Thatcher : Tax evader

[Judith]

I see that the �6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned
by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands

The company�s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and
it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.

So it looks like �2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?

She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.

[Mel Rowing]

She's not anything now!

She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!

Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.

Didn't you know?

[Farmer Giles]

On 13/04/2013 12:21, Mel Rowing wrote:
> On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>> I see that the �6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned

>> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>

>> The company�s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and

>> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>

>> So it looks like �2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

>>
>> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>>
>> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>
> She's not anything now!
>
> She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>
> Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>
> Didn't you know?
>
>

Evader, avoider - just semantics, who cares? They have avoided paying
their dues, that's all that matters.

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:28:48 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:

>On 13/04/2013 12:21, Mel Rowing wrote:
>> On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>>> I see that the �6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned

>>> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>>

>>> The company�s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and

>>> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>>

>>> So it looks like �2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

>>>
>>> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>>>
>>> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>>
>> She's not anything now!
>>
>> She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>>
>> Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>>
>> Didn't you know?

>Evader, avoider - just semantics, who cares? They have avoided paying
>their dues, that's all that matters.

because they are not 'their dues'

[Mel Rowing]

On 13 Apr, 12:28, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com> wrote:
> On 13/04/2013 12:21, Mel Rowing wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

> >> I see that  the 6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned

> >> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>

> >> The company s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and

> >> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>

> >> So it looks like 2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

>
> >> I can't remember now  : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>
> >> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>
> > She's not anything now!
>
> > She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>
> > Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>
> > Didn't you know?
>
> Evader, avoider - just semantics, who cares? They have avoided paying
> their dues, that's all that matters.

There is a distinct difference but I know better than to discuss
semantics with you!

[Farmer Giles]

Because you'd lose - as you usually do. There might be a small
difference, but they both amount to the same thing.

It's a bit like creating money. If you do it in your cellar, with your
own printing machine, you might get locked up. If you've got a bank, and
you do it, you might well get a knighthood!

[Mentalguy2k8]

"Farmer Giles" <gi...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:qa6dncVVl-ta1PTM...@brightview.co.uk...

Congratulations, you've finally understood the concept of legal v illegal.

[Judith]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 04:21:48 -0700 (PDT), Mel Rowing
<mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:

>On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> I see that �the �6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned
>> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>
>> The company�s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and
>> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>
>> So it looks like �2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.
>>
>> I can't remember now �: who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>>
>> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>
>She's not anything now!

Thank god

[Farmer Giles]

Clearly irony is wasted on you. When you've got the hang of that, see if
you can 'understand the concept' of moral v immoral.

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:09:25 +0100, Judith <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:

my my, you're so d-e-e-e-e-e-p

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:10:00 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:

>Clearly irony is wasted on you. When you've got the hang of that, see if
>you can 'understand the concept' of moral v immoral.

that's easy peasy...anyone can do that

what you want is 'moral'
what you don't want is 'immoral'

next

[Blue]

On 13/04/2013 12:00, Judith wrote:
>
> I see that the �6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned

> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>

> The company�s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and

> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>

> So it looks like �2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

>
> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>
> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>

So she's 10 Million quid sponger
and a 2.4 Million quid tax dodger.

They're all in it together.

[John]

"Mel Rowing" wrote

> She's not anything now!

Neither is Jimmy Savile, but that doesn't stop people having a go at
Margaret Hilda's friend, even though he can't answer for himself.

John.

[Farmer Giles]

Wasn't asking you. Now get a job, you parasite, and stop living off the
work of others.

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:36:14 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>

wrote:

>On 13/04/2013 13:21, abelard wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:10:00 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Clearly irony is wasted on you. When you've got the hang of that, see if
>>> you can 'understand the concept' of moral v immoral.
>>
>> that's easy peasy...anyone can do that
>>
>> what you want is 'moral'
>> what you don't want is 'immoral'
>>
>> next

>Wasn't asking you.

of course you weren't...you know i've got your number
you lazy minded whining pillock

> Now get a job, you parasite, and stop living off the
>work of others.

why? if i don't live of the work of others, how am i to employ
more of them?

why are you concerned....you're a ward of the state...
just another charity case living on my taxes

[Mentalguy2k8]

"Blue" <bl...@there.com> wrote in message
news:ast1bi...@mid.individual.net...

> On 13/04/2013 12:00, Judith wrote:
>>
>> I see that the �6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is
>> owned
>> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>
>> The company�s official address is a PO Box in a small town in
>> Liechtenstein and
>> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>
>> So it looks like �2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.
>>
>> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her
>> funeral?
>>
>> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>>
>
>
> So she's 10 Million quid sponger

I reckon we could give her a ceremonial funeral every day until Blair dies
and still have spent less than on his illegal war.

[Farmer Giles]

Stop parroting your betters and go and get a job, you useless parasite.

