- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: Sleazy Peers
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "Sleazy Peers"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by Doggy Styles View PostThat's fine, but what's the connection with sleaze?
Leave a comment:
-
Funny enough, a similar argument raged a couple of hundred years ago on the subject of purchased commissions in the military.
Now we all know that the right man should be in the right job, reward and promotion based on merit etc. The counter argument was that the people who could afford to purchase a commision (rank) had a stake in the country nd the likelihood of a military coup was therefore minimised.
Method in the madness.
Last edited by EternalOptimist; 27 January 2009, 13:29.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mich the Tester View PostPut it this way. My father owns a business which employs a few people. I also own a business which employs a few people. Should either one of us die or become mentally incapacitated, then the other would have to take over his business and thereby the responsibility for the people who depend upon it for a living. Not easy, because neither of us know anything about each other’s businesses, but at least we have the contacts to try and appoint a capable successor and the will to fulfil the business’ duties to employees, creditors, customers and other stakeholders. But then along comes our NuLabour taxman, full of his ‘fairness’ and ‘social justice’ and charges the heir a tulipload of money for inheriting the business. What has he actually inherited? Not a big load of money with no duties, but the responsibilities, risks and liabilities of the other. So why tax him?
Same goes for hereditary peers; they don’t simply inherit power, but the duty of using it for the good of the country, even though they haven’t asked for that duty. So why moan at them?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Doggy Styles View PostOn balance it probably is a bad thing. The bribery bits anyway. The romps are probably OK.
Same goes for hereditary peers; they don’t simply inherit power, but the duty of using it for the good of the country, even though they haven’t asked for that duty. So why moan at them?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mich the Tester View PostIs sleaze necessarily a bad thing? Can a little nepotism never be harnessed for a good cause?
Leave a comment:
-
I thought this Government couldn't get any worse and yet again they prove me wrong. They make the Major years look like a rose-tinted age of innocence.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Doggy Styles View PostI like hereditary peers. They weren't brought up and trained to be lying, mealy-mouthed, short-termist, professional politicians. Which suggests there is more chance of them doing the right things.
I expect they could still be sleazy though.
Leave a comment:
-
I like hereditary peers. They weren't brought up and trained to be lying, mealy-mouthed, short-termist, professional politicians. Which suggests there is more chance of them doing the right things.
I expect they could still be sleazy though.
Leave a comment:
-
Socialists seem to have a problem with people who inherit stuff, even if the inheritance is more a duty than a benefit, as is perhaps the case with hereditary peers. I can think of good reasons why a peerage should be given on merit and not inheritance, but I can’t help thinking it was misguided jealousy that drove Labour to attack the hereditary peers, and not really a desire to make the system more democratic.
Leave a comment:
-
Sleazy Peers
Did we have sleaze issues with hereditary peers, or is this a cronyism thing?Tags: None
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Contracting Awards 2024 hails 19 firms as best of the best Yesterday 09:13
- How to answer at interview, ‘What’s your greatest weakness?’ Nov 14 09:59
- Business Asset Disposal Relief changes in April 2025: Q&A Nov 13 09:37
- How debt transfer rules will hit umbrella companies in 2026 Nov 12 09:28
- IT contractor demand floundering despite Autumn Budget 2024 Nov 11 09:30
- An IR35 bill of £19m for National Resources Wales may be just the tip of its iceberg Nov 7 09:20
- Micro-entity accounts: Overview, and how to file with HMRC Nov 6 09:27
- Will HMRC’s 9% interest rate bully you into submission? Nov 5 09:10
- Business Account with ANNA Money Nov 1 15:51
- Autumn Budget 2024: Reeves raids contractor take-home pay Oct 31 14:11
Leave a comment: