Tony Blair was many things but as much as i dislike him, he was a great debater. Another man who is of dubious character but can argue with the best of them is Christopher Hitchens which is why when they clash in Toronto at the end of November, it should be titanic.
Blair, god botherer extraordinaire, is going head to head with chief atheist Hitchens in a debate titled 'Religion is a force for good in the world.'
Why the two Englishmen have to go to Canada and can't argue it out in their own country is a mystery unless Blair has had enough of being harangued whenever he sets foot outside of his front door here and hopes the Canadians won't come armed with eggs like the Irish did.
So is Religion a force for good in the World?
The best answer i can come up with is that it should be, but it isn't.
It is hard to fathom how something which is predominantly about caring and loving your fellows could be responsible for so many wars, conflicts and hatred throughout history but we have been killing each other in the name of religion ever since the idea of a creator was first floated.
The test would be how would the world look if religion had never been devised?
You could argue that there would still be just as many deaths, just they would have a different justification and you would have a valid point but this page attributes 890 million deaths to religious conflicts. That's almost a billion people dying in the name of one God or another.
I can't think of conflicts over any other beliefs that can get even close to that figure.
So if religion has been such a driving force for us to kill each other throughout history, is it making things better in our modern world today?
The Vatican recently repeated it's claim that Catholics should not use condoms despite AID's claiming 20 million lives and affecting another 42 million.
The Middle East is a firestorm of Jews versus Muslims and Muslims of one flavour against another.
Northern Ireland is simmering with religious tension and atrocities in the name of religion are going on in Sudan, Sri Lanka, Somalia, Nigeria, Iraq, Cyprus, East Timor and the Ivory Coast.
Al Queada are out to kill as many infidels as possible and the Chechen's have targeted all Christians as enemies.
It is hard to make a case for what the World gains by having religion in it against this damning list but maybe Tony Blair will have better luck.
Saturday, 16 October 2010
Thursday, 14 October 2010
Why is Ahmadinejad the bad guy?
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is in the papers after turning up touring Lebanon.
The United States and Israel have expressed concern, with the White House deeming the visit provocative and Israeli officials calling Ahmadinejad a warmonger. How black must that Israeli pot and kettle be? I haven't got enough fingers to count the wars Israel has got itself into. Stick a pin in a map of the middle east and it is high odds Israel has fought with it.
I have never really understood why there is so much animosity from Israel and America towards the Iranian leader.
Yes, his country backs Hezbollah but America and Israel have a history of backing some very iffy characters.
Israel gave South Africa of all countries the technology to build the bomb while America were best pals with the Taliban not so long ago and Al Queada has 'made in America' stamped right through it.
He wants to build nuclear power stations just like Britain, Israel, USA, France and most of the world. No evidence whatsoever that he wants to build nuclear weapons like Britain, Israel, USA and the others already in the nuclear club.
He doesn't like how Israel treats its neighbours, especially the Palestinians, but outside of the USA and Israel, nobody likes how Israel treats its neighbours especially the Palestinians.
The often repeated speech where he supposedly called for Israel to be wiped off the map has been dismissed here before anyone pipes up with that bit of disinformation.
So unless i am missing something, i can't see why Ahmadinejad is the bad guy especially when there are worse countries in that particular area.
The United States and Israel have expressed concern, with the White House deeming the visit provocative and Israeli officials calling Ahmadinejad a warmonger. How black must that Israeli pot and kettle be? I haven't got enough fingers to count the wars Israel has got itself into. Stick a pin in a map of the middle east and it is high odds Israel has fought with it.
I have never really understood why there is so much animosity from Israel and America towards the Iranian leader.
Yes, his country backs Hezbollah but America and Israel have a history of backing some very iffy characters.
Israel gave South Africa of all countries the technology to build the bomb while America were best pals with the Taliban not so long ago and Al Queada has 'made in America' stamped right through it.
He wants to build nuclear power stations just like Britain, Israel, USA, France and most of the world. No evidence whatsoever that he wants to build nuclear weapons like Britain, Israel, USA and the others already in the nuclear club.
He doesn't like how Israel treats its neighbours, especially the Palestinians, but outside of the USA and Israel, nobody likes how Israel treats its neighbours especially the Palestinians.
The often repeated speech where he supposedly called for Israel to be wiped off the map has been dismissed here before anyone pipes up with that bit of disinformation.
