Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Forget Paul Ryan, it’s Cruz or bust for the NeverTrump camp
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Forget Paul Ryan, it’s Cruz or bust for the NeverTrump campaign
It’s fair to say that Wisconsin occupies something of an odd place on the GOP primary calendar in 2016. If it feels like a long time since Republican voters have been to the polls that’s because it has been. By the time that Wisconsin votes this week, it will have been two weeks since Arizona and Utah and we will also have to wait two more weeks for the New York primary on April 19th.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I was just wondering yesterday whether Corbyn or Cameron was the luckiest politician alive. It seems to swing like a pendulum........Under any normal circumstances both wouldn't have survived. Cameron has lost his party but thanks to Corbyn is wearing an asbestos suit. Corbyn has a minute amount of support outside of his clique but it doesn't show because he's facing a disintegrating Tory Party.
Now there is this......... The Panama story which has given Corbyn an opening the size of the Grand Canyon.
Tax evasion/avoidance by extremely rich people is one of the few things that unites both left and right rich and poor.
That Cameron's father has been involved just adds to the uncomfortable sense of privilege that has been like a ticking time bomb under his administration since it took over in 2010. (They're saying he hasn't paid tax in 30 years)
So advantage Corbyn
"No innocent person sites their money in Panama"
So says barrister specialising in financial affairs on the BBC. I suspect we are looking at a very big story here.
Given that hundreds of journalists around the world are involved in researching this story, I just don't buy that British journalists would be holding back on the juicy bits for reasons of timing, all the while having to trust their competitors not to scoop them. It seems more likely that the big news would be on the front page on day one such as it is.
If that's your election winner, the left are more desperate than I thought.
As for my dreams ...I loathe these McCarthyite stories. I've never liked hunting prey
http://www.wired.com/2016/04/reporters-pulled-off-panama-papers-biggest-leak-whistleblower-history/
"Taxation is theft"
"Tax avoidance is a sign of intelligence"
8,888 seconds
Parliament makes laws to collect tax. People are legally and morally obliged to pay the tax parliament enacts. They are not obliged to pay more than required. If parliament makes things so bloody complicated and opaque that there are grey areas and endless allowances and exceptions, whose fault is that? Personally I am in favour of a massive simplification of the tax code, ideally down to one slim volume which everyone should pay. In taxation as in other areas of law it ill becomes parliament to both pass sloppy hole ridden laws and bitch about people using those holes.
Wasn't it Lord Denning that said that a man is not required to arrange his affairs in such a way as to remit the maximum possible tax to the state.
I'm not.
How wrong I was
From a centre-right perspective, it means a far heavier tax burden on middle earners as well.
You tried to rear end my ARSE and found your efforts lacked bottom.
That said, this government has done more than its predecessor - interestingly the peak of the Panama activity was 2005.......and of course if there was any illegality in Cameron Père's activity I'm sure we'd have heard about it by now - just a lot of righteous huffing and puffing and 'something must be done' ing (which is more than we ever did....)
*I've just heard them re quote him and they've used a sligtly watered down edit
There have been rumours for a while that China is considering making either HK or Macau a tax haven for international clients. Lots of nice liquidity for them. Be interesting to see what people try an do about a tax haven with a superpower backing it. Infact there already is one, Panama is only 13th on the world Bank Secrecy Index (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Secrecy_Index) The third is the USA, try getting them to tell you about accounts held in the USA by foreigners.
http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21571554-some-onshore-jurisdictions-can-be-laxer-offshore-sort-not-palm-tree-sight
Doesn't anyone fancy putting a tent up with a beautiful sea front view and by the sound of it not a taxman in sight?
https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/search?country=UK&q=&ppl=on&ent=on&adr=on
I honestly don't expect much to change. Osborne's done quite a bit on this subject, but that counts for nothing vs the stereotype. Maybe Iceland will get a new PM, hey-ho.
The best Panama story remains the canoeist.
This did make me laugh, their faces are a picture of disappointment.
Alex Wickham
Khan holds a "Sadisqco" party. 8 people turn up. All of them blokes. More like a Sad-disco. https://t.co/a8OsGs35Pa https://t.co/hNVZ7Quzvu
How do I get an offshore account?
FWIW, this is normal. When I ran my university Tory association you'd struggle to get anything north of a dozen turning up for a political event, in a university of thousands.
Conversely, turnout for the Tory v. Labour laser quest was very good.
Not anymore. Flourished under Labour, shut down (with hundreds of job losses) under the coalition.
Whatever the outcome of the EU Referendum in June, this whole Panama tax business will inevitably result in shortening David Cameron's tenure of No. 10. Indeed it may well reinforce his own wish and determination to leave the top job sooner rather than later.
This reminded me to revisit Hills' “When will David Cameron Cease to be Tory Leader” market, where the value bet appears to be 2017 at odds of 8.0 decimal and I've topped up accordingly, together with a small saver on 2016 at odds of 4.5 decimal.
