m, so a saving of 200k will not get them uncorking the champers. It is the usual envy politics by saying the super wealthy are the gainers, just a vote winning exercise. Sir Alex Ferguson, the Dragon and any other Labour supporting multi millionaire will make sure their heirs are well protected. If you are worht more than 5m there are lots of schemes to get round inheritence tax. Forget not a large proportion of normal Londoners have homes worht a million as the prices as so high up there. Tough on middle earning people IMO

If he had kept the money stored in the BOE like he would have the gold, but it has been spent. Gold is sold in dollars, and so it makes it all the worse as he sold the gold for dollars, then bought the Euros with those. Lol ps gold has more than trebled since he sold the gold and so whatever currency he bought will not make much difference.

Phil I get the jist but FP only holds 20k fans and that includes 2000 away fans, therefore the situation is dire. The WWF also have said that the Skates have the other major problem that they shed their skin and replace it with Man u or Chelsea shirts according to who wins the league. The WWF have asked people to phone in if you see a Pompey fan as they are hoping to recoerd them, they will have 1 phone operator manning the phone waiting for the odd phonecall. The idea of tagging was dropped as it would have given an incorrect figure as the survey was in Portsmouth and would be confusing with the general population

The sad thing is i think you would lol

Good one.

No i think they are saying is 'Im not getting any of that so why should they' (I would point out that I am not in line for a big inheritence payout)

and 42 years of mine.Top trumped

If we had to win that game it would not have been the starting line up. Period. Therefore we were weakened, or played a weakened side.Next week against Southend would have been fine to have done so, we need to learn to go to Gillingham and win. Playing a side that was not as likely to win is not reinforcing that thought for next season

I was saying we need a vat increase but explaining my thoughts on its fairness when it was levied/increased

Yep,HBOS will be a long time getting us money back. I did read at the time of the crash that Brown said that they had bought derivatives 3 years ahead (all toxic) We will be paying for that

oh no, a friend of the family plays for Luton. He'd love to play for us.

that so called expert with her today is a Pompey fan. He didn't even know why a mule chest is called so (as in not a horse nor donkey, ie not a coffer or a chest of drawers). I knew him when he was a salesroom porter in Salisbury.

You ought to put that to Wedgewood Benn about his wealth, add all the others who wave the same flag.

that is correct, I feel the same when people go on about how well Pompey have done etc etc. They have had all season to get to safety with 3 of the worst teams to play in the PL. Saying all that ,I still would be upset if we were struggling for survival if our opponents were handed a gimme as they had faced a team that were weakened.

The buyers would lose out as they still will pay more than they would do so as the conditions are now.

Supply of prime land , prime position commands a premium that is obvious.How long do you think it will take for land prices to drop to the level that the 20% could be absorbed so that the builders would not be losing their margin? My understanding would be that the builders have bought the land a year or so before the houses come to market. They cant adjust the next day and still take a 20%hit on prices.

I didnt hear that but Clear did say something about a flat rate nad like the utilities it may be 5% Of course once the tax has been put on the item, it will never go away and then is tempting for any chancellor in the future to raise it.After the initial taking away of that perk, it becomnes easier for the exchequor to push that tax a bit more. Stop it before it is applied would be best for all of us. I do wonder that as none of the other leaders crucified Clegg on this issue they may well have similar ideas

Wade the other night Brown kept saying that the inheritence tax is going to give 3000 of the countries richest 200k a year. You only die once and so I cant see how he is giving it to those famillies every year. The 3000 families probably have estates are of 50m or more, the saving from 600k to 1m would not make a difference to their lives. They have to try nd sort out how not to give in excess of 20m to the tax man on their death not gaining 200k