So unless i am missing something, i can't see why Ahmadinejad is the bad guy especially when there are worse countries in that particular area.
Tuesday, 12 October 2010
Passing blame for Linda Norgrove
I have been hearing lots of conflicting views about the death of British Aid worker Linda Norgrove in Afghanistan.
Sympathy for the victim and anger at the Taliban, then anger at the American troops who apparently bungled the attempt to rescue her and now the view that she shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Not mentioned is the bravery of the American troops who risked their life going in to try and get her out. True, it seems that they had bad intelligence about what room she was being held in but it isn't as if they went in to try and kill her. They went to rescue her from people who would probably have killed her but it all went horribly wrong.
She was there, despite it being probably the most dangerous place on the planet at the moment, to help people.
I would like to know how many of the people sitting at home dishing out blame and fault would have the guts to do what either the American soldiers or Linda did. Not many if any.
What i did find distasteful was the almost instant decision to blame the Taliban only to change their minds 2 days later to being accidental killed by her rescuers.
They obviously didn't know how she died and either jumped to conclusions or lied about it.
It happens so much that we are told one thing initially only to later discover it was actually something else. Just wait before apportioning blame then you don't have the farce of having to backtrack and turning an horrendous incident like this into who did what rather than the death of an innocent victim.
Sympathy for the victim and anger at the Taliban, then anger at the American troops who apparently bungled the attempt to rescue her and now the view that she shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Not mentioned is the bravery of the American troops who risked their life going in to try and get her out. True, it seems that they had bad intelligence about what room she was being held in but it isn't as if they went in to try and kill her. They went to rescue her from people who would probably have killed her but it all went horribly wrong.
She was there, despite it being probably the most dangerous place on the planet at the moment, to help people.
I would like to know how many of the people sitting at home dishing out blame and fault would have the guts to do what either the American soldiers or Linda did. Not many if any.
What i did find distasteful was the almost instant decision to blame the Taliban only to change their minds 2 days later to being accidental killed by her rescuers.
They obviously didn't know how she died and either jumped to conclusions or lied about it.
It happens so much that we are told one thing initially only to later discover it was actually something else. Just wait before apportioning blame then you don't have the farce of having to backtrack and turning an horrendous incident like this into who did what rather than the death of an innocent victim.
Monday, 4 October 2010
Europe travel warning
A few weeks back i was stopped by a man and his wife and asked what number bus they needed to catch to get to the town centre. Judging by his accent he was obviously American or Canadian and thanked me warmly when i told him i hadn't a clue. I decided afterwards that he had to be American because he ended every sentence by calling me buddy.
Now i don't think that every American tourist calls everybody buddy but it does seem that whenever i have been called buddy, it was by an American.
I have no problem with being called buddy, the guy in the newsagent calls me dude every morning, but it seems that American and Canadian tourists may be thin on the ground soon because they both have been warned of the raised level of terror attacks in Europe and their citizens should take every precaution to adopt appropriate safety measures to protect themselves when travelling.
Our own threat level stands at severe which means that an attack is highly likely and we have been issued with a warning of the high threat of a terrorist attack in France and Germany.
Confusingly, Germany has said it will not change its country's threat level because there are no indications of imminent attacks there.
A cynical friend has already put it down to Obama sucking so badly in the USA and with imminent mid-term elections, he has taken a leaf from the G W Bush book and stoked up an imaginary threat, but it seems that it is how cynical we have become over this war on terror.
My opinion of Obama has sunk further with the longer he has been in power but i don't know if i believe this is just fear mongering because an election is coming up, there must be some sort of threat.
Maybe us Europeans, and especially us British, are a bit more blase about terrorism threats, more an inconvenience rather than something to cower from. Hopefully this will be another false alarm but it is understandable that Governments want to make announcements like these so they are covered if anything does happen, but it is also understandable if the public take the next announcement with a slightly larger pinch of salt.
Now i don't think that every American tourist calls everybody buddy but it does seem that whenever i have been called buddy, it was by an American.
I have no problem with being called buddy, the guy in the newsagent calls me dude every morning, but it seems that American and Canadian tourists may be thin on the ground soon because they both have been warned of the raised level of terror attacks in Europe and their citizens should take every precaution to adopt appropriate safety measures to protect themselves when travelling.
Our own threat level stands at severe which means that an attack is highly likely and we have been issued with a warning of the high threat of a terrorist attack in France and Germany.
Confusingly, Germany has said it will not change its country's threat level because there are no indications of imminent attacks there.
