To think these people are utter scum, and i am sick to the back teeth with them all

[CustardoPaidforIDSsYFronts]

Private Equity manager Adrian Beecroft has donated over half a million pounds to the Tories since 2005.

Beecroft is the head of the private equity group that administers Wonga. The typical interest rate on a Wonga loan is an incredible 5,853% APR!

the Tory party are resisting regulation of Payday lending sector. Does this resistance have anything to do with the fact that one of their biggest donors runs one of the biggest legal loan shark operations in the country?

yes, that doesn't set a good example but OTOH it doesn't affect anything really - it would be only the left hand paying the right hand.

i'm sure its perfectly legal - agree not a good example though

How could the country pay for schools, NHS, roads, police force, defence, public service employees, state pensions, JSA, housing benefit etc if we did not pay tax?
Why should the country pay for schools, health service, JSA, housing benefit, state pensions? Why not people pay thier own?
When complaining about tax avoidence and spending it is always assumed the rich should pay more, but why should the rich pay for all this - what are they getting from it?

People pay for their own...so who is going to get together and agree to build things such as roads and hospitals the likes? How will that work? Even in the USA - capitalism central - they still have things like roads and schools and fire stations etc etc that are paid by taxes.

Do you rally think these things would get paid for if it was left up to individuals to decide to pay for it off their own backs? I can just see it now....

The rich are getting a civilised country, subject to the rule of law, with roads that they can travel, an educated population that provides workers and customers, and doctors and nurses to treat them when they are sick, and the teachers who educate those doctors and nurses - etc. etc. etc.

How rich do you think most of them would stay if they were transported suddenly to a failed state like, I dunno, Somalia? With no access to markets, very little access to electricity, let alone all the other underpinnings of a mature democracy that enable the wealthy, like the rest of us, to survive.

happytalk you want to know who's going to build things if the government doesn't?

How come we've got shops, health clubs, hotels etc? If people want something, and are willing to pay for it, market forces will make it happen. Usually a lot cheaper, faster and better than if the public sector get involved

A brief trip back into history will show you exactly what is wrong with no taxes

A lot of those things could be paid for if the govt didn't squander 60+ billion on a high speed railway that no-one needs.

happy

details please

Caroldecker I was preparing a long reply for you but actually your position is so ridiculous that I find there is no need. Edam is right: you have only to look at a failed state such as Somalia to see what life would be like with no taxes.

I was not advocating no taxes, I was saying that if people want to have higher taxes, they have to articulate the benefits for the taxpayer. Those listed above are valid for a basic tax position, but not the high level we currently have and certainly not increased taxes.

why not?

Because everyone wants to keep more of thier own money to spend on themselves - what is the benefir of the extra tax?

why is it 'extra' tax - i don't understand your point.

the supposed £40bn of unpaid tax - is extra

its owed - not extra by corporations not people

not all tax gap
companies are people as well. Over 60% of sme's are sole propriators here
Only 9bn is from large businesses and about half that is legal interpretation, so arguably not owed.

The total tax gap between what's owed and collected has been estimated by Richard Murphy of Tax Research UK at £120bn a year: £25bn in legal tax avoidance, £70bn in fraudulent tax evasion and £25bn in late payments.

"Revenue and Customs' own last guess of £35bn has been widely recognised as a serious underestimate. But even allowing for the fact that it would never be possible to close the entire gap, those figures give a sense of what resources could be mobilised with a determined crackdown. Set them, for instance, against the £83bn in cuts planned for this parliament (including £18bn in welfare) – or the £1.2bn estimated annual benefit fraud bill – and you get a sense of what's at stake."

here is HMRC's response to Richard Murphy's research.
here are his funding sources, mainly unions - so based on your assumptions above over the link between donations and actions means he must be a lying bastard in hock to the unions and everything he says or does is corrupt and he is utter scum - or maybe there is not such a link, either here or in your examples above