[Mentalguy2k8]

"Farmer Giles" <gi...@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:yPadnUAw6vIkyfTM...@brightview.co.uk...

>> why? if i don't live of the work of others, how am i to employ
>> more of them?
>>
>> why are you concerned....you're a ward of the state...
>> just another charity case living on my taxes
>>
>
>
> Stop parroting your betters and go and get a job, you useless parasite.

You appear to be very supportive of the Tories' welfare reform.

[Farmer Giles]

What has that got to do with scrounging parasites who live in France?

[Mentalguy2k8]

"Farmer Giles" <gi...@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:_bGdndh8l8xZy_TM...@brightview.co.uk...

I admire your stance that people on benefits are scroungers and should go to
work. And until they do, we can all abuse them and treat them like dirt.
Very Tory.

[Farmer Giles]

On 13/04/2013 14:01, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:
>
> "Farmer Giles" <gi...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:_bGdndh8l8xZy_TM...@brightview.co.uk...
>> On 13/04/2013 13:53, Mentalguy2k8 wrote:
>>>
>>> "Farmer Giles" <gi...@nospam.com> wrote in message
>>> news:yPadnUAw6vIkyfTM...@brightview.co.uk...
>>>>> why? if i don't live of the work of others, how am i to employ
>>>>> more of them?
>>>>>
>>>>> why are you concerned....you're a ward of the state...
>>>>> just another charity case living on my taxes
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Stop parroting your betters and go and get a job, you useless parasite.
>>>
>>> You appear to be very supportive of the Tories' welfare reform.
>>
>> What has that got to do with scrounging parasites who live in France?
>
> I admire your stance that people on benefits are scroungers and should
> go to work. And until they do, we can all abuse them and treat them like
> dirt. Very Tory.

I ran my own business for many years, I am not in favour of people doing
nothing. Neither am I in favour of politicians who bring about
conditions that prevent people from working.

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:06:02 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:

you're an ignorant old fogey living on the state...

you've never done anything else...

[Judith]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:28:35 +0100, Blue <bl...@there.com> wrote:

<snip>

>So she's 10 Million quid sponger
>and a 2.4 Million quid tax dodger.
>
>They're all in it together.
>

I have just been listening to Any Questions - Francis Maude really struggled
when the 10Million was discussed. he made great play of the fact that the
Thatcher family had paid for the actual funeral costs themselves - but could
not give a figure when Dimbleby pushed him on what the overall costs to the
tax-payer would be - he reckoned that a figure had not been calculated - hence
he did not know.

Oh dear - fancy making a commitment with no idea of the costs to be incurred.
(Alternatively : liar)

[Farmer Giles]

Ok, Lardy, I'm not going to encourage your parasitism any longer.

[Mentalguy2k8]

"Judith" <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:t5mim8tp1g8lklpss...@4ax.com...

> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:28:35 +0100, Blue <bl...@there.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>>So she's 10 Million quid sponger
>>and a 2.4 Million quid tax dodger.
>>
>>They're all in it together.
>>
>
> I have just been listening to Any Questions - Francis Maude really
> struggled
> when the 10Million was discussed. he made great play of the fact that the
> Thatcher family had paid for the actual funeral costs themselves - but
> could
> not give a figure when Dimbleby pushed him on what the overall costs to
> the
> tax-payer would be - he reckoned that a figure had not been calculated -
> hence
> he did not know.

How much do you think tonight's "party" and accompanying disorder will cost
the country? Or is that OK because it's on "your" side of the argument?

[Blue]

Well I've nothing against the Tories
paying for National Tory Day as long
as it comes out of their pockets.

They're a bunch of millionaires.
They can afford it.

It's a bit like the bedroom tax.
If you've got it to spare, you pay for it.

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:09:29 +0100, Judith <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:

the probable net cost will be zero...

why not make up any figure you wish...you know you want to

who is the cost to?what will be the tax take on icecreams?
how much will the doleys get from the state for 'demonstrating'?
how much will the tube system make?
what about the sellers of flags and placards?

it's all baloney just like all your posts

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:23:20 +0100, Blue <bl...@there.com> wrote:

>On 13/04/2013 14:09, Judith wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:28:35 +0100, Blue <bl...@there.com> wrote:
>>
>>> So she's 10 Million quid sponger
>>> and a 2.4 Million quid tax dodger.
>>>
>>> They're all in it together.
>>>
>> I have just been listening to Any Questions - Francis Maude really struggled
>> when the 10Million was discussed. he made great play of the fact that the
>> Thatcher family had paid for the actual funeral costs themselves - but could
>> not give a figure when Dimbleby pushed him on what the overall costs to the
>> tax-payer would be - he reckoned that a figure had not been calculated - hence
>> he did not know.
>>
>> Oh dear - fancy making a commitment with no idea of the costs to be incurred.
>> (Alternatively : liar)
>
>Well I've nothing against the Tories
>paying for National Tory Day as long
>as it comes out of their pockets.

