Answer the question.

Erm, I have. Pay attention.

Do you want me to do it again ? OK : How about, Z-11 slagging him off and Mr Johnson praising him ?

Very relevant indeed in the context of this thread and what Z-11 has said. And even if it isn’t relevant, why the reluctance to answer a direct question with a direct answer ? All this exchange of posts and any uncertainty could have already been cleared up.

Answer the question Z-11

No. Why is the voiced opinion of Boris , a mayoral opponent of your beloved newt fancier, relevant to the opinion of Z11?

No

Are you Z-11’s lawyer or something ?

I can’t see the problem with answering the question. It’s a very straight forward question. Does Z-11 agree with Boris’s opinions of Ken as expressed in that quote ? The question is in fact so simple it can be answered with a “yes” or “no”.

Well actually I can see a problem…….I reckon Z-11 is too embarrassed to answer the question. So of course he won’t.

Boris seems to know how to be polite and say the positive good thing to the guy who has just lost an election, speaks volumes about him. Manners you could perhaps learn from.
Given his laudable stance on many issues I’m a little suprised to see him using dividend payments to get his tax down to 25% on his (so called bonus) earnings and also make sure he does not pay NI. Totally legal and done by many but in his case questionable and devalues his currency as an honest guy.

Boris seems to know how to be polite ……

Is that a suggestion that he didn’t really mean it ? Seems to be.

And are you suggesting that Z-11 hasn’t got any manners ?

Ernie, stop clutching at straws here. Your beloved Ken has been exposed as the hypocrite that he is. Not to mention his terrorist supprting, hompohbic, anti-semitic ways. Yet you ignore all of this, picking some semantic claptrap argument instead.

Sorry am I missing something here?
In the Telegraph transcript it says.

In terms of the dividends, you haven’t actually taken any dividends out. You’ve got a large cash pile sitting there at the moment. So you haven’t actually paid any income tax on any of that money because you haven’t taken it as dividends.

So if he hasn’t taken it as dividends what’s the issue?
By retaining the money he has within his company surely he is just ensuring his companies ability to pay him a wage in later years when he may not be earning quite so much, possibly still as a higher rate tax payer. If he doesn’t do this and takes the money as a dividend then yes he is a hypocrite, until then……
As an aside I seem to recall from an article in the Standard in the last couple of weeks that his company is heavily financially involved in a number of charities.

Sorry – been out…

Ernie:

Whats your point – that the fact that Boris once said something nice about him demonstrates that he’s not all of the things I’ve said he is, in addition to being a hypocritical, wife employing, tax avoiding tosser?

Pretty much the worst Straw Man argument Ever…

Boris seems to know how to be polite and say the positive good thing to the guy who has just lost an election, speaks volumes about him. Manners you could perhaps learn from.

yes Liverpool he was nice about them
piccaninnies- he used that lovely phrase
he was pretty polite to his wife except for the affairs and getting someone else pregnant

Neither is particularly admirable IMHO
I am sure the Cpt will be off like a flash to publicly vilify the current Tory major for his obvious personal shortcomings he is good with balanced an objectivity like that

Sure Zulu will to
Fairly pointless/standard STW I dont like you or your politics thread with the objectivity we have come to expect

So Flashheart, I take it from your comment that you don’t agree with Boris Johnson’s claim that Livingstone was a “a very considerable public servant and a distinguished leader” who has “courage and the sheer exuberant nerve” and has “earned the thanks of millions of Londoners” ?

I think it’s a fair question as hypocrisy appears to be the topic here.

And btw some of you Tories appear to be most impolite. So far on this thread you and Z-11 have called Livingstone a hypocrite, homophobic, anti-semitic, and a terrorist supporter. In contrast I have described Boris Johnson only as a clown. Most “unparliamentary” behavour on your part.

You take what you want, I’ll stick to the actual point.

