In his speech in Birmingham, the chancellor made clear he was not planning to change course and said a further £16bn of savings must be found by 2015/16 to meet his target of balancing the budget within five years.
An invoice for tax to Vodaphone, Topshop et al would be a start.
Damned right.
A few pontificating about personal tax - and a Murdoch paper campaigning on dreadful personal tax 'avoiders' - but no mention from government or the Times about corporate tax.
Throw a few celebrities to the wolves - better yet if they have BBC links - but ignore the companies that are getting off by far, far more.
What happens to people who work for privately owned companies, co-operatives or in the public sector? Do they get to keep their rights?
A thought which has crossed my mind as well. Private companies do issue shares but they aren't traded. They become worth something real if the company is either sold or takes a listing on the stock exchange. In the meantime they are worthless. So maybe the intention is such companies can give you £2K of worthless paper and still do away with your rights?
Another thing that crossed my mind is the fact this scheme will be free from CGT is a worthless sop unless you are given more than £10600 of shares. You are exempt from the first £10600 of capital gains in any one year so you would have to given more than this amount in shares and sell more than that amount in any one year to incur any tax anyway.
There's always the possibility that this is just intended for consumption at the conference - a bit of dead badger thrown to the party faithful - and that it'll quietly be allowed to disappear once he steps through the Stargate and returns to Earth.
There's always the possibility that this is just intended for consumption at the conference - a bit of dead badger thrown to the party faithful - and that it'll quietly be allowed to disappear once he steps through the Stargate and returns to Earth.
Hopefully.
That seems to be the case, IDS has basically said that Osborne was spouting rubbish on most of the reforms and that none if it had, as much as I hate pretty much everything Labour I can't say as I think Osborne is the man to run the economy, problem is, I don't know who I would trust, certainly not the Lib Dems.
Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't
I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator."
cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan
The BIS/Treasury presser says: "Owner-employee status will be optional for existing employees, but both established companies and new start-ups can choose to offer only this new type of contract for new hires."
And one of the right's you'll be able to give up (or be forced to) will be to request training. A trained workforce is such a drag on business, isn't it? Imagine workers wanting to be better trained! What do they want? To improve themselves?
Presumably the loan shark Beecroft is wetting his knickers at present.
The BIS/Treasury presser says: "Owner-employee status will be optional for existing employees, but both established companies and new start-ups can choose to offer only this new type of contract for new hires."
And one of the right's you'll be able to give up (or be forced to) will be to request training. A trained workforce is such a drag on business, isn't it? Imagine workers wanting to be better trained! What do they want? To improve themselves?
Presumably the loan shark Beecroft is wetting his knickers at present.
And one of the right's you'll be able to give up (or be forced to) will be to request training. A trained workforce is such a drag on business, isn't it? Imagine workers wanting to be better trained! What do they want? To improve themselves?
Its a proven fact that trained employees are of absolutely no benefit to an employer. No sirree
Advice is what we seek when we already know the answer - but wish we didn't
I'd rather have a full bottle in front of me than a full-frontal lobotomy ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ kirkstaller wrote: "All DNA shows is that we have a common creator."
cod'ead wrote: "I have just snotted weissbier all over my keyboard & screen"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin." - Aneurin Bevan
I wonder how all of this waiving of employye's rights will sit with EU employment legislation? I always assumed that one of the basic tenets of the EU "market" was that no member country could try to obtain advantage by reducing basic employee rights. I could be wrong though
Presumably the loan shark Beecroft is wetting his knickers at present.
It is getting companies to implement what he wanted at £2000 a time (assuming the shares are actually worth that amount....).
Vince Cable and the Lib Dems were against it:
Writing in The Sun, Mr Cable said: "Some people think that if labour rights were stripped down to the most basic minimum, employers would start hiring and the economy would soar again.
"This is complete nonsense."
He added: "British workers are an asset, not just a cost for company bosses. That is why I am opposed to the ideological zealots who want to encourage British firms to fire at will."
But Mr Cable made his stance clear, adding: "Those who want to shake up the law need to realise that the days in the 70s and 80s when the unions ruled the roost have long since gone.
"I talk to businesses every day and none of them tell me that their biggest obstacle to employment and growth is troublesome workers who they can't get rid of."
So have I missed Vince saying this bit of nutty legislation is not going to get past them either?
Mintball wrote:
Presumably the loan shark Beecroft is wetting his knickers at present.
It is getting companies to implement what he wanted at £2000 a time (assuming the shares are actually worth that amount....).
Vince Cable and the Lib Dems were against it:
Writing in The Sun, Mr Cable said: "Some people think that if labour rights were stripped down to the most basic minimum, employers would start hiring and the economy would soar again.
"This is complete nonsense."
He added: "British workers are an asset, not just a cost for company bosses. That is why I am opposed to the ideological zealots who want to encourage British firms to fire at will."
But Mr Cable made his stance clear, adding: "Those who want to shake up the law need to realise that the days in the 70s and 80s when the unions ruled the roost have long since gone.
"I talk to businesses every day and none of them tell me that their biggest obstacle to employment and growth is troublesome workers who they can't get rid of."