of course it comes out of their pockets...just as your dole
comes out of their pockets...

but we don't resent your bread and circuses...as long as
you don't smash up too much...
of course what you smash up will be more business for
the shopfitters and the shopfitters union and the glass makers
and the insurance valuers...and more money in police overtime etc

>They're a bunch of millionaires.
>They can afford it.
>
>It's a bit like the bedroom tax.
>If you've got it to spare, you pay for it.

you don't pay 'the bedroom tax'...you just get paid a mite
less dole

[AlanG]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 15:08:10 +0200, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
wrote:

If that is the case you two should get married, You have a lot in
common

>
>you've never done anything else...

Have you got your farm subsidy this month?

[Turk182]

On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> I see that  the £6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned

> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>

> The company’s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and

> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>

> So it looks like £2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

>
> I can't remember now  : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>
> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.

Mark Thatcher married Kathy Kirby's niece. The Thatcher's told Kirby
that they were moving her out of her flat to redecorate it - she never
went back! Popped into a home I heard! I am absolutely sure this is
untrue and a vile lie. The Thatcher's are so giving, caring.

One Tory MP yesterday said that Margarte Thatcher cared greatly for
society! Ah yes! The one that doesn't exist.

Turk182

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:41:57 +0100, AlanG <inv...@invalid.co.uk>

while i don't want him, i'm sorry i rejected your suite...
i'm absolutely committed to yaks and will not revoke my vows...

why don't you chat him up...you could combine your dole and
soon enough you'll be able to go beyond a civil partnership...
two can live more cheaply than one...and you're both cheap...

you just can't expect to get everything, that i long kept the
pair of you should be enough for me to merit your eternal
gratefulness..

>>you've never done anything else...
>
>Have you got your farm subsidy this month?

no, nor any month...
i did get some for tempete klaus...but not nearly as much
as my bigger specialist neighbours

[AC]

Mel Rowing wrote:
> On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>> I see that the �6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned

>> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>

>> The company�s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and

>> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>

>> So it looks like �2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

>>
>> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>>
>> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>

> She's not anything now!
>

> She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>
> Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>
> Didn't you know?
>
>

Again, fascinating watching rightard principles wobble all over the place.

Violence, now fine.
Tax avoidance, now fine.

Kinda shows you lot up for what you really are.

--
AC

[AC]

Mel Rowing wrote:
> On 13 Apr, 12:28, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com> wrote:

>> On 13/04/2013 12:21, Mel Rowing wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>>>> I see that the 6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned

>>>> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>

>>>> The company s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and

>>>> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>

>>>> So it looks like 2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

>>
>>>> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>>
>>>> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>>
>>> She's not anything now!
>>
>>> She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>>
>>> Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>>
>>> Didn't you know?
>>

>> Evader, avoider - just semantics, who cares? They have avoided paying
>> their dues, that's all that matters.
>
> There is a distinct difference but I know better than to discuss
> semantics with you!
>

Yeah, it concerns your rotting queen rightard. Funny how when others
avoid tax, its all evil, but suddenly now, no problem.

Tory hypocrisy, now there is a shocker.

--
AC

[Turk182]

> AC- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

A Tory MP once told me that the rule was that it was not a crime to do
a dodgy deal - the crime was getting caught - that is unforgiveable!

Turk182

[AC]

Fine if it applies to all, from benefits upwards.

Reminds me of an old quote:
"Laws are rules for the stupid, guidance for the intelligent".

Or to rewrite it:
"Laws are rules for plebs, guidance for tory toffs"

The problem here is we have a tory government coming down on legal tax
avoidance like its the second coming of the devil, and the rightards
here thought that was fantastic. Then suddenly Thatcher get outed and
suddenly its a quick 180 in the opposite direction. Next time Camoron
get up in parliament pointing fingers at legal tax avoidance, all the
Labour lot have to do is simply reply "Thatcher".

It really does expose what rightards are really are about. They don't
believe in anything other than finger point divide and exploit
nastiness. Its a shame because the centre right is as sensible as the
centre left, but we have to put us with extreme nut jobs.

Ho hum.

--
AC

[John]

"Mentalguy2k8" wrote

> I reckon we could give her a ceremonial funeral every day until Blair dies
> and still have spent less than on his illegal war.

Aye but it wouldn't get close to the amount spent following Margaret Hilda's
introduction of Incapacity Benefit - one of the many things she employed to
keep unemployment levels artificially low.

Note - a benefit not introduced by Labour, but by Thatcher's Tories.

John.

[John]

"Mentalguy2k8" wrote

> How much do you think tonight's "party" and accompanying disorder will
> cost the country? Or is that OK because it's on "your" side of the
> argument?