No Ernie I’m suggesting that you are getting all defensive about a guy who has let you down with the way he pays his tax. You cannot take it that your hero has been proven to be just like any other politician, taking what they want and crapping on those that support them. Ever felt like you have been used and abused. Hurts I know but thats what we have to put up with as forum warriors. Suck it up, Ken is a profesional politician and using the system for himself and you do not count.

can I have you full and frank view of Boris whilst you are sticking to the point and not just scoring political internet hit points please
ta

yes Liverpool he was nice about them

And he made an entirely valid point about certain aspects of the Liverpudlian character, as someone born on the Wirral, to a Liverpudlian Father, I’m more than happy to back him on it as well 😀

piccaninnies- he used that lovely phrase

Boris apologised for any offence caused, He wasn’t being racist, it was taken out of context and some people interpreted it maliciously – I think you’ll find thats, verbatim, the Diane Abbot defence 😉

Ernie:

“a very considerable public servant and a distinguished leader”
“courage and the sheer exuberant nerve”
“earned the thanks of millions of Londoners”

Erm, does the fact that Boris thinks that make the violent drunkenness, tax avoidance and all the other stuff acceptable then?

ah right so a bigot you like and appreciate….fair enough I suppose

Yes Junky, I do quite like certain aspects of Diane Abbot’s character actually.

everyone in direct question avoidance shocka

you are getting all defensive about a guy who has let you down with the way he pays his tax.

I’m not in the least bit bothered how Livingstone pays his tax. Mudslinging by the Tory press at Livingstone has gone on for as long as I can remember. And for that reason the article in the Telegraph is unlikely to very much affect in the level of support which he will receive next election.

It’s quite likely that I won’t vote for him but that is due to policies, rather that the usual mud-raking by the press. Likewise I suspect the majority of the electorate are a tad more sophisticated than to be taken in by US-style negative politics.

Lefties in diverting point away from unpalatable truth shocka.

Ah, Right wing press conspiracy, I’d forgotten that aspect.

Are you sure you’re not a member of the David Icke forums as well Ernie – its all an Illuminati/NWO/Elders of Zion plot innit 😆

The truth is always palatable to me Flashheart. If the truth doesn’t fit comfortably with my beliefs then I simply change my beliefs until it does.

dancing on a pin with the Livingstone defence. At least you can take comfort that Boris thinks he’s a good public servant, he got it wrong again I presume?

Are you sure you’re not a member of the David Icke forums as well Ernie

And there you go again Zulu-Eleven, with your childish and silly comments.

And of course you haven’t forgotten to add the laughing emoticon, just to emphasise the point.

Sorry, Yes, I really shouldn’t underplay the seriousness of the longstanding right wing plot to undermine Ken Livingstone through a train of long running investigative journalism that reveals his lies, drunkenness and hypocrisy to the sheeple, should I ?

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuYu_5QdXjw[/video]

Lefties in diverting point away from unpalatable truth shocka

flash in not reading thread and refusing to comment negatively on any tory
here is me diverting from the issue again just for you

Is he a hypocrite
Yes
you cannot really go on about how everyone should be their fair share of tax* then actively do something to make sure your “fair share” is the least [ or less than if it was just paid as wages rather than paid via dividends] it can possibly be under the current legislative structure as that is [partly] what he has attacked.
If you object to tax avoidance you cannot then avoid tax and not look hypocritical

What would you like me to clarify?
So you did not like ernie not answering the question so then Boris flash you views? Is their a magic number of times to ask before you answer after all you dont want to look like a hyporite now do you
Really all you ever do slag of lefties and never ever say anything about your club o the morals of someone like the racist philandering Boris appointing his mates to jobs etc

Sorry Junky – I thought it was a given that all (Evil) Tories are, by definition, all for tax avoidance for them and their millionaire chums, so its not like you can accuse Boris and his mates of hypocrisy is it ?

Junkyard – Member

you cannot really go on about how everyone should be their fair share of tax* then actively do something to make sure your “fair share” is the least [ or less than if it was just paid as wages rather than paid via dividends] it can possibly be under the current legislative structure as that is [partly] what he has attacked.

I would not agree. If someone was demanding that tax be cut to 20% would you insist they stop paying 40% tax?

To me, it’s simple- you call for change but you deal with the rules as they are. It’d be good politics to practice what you preach of course but is it hypocritical to live with the system that we have now while calling for a better one?

Now if he’d called for other people to stop using existing rules to minimise tax, that would be different- has he done that?

Now if he’d called for other people to stop using existing rules to minimise tax, that would be different- has he done that?

“Cameron’s problem is too many of his team have become super-rich by exploiting every tax fiddle… ”

its not like you can accuse Boris and his mates of hypocrisy is it

well i can accuse people of hypocritically demanding answers to questions whilst not answering a question themselves whilst the person accuses others of diversion. This is what i have done.