A cynical friend has already put it down to Obama sucking so badly in the USA and with imminent mid-term elections, he has taken a leaf from the G W Bush book and stoked up an imaginary threat, but it seems that it is how cynical we have become over this war on terror.
My opinion of Obama has sunk further with the longer he has been in power but i don't know if i believe this is just fear mongering because an election is coming up, there must be some sort of threat.
Maybe us Europeans, and especially us British, are a bit more blase about terrorism threats, more an inconvenience rather than something to cower from. Hopefully this will be another false alarm but it is understandable that Governments want to make announcements like these so they are covered if anything does happen, but it is also understandable if the public take the next announcement with a slightly larger pinch of salt.
Thursday, 30 September 2010
English & French Military Alliance
It's the year 1415 and the English have just routed the French at Agincourt despite being outnumbered twenty to one.
Very impressive even if the French troops were masterminded by King Charles the Mad, a man who believed he was made of glass and who forgot which side he on was during one battle and killed 8 of his own soldiers before being overpowered and held down by his knights until he fell asleep.
Not the toughest foe we ever crossed swords with but the English and the French have a proud history of pounding each other.
Almost 600 years on from Henry V hacking his way across Normandy, the French and English are considering combining military forces in a new alliance.
Due to drastic military cuts in both the countries, David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy are to meet up in November to discuss the possibility of a shared Anglo-French nuclear deterrent.
It is an idea that has been mooted before but has proved so politically explosive both here and across the channel that it always forced the politicians to backpedal faster than footage of a Tour de France cyclist on 16x rewind.
Things are different now though with Dave slashing things like a posh Freddie Kruger on speed and admitting that although he wanted to replace our aging nuclear deterrent, "one had to adjust one's sights" to achieve it.
The little englanders may moan but there are far worse countries we could be getting into bed with in a military sense. That said there are far better countries also but Switzerland wouldn't want us trampling all over their pristine alps with our muddy boots.
Of course the ideal would be we scrap the nuclear weapons altogether and spend the billions on proper things instead but why would either place need hospitals when we can both have some gleaming new weapons we won't ever use rusting away on a submarine in Brittany or Southampton instead?
Maybe we can arrange some more closer ties with the Frenchies. We lend them some decent musicians and actors in exchange for them teaching us that wonderful ability to not give a rats what anyone else thinks of them.
As Henry V said 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more'
As Charles the mad said 'Don't stand so close, I've just been polished'.
Very impressive even if the French troops were masterminded by King Charles the Mad, a man who believed he was made of glass and who forgot which side he on was during one battle and killed 8 of his own soldiers before being overpowered and held down by his knights until he fell asleep.
Not the toughest foe we ever crossed swords with but the English and the French have a proud history of pounding each other.
Almost 600 years on from Henry V hacking his way across Normandy, the French and English are considering combining military forces in a new alliance.
Due to drastic military cuts in both the countries, David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy are to meet up in November to discuss the possibility of a shared Anglo-French nuclear deterrent.
It is an idea that has been mooted before but has proved so politically explosive both here and across the channel that it always forced the politicians to backpedal faster than footage of a Tour de France cyclist on 16x rewind.
Things are different now though with Dave slashing things like a posh Freddie Kruger on speed and admitting that although he wanted to replace our aging nuclear deterrent, "one had to adjust one's sights" to achieve it.
The little englanders may moan but there are far worse countries we could be getting into bed with in a military sense. That said there are far better countries also but Switzerland wouldn't want us trampling all over their pristine alps with our muddy boots.
Of course the ideal would be we scrap the nuclear weapons altogether and spend the billions on proper things instead but why would either place need hospitals when we can both have some gleaming new weapons we won't ever use rusting away on a submarine in Brittany or Southampton instead?
Maybe we can arrange some more closer ties with the Frenchies. We lend them some decent musicians and actors in exchange for them teaching us that wonderful ability to not give a rats what anyone else thinks of them.
As Henry V said 'Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more'
As Charles the mad said 'Don't stand so close, I've just been polished'.
Tuesday, 28 September 2010
Labours back
It was always a somewhat bizarre feeling that i helped get the Conservatives into Government.
I was one of those who couldn't bring themselves to vote Labour so voted Liberal Democrat instead who then went and used their new found popularity to get the Conservatives into Downing Street.