There will be no cost to the taxpayer for the party (unlike the funeral) but
both will be policed at public expense.

John.

[Mentalguy2k8]

"AC" <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote in message news:U5eat.15772$jt2....@fx06.fr7...

>>
>>
>
> Again, fascinating watching rightard principles wobble all over the place.
>
> Violence, now fine.

Who said that?

> Tax avoidance, now fine.

Who said that? Saying that something isn't illegal isn't the same as saying
it's "fine".

[Mel Rowing]

On 13 Apr, 15:40, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:
> Mel Rowing wrote:

> >> Evader, avoider - just semantics, who cares? They have avoided paying
> >> their dues, that's all that matters.
>
> > There is a distinct difference but I know better than to discuss
> > semantics with you!
>
> Yeah, it concerns your rotting queen rightard. Funny how when others
> avoid tax, its all evil, but suddenly now, no problem.
>
> Tory hypocrisy, now there is a shocker.

But avoiding tax is not evil.

If I agree a price with a trader I don't pay him more than he asks.
Nobody is in any position to negotiate their tax liability so why pay
more than the letter of the law demands. Where exactly is the virtue
of paying tax in a world where politicians squander billions.

I have avoided tax in the past. On nothing like this scale of course.

When I was a young man there was a systems called MIRAS. MIRAS allowed
you to claim tax relief on all your mortgage interest. Did I claim it?
Of course I did just like anyone else in the same position

I could also offset all of my pension contributions against tax? Did
I? Of course I did just like everyone else in the same position.

I could also claim tax relief on 2/5 of the premiums I paid for life
insurance. Did I claim it? What do you think.

Similarly professional fees, cost of lab overall, I claimed the lot.

Anyone who pays more than he is required to do is a fool even if the
bill is set by HMG.

I am not in the same income bracket as the Thatchers were and never
have been but if I were don't you think I would be employing tax
experts to devise creative but legal schemes to bring down my tax
bill? You bet your life I would. The money is better and more
effectively used in my pocket than in the pocket of HMG. When I have
no further use for it my children have greater entitlement to it than
anyone else's If the money is to go to good causes, then I'll decide
what those causes are and my benefice will be better targeted than if
it went via HMG.

The experts can use every hole that remains in the tax net (and
virtually all of the above have been blocked) they will still not and
cannot bring the Thatchers to a position where they take out more than
they put into the exchequer They would never have been
in a negative tax position throughout their working lives and beyond.
They have put in 100s of thousands if not millions of pounds to the
exchequer and taken nothing out by comparison.

Of course there would be no need for these discussions if we coud have
a sensible tax system that sets limits on personal taxation. The you
would get money coming here instead of fleeing.

[abelard]

or milipede or livingslime

>It really does expose what rightards are really are about. They don't
>believe in anything other than finger point divide and exploit
>nastiness.

good job you're not like that

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 16:08:25 +0100, "John" <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

introduced in 1971 and hugely exploited by bliar and co

[abelard]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 16:09:58 +0100, "John" <nos...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

almost all policing is at public expense...just like you

[John Turner]

"abelard" wrote

> almost all policing is at public expense...just like you

Excuse me, I'm a significant net contributor to the Treasury.

John.

[Alex Heney]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:00:50 +0100, Judith <jmsmi...@hotmail.co.uk>

wrote:

>
>I see that the £6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned
>by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>

Where do you see that?

>The company’s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and
>it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>
>So it looks like £2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.
>
>I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>

So you are telling us you are now too senile to remember things from
within the last few days, in which you take an excessive interest.

As you would know if you weren't so senile, it is being partly paid
for by her family, and partly by the government.

>She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.

If that were true, then most of your complaints against her would not
be true.
--
Alex Heney, Global Villager
I may be fat, but you're ugly. I can lose weight.
To reply by email, my address is alexDOTheneyATgmailDOTcom

[Alex Heney]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 13:04:22 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:

>On 13/04/2013 12:45, Mel Rowing wrote:
>> On 13 Apr, 12:28, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2013 12:21, Mel Rowing wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>>> On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> I see that the 6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned
>>>>> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>>

>>>>> The company s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and
>>>>> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>>
>>>>> So it looks like 2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.
>>>
>>>>> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>>>

>>>>> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>>>

>>>> She's not anything now!
>>>
>>>> She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>>>
>>>> Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>>>
>>>> Didn't you know?
>>>
>>> Evader, avoider - just semantics, who cares? They have avoided paying
>>> their dues, that's all that matters.
>>
>> There is a distinct difference but I know better than to discuss
>> semantics with you!
>>
>

>Because you'd lose - as you usually do.

Unlikely, since he is plainly right.

> There might be a small
>difference, but they both amount to the same thing.
>

They aren't all that close to being the same thing.

One is illegal, and can result in a criminal record and a jail
sentence.

The other is completely legal.