It’d be good politics to practice what you preach of course but is it hypocritical to live with the system that we have now while calling for a better one?

If someone says it is wrong to do something and then do it i dont really see how they are not a hypocrite.
It is crtical here it is voluntary and you can do it or not do it unlike your tax example

everybody should pay tax at the same rate on earnings and other income

but as said, if that’s the case I want the same ‘benefits’ too – pension, sick pay, holiday pay, not-earning pay etc

Zulu-Eleven – Member

“Cameron’s problem is too many of his team have become super-rich by exploiting every tax fiddle… ”

Mmm. I wouldn’t say it’s the same thing but it’s sailing pretty close isn’t it.

Junkyard – Member

If someone says it is wrong to do something and then do it i dont really see how they are not a hypocrite.

Has he specifically said- “You should not minimise your tax, even when entitled to?” Being against laws that allow tax minimisation isn’t the same thing.

to be literal, rather than political for a moment, to be hypocritical is to show: “the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretence.”

And it’s hard to see just how he’s not being hypocritical here.

It is crtical here it is voluntary and you can do it or not do it unlike your tax example

I have given an example where he has called for a higher tax rate on wealthy people, and yet no one is accusing him of being a hypocrite for not paying this higher rate. I am fairly confident that the inland revenue will accept more than someone needs to give them.

As I said previously, I think Livingstone could fairly be called a hypocrite if he was expecting to be personally excluded from any changes which he is calling for. I agree with Northwind.

Junkyard – Member

It is crtical here it is voluntary and you can do it or not do it unlike your tax example

Good point- that was a pretty crappy example.

this is not the stw way 😀
That is meant as a joke it would be better if we could all accept that every now again someone makes a point
i may be laying myself open to a hypocrisy charge here 😳

kens obvious and many failings aside id be inclined to dismiss anything written in the telegraph about ken before the next mayoral election as 100% borris electioneering

(their recent article about the ftl neutrinos was so bad I vowed is stop reading it )

allthepies – Member
Sexed up, well read for yourself and decide.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/andrewgilligan/100139555/ken-livingstone-tax-avoidance-the-transcript/

Ignoring all the petty squabbling above( 😉 ), reading the transcript above I’d say Gilligan did “sex up” the article. He accuses Ken of reducing his tax liabilities by taking dividends and then goes on to say in a later question that Ken hasn’t taken any dividends! Also it seems that Ken is taking a salary from his company and that salary has been spread over a few years where not a lot has been earned following a brief burst of activity after he lost the election. Someone find me a well run company that doesn’t keep reserves so it can keep staff employed during quiet periods.

He also seems to argue that only Ken has been paid for his speaking engagements and makes no allowance for Ken to need a secretary/personal assistant to arrange all of these (his wife). Find me someone who earns over £150k a year who doesn’t employ (or have employed for him) a PA. All the article is is another Gilligan piece trying to drag Livingstone through the mud which is pretty much all Gilligan has tried to do since he was sacked by the beeb.

What Ken’s situation isn’t comparable to is that of senior civil servants who are clearly employed by a single employer for long periods with support etc provided by the employer.

Find me someone who earns over £150k a year who doesn’t employ (or have employed for him) a PA.

I know of plenty of people who earn considerably more than this and don’t.

Also it seems that Ken is taking a salary from his company and that salary has been spread over a few years where not a lot has been earned following a brief burst of activity after he lost the election.

Tax avoidance then, perfectly legal but tax avoidance none the less. He could have declared that big earnings amount, paid the going rate of income tax on it and shoved the residue in a savings account to live off in the leaner years.

read the rest of my statement – If you think of it as a company rather than an individual. Also he’s not taking dividends he’s only taking a salary for which he will pay tax on, either now or in the future.

Gilligan is trying to equate this to people who have only one revenue stream who work in a solid job which would normally be full time employment which is what Ken has criticised in the past. they aren’t equivalents. In his blog he has also admitted that Ken hasn’t taken any dividends out of his company so where is it apparent that Ken has paid less tax?

mefty – Member
Find me someone who earns over £150k a year who doesn’t employ (or have employed for him) a PA.

I know of plenty of people who earn considerably more than this and don’t.

So they never have any secretarial/administration services done by others? wow.