Now we are stuck with the last thing we wanted, David Cameron and his rich boys running things or rather running down things. It if isn't nailed down they are looking to cut it or stop it altogether. Oh well, only another four and a half years to go.
I am a Labour Party voter by rights but after the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, there wasn't a peg strong enough to allow me to vote for Blair or Brown but now Labour is back again with a new leader and all of the Blair brigade swept away.
I don't know much about Ed Miliband, he sounded like a Labour man in his initial speech where he received a roar of approval with the line 'We must protect those on middle and low incomes. They did nothing to cause the crisis but are suffering the consequences'.
A poll put Labour a point in front of the coalition and once the cuts hit at the end of October, when it is put into action the severe cuts to public services, there is a very real chance that the demonstrations and public outcry could bring down the coalition and force another election.
With the Lib Dems as a party now almost obsolete thanks to Clegg tying them to the Tories star, Labour would be in the perfect position to get back in power with all the bad remnants of the last Labour Government washed away and a fresh new cabinet with a proper Labour leader.
I'd put up with 12 months of Conservative rule for that so maybe the voting Liberal will turn out to be a great decision by those of us who gave voting Labour a miss last time.
I was one of those who couldn't bring themselves to vote Labour so voted Liberal Democrat instead who then went and used their new found popularity to get the Conservatives into Downing Street.
Now we are stuck with the last thing we wanted, David Cameron and his rich boys running things or rather running down things. It if isn't nailed down they are looking to cut it or stop it altogether. Oh well, only another four and a half years to go.
I am a Labour Party voter by rights but after the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, there wasn't a peg strong enough to allow me to vote for Blair or Brown but now Labour is back again with a new leader and all of the Blair brigade swept away.
I don't know much about Ed Miliband, he sounded like a Labour man in his initial speech where he received a roar of approval with the line 'We must protect those on middle and low incomes. They did nothing to cause the crisis but are suffering the consequences'.
A poll put Labour a point in front of the coalition and once the cuts hit at the end of October, when it is put into action the severe cuts to public services, there is a very real chance that the demonstrations and public outcry could bring down the coalition and force another election.
With the Lib Dems as a party now almost obsolete thanks to Clegg tying them to the Tories star, Labour would be in the perfect position to get back in power with all the bad remnants of the last Labour Government washed away and a fresh new cabinet with a proper Labour leader.
I'd put up with 12 months of Conservative rule for that so maybe the voting Liberal will turn out to be a great decision by those of us who gave voting Labour a miss last time.
Saturday, 25 September 2010
Answering Irish terrorism
The threat level to Great Britain from Irish-related terrorism has gone from moderate to substantial, meaning an attack is a strong possibility, the Home Secretary has said.
Right, we have been here before and we know exactly how to deal with this.
Firstly we need a snappy name, something along the lines of 'Operation Kick the Mick' and then take out the Irish Government because as George W Bush said 'we can't distinguish between terrorist organizations and governments that harbored them'.
As the IRA have been hanging around Ireland for decades, the Prime Minster Brian Cowen and his gang have obviously not doing anything to root them out.
A coalition of the willing would be good, no need for any UN backing or that nonsense. I expect the powerhouses of Albania, Estonia and and Macedonia will be up for another adventure. If we pretend Ireland has oil there we can guarantee the Americans signing up as well.
We will need some Apache helicopters and a few high altitude bombers to hit whatever they like. Weddings and groups of civilians fleeing always seem a popular choice for our crack top gun boys.
Keep it up for a decade or so, smash the country with bombs and pollute it with uranium from the weapons and then withdraw stating that we have won while leaving the country in a mess and even more of a danger than we found it.
A tried and tested response to terrorism so what could possibly go wrong? Load up those 500lb bombs lads and Dublin is that-a-way.
Right, we have been here before and we know exactly how to deal with this.
Firstly we need a snappy name, something along the lines of 'Operation Kick the Mick' and then take out the Irish Government because as George W Bush said 'we can't distinguish between terrorist organizations and governments that harbored them'.
As the IRA have been hanging around Ireland for decades, the Prime Minster Brian Cowen and his gang have obviously not doing anything to root them out.
A coalition of the willing would be good, no need for any UN backing or that nonsense. I expect the powerhouses of Albania, Estonia and and Macedonia will be up for another adventure. If we pretend Ireland has oil there we can guarantee the Americans signing up as well.
We will need some Apache helicopters and a few high altitude bombers to hit whatever they like. Weddings and groups of civilians fleeing always seem a popular choice for our crack top gun boys.
