A fool could say that

Anyone with an ounce of sense could not

What are these pseudo jobs? Nurses, teachers, the police, the forces, health and safety that mean you can buy food and expect to eat it without being ill?

Tell me who the one in 4 are? And don’t say ‘admin’. All services need admin.

Richard

1. “her £16,000 a year job”… “She simply won’t notice the difference. Her family as a whole will be £88 a year worse off”. Fortunately, I earn more than £16k a year, but sadly I’m not rich enough not to even notice £88. I suspect on her salary, she’s not rich enough, either.

2. “Unlike the TPA, the TJN works in the real world. We talk to real politicians,” Funny - the ‘real world’ is a phrase I’ve only ever previously heard to describe a place where politicians have never known.

3. “But how wrong you are! The far right are the far right”. DK is right here. It may be fair to compare two different groups and conclude neither has mainstream appeal. But to lump together classical liberalism or ‘libertarianism’ with conservative and socialist ideologies of fascism and National Socialism (or ‘nazism’) defeats the purpose of naming and grouping of ideologies. It makes no sense at all to group together conservative, socialist or liberal ideological sub-groups simply because they share minority public appeal. It is like classifying a chiauwawa and a squirrel in the same order simply because they are of a similar size!

But how wrong you are! The far right are the far right - and if they wish to argue with each others defintions of ‘rightness’, so be it. The world will still ignore them.

But in the real world the fact that there is no clear distinction between tax evasion and avoidance does matter. And it’s this ability to see beyond the pointless argument on definition to the reality of life as it actually is that makes all the difference.

Richard

PS Please don’t bother to reply - as you know, I find your style so offensive I won’t be repeating this unusual exception of allowing you on here for a change

The reason that the government will listen to you is because you tell them want they want to hear, i.e. that they should rake in much more tax so that they may waste it on yet more pointless, expensive and downright damaging schemes.

DK

P.S. Your conflation of Neo-Con and Libertarian demonstrates your ignorance of political theory: a fundamental of libertarian thought is the non-aggression rule, which hardly sits with the expansionist Neo-Con agenda.

When I was Chairman of the ICAEW’s Tax Faculty I got my fair share of coverage but it was nothing as compared with the tax spokesman for another accountancy body. One fundamental difference then (and now) is that he has apparent freedom to create quotes and to take positions that do not require anyone else’s prior approval. A key part of his job is to get his name in the press as often as possible. ICAEW members complain that ICAEW reps are not as visible. The process is more complex and those who might be the face of tax for ICAEW are heavily involved in other activities, considering con docs, collating views, preparing responses and taking part in face to face discussions with HMRC, the Treasury and MPs. These are considered to be more worthwhile activities than getting quotes in the press every day.

I can tell from your piece above that the distinction between TPA and TJN is partly due to a similar choice being made as regards how to spend time and effort.

Mark