• Nick Clegg: The rich should pay more tax
    24 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19406022[/url] [quote=BBC News][B]Deputy PM Nick Clegg has suggested the UK's wealthiest people could be asked to pay more tax for a limited period.[/B] He said that "if we want to remain cohesive and prosperous as a society" those of "very considerable" wealth should make an extra contribution, in an interview with the Guardian. "What we are embarked on is in some senses a longer economic war rather than a short economic battle," he said. He also hinted at a return to cabinet for ex-treasury minister David Laws. Liberal Democrat Mr Laws resigned as chief secretary to the Treasury two years ago after admitting he claimed expenses to pay his partner rent. "I have never made any secret of the fact that I want to see David Laws back in government," Mr Clegg told the newspaper. He also said the coalition would stand by its commitment not to build a third runway at Heathrow despite growing calls from Tory MPs for a change of heart. [B]'Belt tightening'[/B] In the Guardian interview, he called for a "time limited contribution" from the richest in society beyond his party's current policy for a mansion tax - taxes on properties above a certain value. "In addition to our standing policy on things like the mansion tax is there a time limited contribution you can ask in some way or another from people of considerable wealth so they feel they are making a contribution to the national effort?" he said. "What we are embarked on is in some senses a longer economic war rather than a short economic battle." But he said fairness was key to the next steps in tackling the economic downturn. "If we are going to ask people for more sacrifices over a longer period of time, a longer period of belt tightening as a country, then we just have to make sure that people see it is being done as fairly and as progressively as possible," he said. "While I am proud of some of the things we have done as a government I actually think we need to really hard-wire fairness into what we do in the next phases of fiscal restraint. "If we don't do that I don't think the process will be either socially or politically sustainable or acceptable." [B]'Failing plan'[/B] Responding to the interview, Chris Leslie, Labour's shadow treasury minister, said: "Nick Clegg is once again taking the British people for fools. He talks about a tax on the wealthiest, but he voted for the tax cut for millionaires in George Osborne's Budget. "And he has supported a failing economic plan which has pushed Britain into a double-dip recession and is leading to borrowing going up by a quarter so far this year." A Lib Dem source played down any suggestion of an imminent policy announcement, and suggested the party was likely to have a combination of measures in mind. Discussions about tax and spending will take place before the chancellor's autumn statement.[/quote]
And suddenly the tories are regretting adopting him.
I trust him to see this through. I mean, he helped cut tuition fees.
NICK CLEGG MAN OF THE PEOPLE NEVER GOES BACK ON HIS WORD EVER
I find it so strange that this Clegg is partnered up with the Conservatives. Raise taxes for the rich but not really!
Clegg's just a puppet, like the Conservatives will be worried about this
Too little too late Cleggy boy.
[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;37448344]Too little too late Cleggy boy.[/QUOTE] Remember when he wasn't going to raise student fees? Good times I can't see how lib dems aren't going to fail hilarious the next elections. Who wants to vote for them anymore? They shafted their main voter group; the people who vote for them are likely to be the people who'll also be upset by the student fee rise
[QUOTE=Icedshot;37449871]Remember when he wasn't going to raise student fees? Good times I can't see how lib dems aren't going to fail hilarious the next elections. Who wants to vote for them anymore? They shafted their main voter group; the people who vote for them are likely to be the people who'll also be upset by the student fee rise[/QUOTE] If it weren't for Coalition bullshit they might have actually gotten a backbone. But they always fucking bend over for the Tories.
Why did they not side with the Labour Party? Would they not have gotten a majority that way as well? They seem more ideologically aligned. [editline]28th August 2012[/editline] Or is there something about the Parliamentary system that I am missing.
[QUOTE=person11;37450249]Why did they not side with the Labour Party? Would they not have gotten a majority that way as well? They seem more ideologically aligned. [editline]28th August 2012[/editline] Or is there something about the Parliamentary system that I am missing.[/QUOTE] Lab 254 + Lib 57 = 311, they needed 326 for a majority Plus at the time of the election no one liked Labour because of Gordon Brown and Tony Blair and the Iraq War and the recession and Duffygate
[QUOTE=person11;37450249]Why did they not side with the Labour Party? Would they not have gotten a majority that way as well? They seem more ideologically aligned. [editline]28th August 2012[/editline] Or is there something about the Parliamentary system that I am missing.[/QUOTE] there was a hung parliament. the Tories had the most seats but not enough to have political control of parliament so they made a deal with the Lib Dems.
I had assumed that the Labour Party could have still made a Coalition with the Lib Dems despite their lack of popularity. Makes more sense now. [editline]28th August 2012[/editline] Still though, they must have known there would be conflict in siding with your ideological opposites
[QUOTE=person11;37450581]I had assumed that the Labour Party could have still made a Coalition with the Lib Dems despite their lack of popularity. Makes more sense now. [/QUOTE] a labour and lib dem coalition wouldn't have given them the majority
[B]BREAKING:[/B] Nick Clegg: The Sky Is blue.
[QUOTE=smurfy;37450282]Lab 254 + Lib 57 = 311, they needed 326 for a majority Plus at the time of the election no one liked Labour because of Gordon Brown and Tony Blair and the Iraq War and the recession [B]and Duffygate[/B][/QUOTE]It never ceases to amuse me how such a small and comparatively insignificant gaffe became such big news. Though I suppose it's a good thing that even such small things about politicians get in the news, in some way it demonstrates that Britons aren't just used to politicians being cunts; whereas in e.g. Italy it took Berlusconi fucking an underage girl before he started having public opinion problems.
Dick Smegg
How about taxing the rich like they should be and then keeping at that level?? Crazy idea but I have this crazy idea that it might help us not fuck up again.
Cameron must've let Clegg out to stretch his legs. Not seen or heard from this little lap dog in a while
Why did Nick Clegg cross the road? Because he said he wouldn't
Guys hey guys what guys hey if we nobody is listening taxes raise them guys :C
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;37454225]Guys hey guys what guys hey if we nobody is listening taxes raise them guys :C[/QUOTE] Shut up, Clegg. Jesus, this is why we never invite you to go fox hunting.
[quote]Clegg wants the super-rich to pay "an emergency tax." Better idea: the super-rich pay "a tax".[/quote]
part of me wonders if Nick Clegg wouldn't have his spineless reputation if he hadn't sacrificed his party for the sake of ending the hung parliament
[QUOTE=Turnips5;37454341]part of me wonders if Nick Clegg wouldn't have his spineless reputation if he hadn't sacrificed his party for the sake of ending the hung parliament[/QUOTE] Nah, it was more that Cameron pretty much put him on a leash and said 'if you complain, the country will crumble! We must all be happy together', rather than actually fighting him.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.