Keep it up for a decade or so, smash the country with bombs and pollute it with uranium from the weapons and then withdraw stating that we have won while leaving the country in a mess and even more of a danger than we found it.
A tried and tested response to terrorism so what could possibly go wrong? Load up those 500lb bombs lads and Dublin is that-a-way.
Thursday, 23 September 2010
Flotilla Report Published: Israel Lied Shock
The Human Rights Council have published the results of their fact finding mission into the Israeli attacks on the flotilla of Gaza bound ships in May, and i expect the words 'anti-Semite' and ‘bias’ to be bandied liberally about by Israeli apologists.
Let’s take a seat and marvel at how the cargo was checked by three independent authorities and sealed before it left Ireland and how the seals remained intact when the ship was boarded by the Israelis. Not arms smuggling as the Israelis accused.
Be amazed at how the insulting references by unknown persons referring to ‘Auschwitz’ and the 11 September 2001 attack on the World Trade Centre in New York which the Israelis said were transmitted to them over the ships radio by the flotilla are dismissed by the HRC as 'fabricated' and 'no such statements were made by anyone involved in communications on the flotilla.'
Gasp as it reports 'live ammunition was used from the helicopter onto the top deck prior to the descent of the soldiers.' Included in the fatalities was a man 'using a video camera and not involved in any of the fighting'.
Shake your head with dismay when you read how 'Israeli soldiers continued shooting at passengers who had already been wounded' and how 'forensic analysis demonstrates that two of the passengers killed on the top deck received wounds compatible with being shot at close range while lying on the ground' and how 'none of the four passengers who were killed on the top deck posed any threat to the Israeli forces' and reaches the conclusion that 'under the circumstances, it seems a matter of pure chance that there were not more fatalities as a result' and deciding that 'Israeli forces carried out extralegal, arbitrary and summary executions prohibited by International human rights law, specifically article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights'.
Sob at how 'a number of passengers were injured or killed whilst trying to take refuge inside the door or assisting other to do so'.
Feel ashamed at how after the Israeli forces has taken control of the flotilla, they meted out 'physical abuse of passengers including kicking and punching and being hit with the butts of rifles.'
Shift uncomfortably as you read about how at the processing centre in the Israeli port of Ashdod one 'Greek national, was dragged along the ground for some distance and then surrounded by a large group of Israeli officials who proceeded to beat him severely, including the deliberate fracture of his leg' or how a passenger 'was seen having his arm twisted behind his back by police to the point that the arm broke.
Weep at how Israeli authorities stole 'laptop computers, credit cards and
mobile telephones and how 'stolen credit cards were later used to purchase items in Israel'.
Nod in agreement at the conclusion that 'there is clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:
• wilful killing;
• torture or inhuman treatment;
• wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health.
And they will have us believe that Iran is the dangerous one in the Middle East.
Let’s take a seat and marvel at how the cargo was checked by three independent authorities and sealed before it left Ireland and how the seals remained intact when the ship was boarded by the Israelis. Not arms smuggling as the Israelis accused.
Be amazed at how the insulting references by unknown persons referring to ‘Auschwitz’ and the 11 September 2001 attack on the World Trade Centre in New York which the Israelis said were transmitted to them over the ships radio by the flotilla are dismissed by the HRC as 'fabricated' and 'no such statements were made by anyone involved in communications on the flotilla.'
Gasp as it reports 'live ammunition was used from the helicopter onto the top deck prior to the descent of the soldiers.' Included in the fatalities was a man 'using a video camera and not involved in any of the fighting'.
Shake your head with dismay when you read how 'Israeli soldiers continued shooting at passengers who had already been wounded' and how 'forensic analysis demonstrates that two of the passengers killed on the top deck received wounds compatible with being shot at close range while lying on the ground' and how 'none of the four passengers who were killed on the top deck posed any threat to the Israeli forces' and reaches the conclusion that 'under the circumstances, it seems a matter of pure chance that there were not more fatalities as a result' and deciding that 'Israeli forces carried out extralegal, arbitrary and summary executions prohibited by International human rights law, specifically article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights'.
Sob at how 'a number of passengers were injured or killed whilst trying to take refuge inside the door or assisting other to do so'.
Feel ashamed at how after the Israeli forces has taken control of the flotilla, they meted out 'physical abuse of passengers including kicking and punching and being hit with the butts of rifles.'