>It's a bit like creating money. If you do it in your cellar, with your
>own printing machine, you might get locked up. If you've got a bank, and
>you do it, you might well get a knighthood!
>

No, you would still get locked up.

Only the Royal Mint is allowed to print UK money.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager

If idiots could fly, this would be an airport.

[Alex Heney]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 15:38:44 +0100, AC <x...@xxx.xxx> wrote:

>Mel Rowing wrote:
>> On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>>> I see that the £6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned

>>> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>>

>>> The company’s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and

>>> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>>

>>> So it looks like £2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.

>>>
>>> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>>>
>>> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>>
>> She's not anything now!
>>
>> She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>>
>> Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>>
>> Didn't you know?
>>
>>
>
>Again, fascinating watching rightard principles wobble all over the place.
>
>Violence, now fine.

Liar.

>Tax avoidance, now fine.
>
>Kinda shows you lot up for what you really are.

Yes.

Consistent.

None of us have said it is "fine". Many of us have said it is legal.

--
Alex Heney, Global Villager

Buy Land Now. It's Not Being Made Any More.

[Steve Firth]

Alex Heney <m...@privacy.net> wrote:

> Only the Royal Mint is allowed to print UK money.

That's complete and utter bollocks. Scottish and Northern Irish banks have
their notes printed by De La Rue.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[xerxes]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 08:54:45 -0700 (PDT), Mel Rowing
<mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:



<snip>



Instead of writing all that shite, why did you not just say "I am a cunt", it
would have given precisely the same message.

[Vidcapper]

On 13/04/2013 23:00, Steve Firth wrote:
> Alex Heney<m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>
>> Only the Royal Mint is allowed to print UK money.
>
> That's complete and utter bollocks. Scottish and Northern Irish banks have
> their notes printed by De La Rue.
>

At first I read that as 'Danny La Rue'. :)

--
Regards,

Paul Hyett

[Steve Firth]

Obviously there had to be some way that he got rich. Printing his own money
would achieve that.

--
<•DarWin><|
_/ _/

[Major Scott]

On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:45:29 +0100, Mel Rowing <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On 13 Apr, 12:28, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com> wrote:

>> On 13/04/2013 12:21, Mel Rowing wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> I see that the 6million property she lived in for more than 20 years is owned
>> >> by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British Virgin Islands
>>
>> >> The company s official address is a PO Box in a small town in Liechtenstein and
>> >> it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>
>> >> So it looks like 2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir Mark.
>>
>> >> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for her funeral?
>>
>> >> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>>
>> > She's not anything now!
>>
>> > She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>>
>> > Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>>
>> > Didn't you know?
>>

>> Evader, avoider - just semantics, who cares? They have avoided paying
>> their dues, that's all that matters.
>
> There is a distinct difference but I know better than to discuss
> semantics with you!

You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest of us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do not make what you do right.

--
Quando omni Flunkus Moritati - When all else fails, play dead.

[abelard]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:44:58 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:


>You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest of us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do not make what you do right.

so you're another scotch miner who wants other people's money

[Major Scott]

How on earth is that anything to do with it? I simply stated that she stole tax payers money. And that's more from the rich than the poor as they paid more taxes!

--
"All you need is love, money, broadband, good health, satellite TV, a fast car, ......." - The Beatles

[Mel Rowing]

On 14 Apr, 10:44, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:45:29 +0100, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:

> You're not very bright are you?  They didn't pay taxes that the rest of us do.  That's cheating, plain and simple.  Loopholes in laws do not make what you do right.

But they do!

Tax law just like any other law applies equally to all it applies to.
The may the set rates have the same allowances etc. that the rest of
us do. It is absolutely essential that the law in any area is
unambiguous through careful drafting clarified through judicial
judgement and precedent. Bear in mind it is government and politicians
who create law.

There is no onus on anyone to fall in with or indeed try to ascertain
the spirit of legislation. That would be a subjective judgement. So
long as a given practice is within the letter of the law then it is
permissible as it should be. Unless of course you are prepared to lay
out reasons why tax law should be any different.

[Major Scott]

They don't pay the inheritance tax that the rest of us do. That means they're not following the laws we are.