As ever, DYOR.
http://reverbpress.com/religion/soldiers-of-god-bill/
However isn't part of the reason that all these dictators, despots and criminals (*) put their money offshore from their own countries is access? Once it's out of their country it's harder for people in their own country to discover about it, and it's more accessible if the worst comes and they need to flee.
Now a question: would it be possible for (say) the UK to ask Panama to freeze accounts belonging to terrorists and/or criminals? I'm guessing not.
(*) Naturally not including Cameron's dad ...
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/no-simon-schama-people-worried-about-gang-rape-and-fgm-arent-obsessed-with-sex/
http://order-order.com/2012/11/26/the-guardians-offshore-secrets-guardian-media-group-still-operates-caymans-company/
Edit - for avoidance / evasion
I rather think so ..... if would simply being too boring to repeat last week's numbers precisely.
Fully agree that governments cause the problem by excessively complicated tax codes.
The question is, How do you stop a Chancellor/Fin minister tinkering with the tax code?
GO may have done more than previous CotE to crack down on tax avoidance, but what new opportunities has he created which his brand of tinkering?
I make efficiency savings
You avoid tax
They are prosecuted under the Taxes Management Act 1970
"Only for secrecy. It's almost impossible for British tax authorities to investigate"
Shame, as up to now I rather liked him.
Ahh.. Tax avoidance by right bad ... Tax avoidance by left " look squirrel" . What's actually the difference between the Guardian and Cameron's Pops? The Guardian refuse to answer the same questions they demand others themselves answer openly .
Also Mrs FB educated professional generally interested and well informed lady thatshe is has already declared herself heartedly fed up to the back teeth with all this referendum stuff.... Bored to tears by it. It seems excitement maynot be building!, outside this site that is. I forecast a low turnout
I feel some Thomas More coming on...
NORFOLK Then your reasons must be treasonable!
MORE Not "must be"; may be.
NORFOLK It's a fair assumption!
MORE The law requires more than an assumption; the law requires a fact.
Nice quote, Mr. Indigo.
On-topic: good article, Mr. Pedley. I concur that there'd be a democratic (ahem) outcry if someone not even standing won.
My gorgeous palace for a hermitage,
My gay apparel for an almsman's gown,
My figured goblets for a dish of wood,
My scepter for a palmer's walking staff
My subjects for a pair of carved saints
and my large kingdom for a little grave.”
Where have the cases about Ted Cruz potentially being ineligible got to?
Therefore, if the votes do fall as Keiran suggests, Trump will surely be the unenthusiastically endorsed nominee in order to stop Cruz.
The only way I can see Trump being stopped under this scenario is if a late surge from Kasich brings him into play. But he's got a lot to do if he's to manage that.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35965835
And to get rid of the corny puns in advance, no it's not a trap!
If they vote leave, what's the excuse for such a thing? Sturgeon's scenario was if the UK as a whole votes to leave but Scotland doesn't.
Given a smaller population it's easier to get a higher proportional turnout. It's still entirely possible, nay likely, that everyone coming out to protest would have been against him anyway before any of this.
http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2016/04/over-half-of-party-member-respondents-to-our-survey-have-no-confidence-in-the-feldman-review.html
No one proposes banning or exterminating anyone or anything, they just pointed out the hypocrisy of one organisation that uses offshore arrangements to optimise its tax arrangements throwing stones at someone else who is alleged to have done the same.
I wish I had so much money that tax avoidance would be worthwhile! Its the sort of hassle that's worth putting up with. (Although surely ISAs and the like are 'simple' tax avoidance?)
Say we were told we could avoid 10% of tax on our earnings by a technically legal mechanism that is against our own moral code. How many of us would do it?
And how many of us would just close out eyes, lost in the incomprehensible terminology, and just tell our accountant to get us a good deal?
The irony of the Grauniad, of course, is that without its - ahem - efficient tax arrangements it would have gone out of business years ago because almost nobody reads it. It looks though as if its final demise is approaching rapidly, tax arrangements or no. Personally I shall be rather sorry when that happens, as it is always useful to know what its 124 readers are thinking. All you have to do then is think the opposite and you'll usually be right.
33 minutes 33 seconds
Back into 90 / 130 for GOP Nom !
True. Which does strike me as unlikely too.
The question that Ryan backers have to answer is if not Trump because he's too unreliable, and if not Cruz because he's too extreme, then why not Kasich?
Their answer to that may well be 'because he kept losing', and that's not all that unreasonable but then if that is the answer then how does it keep Ryan in play when he didn't even compete? There's no guarantee that he'd have done any better; lots of other establishment candidates entered and finished behind the Ohio governor.
It seems to me that Kieran's logic is sound save for that one point. The NeverTrump brigade have two flawed choices before they get to Ryan or some other non-runner. Skipping Cruz and Trump would upset a lot and reinforce The Party Always Wins but Kasich is still viable.
On a related note, there is a rumour that Kasich is really running for the VP slot. I'm not sure I buy that but if ultimately offered it to either Trump or Cruz, he'd be sensible to take it: a flaky running-mate can damage a presidential bid; it doesn't work the other way round. But whether he wants it or not, his best bet is to compete as hard as possible for the top prize so for the moment his strategy should be the same either way.