Shift uncomfortably as you read about how at the processing centre in the Israeli port of Ashdod one 'Greek national, was dragged along the ground for some distance and then surrounded by a large group of Israeli officials who proceeded to beat him severely, including the deliberate fracture of his leg' or how a passenger 'was seen having his arm twisted behind his back by police to the point that the arm broke.
Weep at how Israeli authorities stole 'laptop computers, credit cards and
mobile telephones and how 'stolen credit cards were later used to purchase items in Israel'.
Nod in agreement at the conclusion that 'there is clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:
• wilful killing;
• torture or inhuman treatment;
• wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health.
And they will have us believe that Iran is the dangerous one in the Middle East.
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
Difference of opinion on Blair
What a week for Tony Blair. At the start of it he is dodging eggs and shoes while cancelling book signing sessions for fears of rioting in his own country and by the start of the following week he is receiving yet another yankee medal and being applauded by an American audience.Not sure what that means about the British and the Americans but i can have a stab at it.
Now we all know American Governments have always liked a spot of armed conflict and we know Tony was always up for a bit of sending the guns in so they seem a perfect match for each other.
As for the British and American citizens view of Blair, he is detested here and seemingly loved over there.
The lowest ratings of any Labour leader ever, he was bounced out of power by his own party and is unable to even make a public appearance in his own country out of fear for his own safety.
For a lot of Americans he is treated as almost a hero for exactly the same reasons that made him so damned unpopular here.
Possibly the Americans population in general are more up for a war than the Brits who seem to have moved into the pacifist, some might say appeaser, camp.
Another reason may be because the Americans are unaware of the blatant Blair lies that were offered up and dismissed in the lead up to the Iraq War. Nukes became WMD's which became WMD programs which became UN resolution breaking and ended up as he was a tyrant who at some point in the future may have nukes, WMD's & WMD programs.
Another reason could be that Blair was gullible enough to give the Bush & Clinton Governments the fig leaf of cover they needed in Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan, three conflicts that can be diplomatically called highly dubious at best.
Whatever the reason America keeps hanging medals around the mans neck, he is more suited to American way of thinking than British and the truth is he should probably stay over there because all he will get here is more eggs, shoes and abuse whenever he shows his sickly grinning face.
Friday, 10 September 2010
Defending HMRC
Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs have been having a hard time of things recently over yet another foul up over the tax system. This time they took too much tax from 4 million people and not enough from 2 million.
Apparently they have a new system and worked out two years in one go and discovered all those that had slipped through the net.
My take is if you had been paying too much tax for the past 2 years, you obviously had not noticed otherwise you would have been on the telephone screaming at the Tax people to change it when you got your first pay packet 24 months ago. Greet the news as an unexpected bonus and spend it on something nice.
If you had not paid enough tax for the past 2 years then i'm glad that they have finally caught up with you and now you will be paying your fair share like the other 36 million of us. As the repayment is going to be spread over a couple of years and paid back through your tax code it is quite a good deal and if you owe less than £300, it is being scratched off anyway.
The problem seemed to be that employers and employees didn't inform the tax office of any changes so the codes never got amended so its a bit rich to be moaning at HMRC for not making the changes when they didn't know about them in the first place.
Nobody likes paying tax, i moan as much as anyone when my payslip arrives, but it is a necessary evil to allow the Government to keep things going and to quote Frankie Boyle, those Afghan wedding parties won't just blow themselves up.
Apparently they have a new system and worked out two years in one go and discovered all those that had slipped through the net.
My take is if you had been paying too much tax for the past 2 years, you obviously had not noticed otherwise you would have been on the telephone screaming at the Tax people to change it when you got your first pay packet 24 months ago. Greet the news as an unexpected bonus and spend it on something nice.
If you had not paid enough tax for the past 2 years then i'm glad that they have finally caught up with you and now you will be paying your fair share like the other 36 million of us. As the repayment is going to be spread over a couple of years and paid back through your tax code it is quite a good deal and if you owe less than £300, it is being scratched off anyway.
The problem seemed to be that employers and employees didn't inform the tax office of any changes so the codes never got amended so its a bit rich to be moaning at HMRC for not making the changes when they didn't know about them in the first place.
Nobody likes paying tax, i moan as much as anyone when my payslip arrives, but it is a necessary evil to allow the Government to keep things going and to quote Frankie Boyle, those Afghan wedding parties won't just blow themselves up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)