--
__.------.
.-' .---. \
.' .' O )/"\/
.' ) >:' L
.'"/ ( _J: |
/ '' \ / `\ F
J ' L_( _> J
| ( ( `--' |/
J / : :. : J
| | :. :. :. : .:L
| \ . . .:'|F
| | `:. .: ||
F || ' |||
| :) : . JJ
|) | /F
V A /J
|| \_.-. .-.FF
---'--. /<--\\ L----.
|||L \|| |
JJ)) `|| |
)|___.---\----'
.--'""<'|/ |F
|J`-' FF
| L : JJ
| J :||
J | | ||
J |_/\_F
J | |J
L L ||
| | |F
| | |F

[JNugent]

On 14/04/2013 10:44, Major Scott wrote:

> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:45:29 +0100, Mel Rowing
> <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> On 13 Apr, 12:28, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2013 12:21, Mel Rowing wrote:
>>> > On 13 Apr, 12:00, Judith <jmsmith2...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>>> >> I see that the 6million property she lived in for more than 20
>>> >> years is owned by Bakeland Property Company, based in the British
>>> >> Virgin Islands
>>> >> The company s official address is a PO Box in a small town in
>>> >> Liechtenstein and it had its original roots in St Helier, Jersey.
>>> >> So it looks like 2.4 million inheritance tax will be saved for Sir
>>> >> Mark.

And, if true, for Carol.

>
>>> >> I can't remember now : who is paying the ten million pounds for
>>> her funeral?
>>> >> She really was the epitome of everything the Tory party stands for.
>>> > She's not anything now!

>>> > She probably never was a tax evader. Didn't need to be!
>>> > Tax evasion is illegal and you can get banged up for it.
>>> > Didn't you know?
>
>>> Evader, avoider - just semantics, who cares?

The law does.

>>> They have avoided paying their dues, that's all that matters.

They haven't, and it doesn't.

>> There is a distinct difference but I know better than to discuss
>> semantics with you!
>
> You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest of
> us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do not

> make what you do right.#

How much inheritance tax did you pay, out of interest?

[JNugent]

On 14/04/2013 11:08, Major Scott wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:59:43 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:44:58 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest
>>> of us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do
>>> not make what you do right.
>>
>> so you're another scotch miner who wants other people's money
>
> How on earth is that anything to do with it? I simply stated that she
> stole tax payers money. And that's more from the rich than the poor as
> they paid more taxes!

Spending money you have earned is "stealing", is it?

[JNugent]

On 14/04/2013 11:58, Major Scott wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 11:57:08 +0100, Mel Rowing
> <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> On 14 Apr, 10:44, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:45:29 +0100, Mel Rowing
>>> <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest
>>> of us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do
>>> not make what you do right.
>>
>> But they do!
>>
>> Tax law just like any other law applies equally to all it applies to.
>> The may the set rates have the same allowances etc. that the rest of
>> us do. It is absolutely essential that the law in any area is
>> unambiguous through careful drafting clarified through judicial
>> judgement and precedent. Bear in mind it is government and politicians
>> who create law.
>>
>> There is no onus on anyone to fall in with or indeed try to ascertain
>> the spirit of legislation. That would be a subjective judgement. So
>> long as a given practice is within the letter of the law then it is
>> permissible as it should be. Unless of course you are prepared to lay
>> out reasons why tax law should be any different.
>
> They don't pay the inheritance tax that the rest of us do. That means
> they're not following the laws we are.

How much did you pay?

Be precise.

I have paid precisely nothing on all the bequests I have ever received.
I'd be surprised if you have received enough to trigger the threshold
any more than I have.

[Major Scott]

I've never inherited anything.

--
101 Dalmatians and Peter Pan are the only two Disney animated features in which both the parents are present and don't die throughout the movie.

[Major Scott]

What's spending to do with anything? I'm talking about them not paying taxes and keeping millions to themselves.

--
If one of the questions in a GCSE exam was "express 4.8% as a fraction", 4.8% would give "low battery".

[Major Scott]

Why are you trying to compare people like us without much money to people like Thatcher with millions?

Why have a threshold if you can ignore it?

--
Disk Full - Press F1 to belch.

[Mel Rowing]

On 14 Apr, 11:58, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 11:57:08 +0100, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> > On 14 Apr, 10:44, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:45:29 +0100, Mel Rowing <mel.row...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> >> You're not very bright are you?  They didn't pay taxes that the rest of us do.  That's cheating, plain and simple.  Loopholes in laws do not make what you do right.
>
> > But they do!
>
> > Tax law just like any other law applies equally to all it applies to.
> > The may the set rates have the same allowances etc. that the rest of
> > us do. It is absolutely essential that the law in any area is
> > unambiguous through careful drafting clarified through judicial
> > judgement and precedent. Bear in mind it is government and politicians
> > who create law.
>
> > There is no onus on anyone to fall in with or indeed try to ascertain
> > the spirit of legislation. That would be a subjective judgement. So
> > long as a given practice is within the letter of the law then it is
> > permissible as it should be. Unless of course you are prepared to lay
> > out reasons why tax law should be any different.
>
> They don't pay the inheritance tax that the rest of us do.  That means they're not following the laws we are.

The great majority of us don't pay IT since the threshold is too high
the very existence of this threshold encourages people to run down the
value of their estates. hat's all Maggie is accused of. And why not?
It's a sad day if one cannot do what one wants with their own whilst
they are alive. By what twist of logic does what was hers become
yours?

[AlanG]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 11:59:43 +0200, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:44:58 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest of us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do not make what you do right.
>
>so you're another scotch miner who wants other people's money

You're another Frog farmer who wants other people's money.

this might be ewe
http://www.angelfire.com/extreme3/shentanator/imacow.htm

[abelard]

so, you want other people's inheritance to be given to you...
typical scotch miner

[abelard]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:23:14 +0100, AlanG <inv...@invalid.co.uk>

wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 11:59:43 +0200, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:44:58 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest of us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do not make what you do right.
>>
>>so you're another scotch miner who wants other people's money
>
>You're another Frog farmer who wants other people's money.

getting some of my own back would be a fine hope

>this might be ewe
>http://www.angelfire.com/extreme3/shentanator/imacow.htm

what is it? why should i waste time opening it?

[Major Scott]

Why is the threshold there if the rich ignore it?

--
If Christians want us to believe in a Redeemer, let them act redeemed. -- Voltaire

[Major Scott]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:23:45 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:09:42 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:05:44 +0100, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/04/2013 10:44, Major Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:45:29 +0100, Mel Rowing
>>>> <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 13 Apr, 12:28, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>
>>> And, if true, for Carol.
>>>>

>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> The law does.

>>>

>>>
>>> They haven't, and it doesn't.
>>>
>>>>> There is a distinct difference but I know better than to discuss
>>>>> semantics with you!
>>>>
>>>> You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest of
>>>> us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do not
>>>> make what you do right.#
>>>
>>> How much inheritance tax did you pay, out of interest?
>>
>> I've never inherited anything.
>
> so, you want other people's inheritance to be given to you...
> typical scotch miner

Stop putting words into my mouth.

--
Peter is listening to "Pogues with Sinead O'Connor - I'm a man you don't meet every day"

[Major Scott]

Because it would have been quicker than typing "what is it? why should i waste time opening it?"

[abelard]

they don't

[JNugent]

On 14/04/2013 12:10, Major Scott wrote:
> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:06:24 +0100, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14/04/2013 11:08, Major Scott wrote:
>>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:59:43 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:44:58 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest
>>>>> of us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do
>>>>> not make what you do right.
>>>>
>>>> so you're another scotch miner who wants other people's money
>>>
>>> How on earth is that anything to do with it? I simply stated that she
>>> stole tax payers money. And that's more from the rich than the poor as
>>> they paid more taxes!
>>
>> Spending money you have earned is "stealing", is it?
>
> What's spending to do with anything? I'm talking about them not paying
> taxes and keeping millions to themselves.

What does one do with money one has earned and been allowed by the
taxman to keep?

Answer carefully.

[JNugent]

One cannot ignore it.

But you claimed to have paid more tax than Baroness Thatcher. Now you
claim not to have.

Which one is it?


>

[JNugent]

Then how did you pay inheritance tax?
>

[Mel Rowing]

On 14 Apr, 12:26, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:

They don't ignore it. Quite the contrary. They take it into account
when organizing their financial affairs particularly as they get
older. As I said, It's a sad day when they cannot do what they like
with that which is theirs.

[Farmer Giles]

So you don't regard what she did as morally wrong?

It may not be illegal but it is still wrong.

A bit like this chap, or do you see a difference?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18531008

[Major Scott]

Read back through the thread.

--
Create instant designer stubble by sucking a magnet and dipping your chin in a bowl of iron fillings.

[Major Scott]

Thatcher did.

> But you claimed to have paid more tax than Baroness Thatcher.

No I didn't.

[Major Scott]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:35:24 +0100, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

> On 14/04/2013 12:09, Major Scott wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:05:44 +0100, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/04/2013 10:44, Major Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 13 Apr 2013 12:45:29 +0100, Mel Rowing
>>>> <mel.r...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 13 Apr, 12:28, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com> wrote:

>>>

>>>
>>> And, if true, for Carol.
>>>>

>>>

>>>>

>>>

>>> The law does.

>>>

>>>
>>> They haven't, and it doesn't.
>>>
>>>>> There is a distinct difference but I know better than to discuss
>>>>> semantics with you!
>>>>
>>>> You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest of
>>>> us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do not
>>>> make what you do right.#
>>>
>>> How much inheritance tax did you pay, out of interest?
>>
>> I've never inherited anything.
>
> Then how did you pay inheritance tax?

I never said I did.

--
"My professional and my personal lives have become way too intertwined," the stewardess told her fellow stew.
"Last night my husband nudged me awake, and began to make love.
Without giving it a thought I said, 'Welcome Aboard'."

[abelard]

why? you're wrong

[Major Scott]

I agree with you, there should be no inheritance tax. But since there is, Thatcher shouldn't get round it.

[Major Scott]

You get taxed on it when you die, it's called inheritance tax.

--
A foursome of ladies was standing on a tee when a streaker ran across the fairway in front of them. One lady asks, "Is that Dick Green?"
Another replied, "No, I think it's just the reflection off the grass."

[abelard]

you're wrong

[Major Scott]

More loopholes in a pathetic legal system.

--
An expert is someone who takes a subject you understand and makes it sound confusing.

[abelard]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:44:31 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
wrote:

>On 14/04/2013 12:34, JNugent wrote:
>> On 14/04/2013 12:10, Major Scott wrote:
>>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:06:24 +0100, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 14/04/2013 11:08, Major Scott wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:59:43 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 10:44:58 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're not very bright are you? They didn't pay taxes that the rest
>>>>>>> of us do. That's cheating, plain and simple. Loopholes in laws do
>>>>>>> not make what you do right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> so you're another scotch miner who wants other people's money
>>>>>
>>>>> How on earth is that anything to do with it? I simply stated that she
>>>>> stole tax payers money. And that's more from the rich than the poor as
>>>>> they paid more taxes!
>>>>
>>>> Spending money you have earned is "stealing", is it?
>>>
>>> What's spending to do with anything? I'm talking about them not paying
>>> taxes and keeping millions to themselves.
>>
>> What does one do with money one has earned and been allowed by the
>> taxman to keep?
>>
>> Answer carefully.
>
>So you don't regard what she did as morally wrong?

ie, you don't like it...

>It may not be illegal but it is still wrong.

ie, you don't like it

[abelard]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:51:32 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:


>More loopholes in a pathetic legal system.

ie, you don't understand it

[JNugent]

What, in particular?

> It may not be illegal but it is still wrong.
> A bit like this chap, or do you see a difference?
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18531008

I do not go scurrying to websites at the behest of others.

If you have a point to try to make, try to make it.

I'll demolish it in good time.

[abelard]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:50:50 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:34:11 +0100, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote:

>> What does one do with money one has earned and been allowed by the
>> taxman to keep?
>>
>> Answer carefully.
>
>You get taxed on it when you die, it's called inheritance tax.

yeah, you save it up so's the government can steal it...

you know nothing

[JNugent]

One can only assume that you mean you don't feel it advantages you
enough, or that it disadvantages others enough, or both.

[Farmer Giles]

More devastating input from Lardy.

[Major Scott]

I didn't write the post you're referring to.

--
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours -- Stephen Roberts

[Major Scott]

Read the thread.

--
A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death -- Albert Einstein

[JNugent]

They don't ignore it.

Read back through the thread, with a dictionary at your elbow if necessary.
>

[Major Scott]

No, anyone with half a brain knows it's wrong.

[abelard]

any money you spend 'gets around it' you dopey scotch miner

[Major Scott]

Stop running away from the argument. Doesn't your ISP do www?

--
Black holes are where god divided by zero.

[abelard]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:54:13 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>

more evasion from the dopey farmer

[Major Scott]

It's broken, you don't need to understand it to know that.

There is a threshold above which you are supposed to pay inheritance tax, yet the rich do not pay it. We have a law which is not followed.

[abelard]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:54:58 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:52:17 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:44:31 +0100, Farmer Giles <gi...@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 14/04/2013 12:34, JNugent wrote:
>>>> On 14/04/2013 12:10, Major Scott wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:06:24 +0100, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 14/04/2013 11:08, Major Scott wrote:
>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Spending money you have earned is "stealing", is it?
>>>>>
>>>>> What's spending to do with anything? I'm talking about them not paying
>>>>> taxes and keeping millions to themselves.
>>>>
>>>> What does one do with money one has earned and been allowed by the
>>>> taxman to keep?
>>>>
>>>> Answer carefully.
>>>
>>> So you don't regard what she did as morally wrong?
>>
>> ie, you don't like it...
>>
>>> It may not be illegal but it is still wrong.
>>
>> ie, you don't like it
>
>No, anyone with half a brain knows it's wrong.

that certainly puts you at a minor advantage

[Mel Rowing]

On 14 Apr, 12:49, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:

I never said that in fact I said the exact opposite.

[JNugent]

You first try to claim that she (or, more likely, the late Denis
Thatcher, who was the rich one of the couple) took action in the light
of the inheritance tax laws, then you try to claim that he (or, as the
case may be, he) didn't.

Which is it?

>> But you claimed to have paid more tax than Baroness Thatcher.

> No I didn't.

Yes, you did.

You typed: "They don't pay the inheritance tax that the rest of us do".

Are you not one of "us"?

[abelard]

On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:54:38 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:

>On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:51:17 +0100, abelard <abel...@abelard.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:49:24 +0100, "Major Scott" <n...@spam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 12:35:03 +0100, JNugent <jenni...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>>> One cannot ignore it.
>>>
>>> Thatcher did.
>>
>> you're wrong
>
>Read the thread.

read it yourself you dumb scotch miner