MoonManKipper

joined 2 years ago
[–] MoonManKipper 2 points 3 months ago

Now that's a movie!

[–] MoonManKipper 2 points 3 months ago

Truly awful

[–] MoonManKipper 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

A quick review of the lore says no…

[–] MoonManKipper 45 points 5 months ago

Gimli was turned into the comic relief dwarf, which was a bit sad

[–] MoonManKipper 22 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Hard though it may be try not to propose solutions unless asked (it’s only taken me 20 years of marriage to mostly learn this!). Every thing else is good though

[–] MoonManKipper 16 points 5 months ago

If you’re using a webpage JavaScript can see your mouse cursor and anything you type. But only if the browser has focus. So if you’re typing in another window it can’t

[–] MoonManKipper -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not the same - a bank needs it to be roughly right across a portfolio of loans, I need it to be exactly right for me.

Property tax etc is an understood part of owing a property- an intrinsically valuable thing. I’m strongly in favour of land tax - it encourages the productive use of land. I can’t live in shares, and I can’t eat them. At some point I may make some actual money from them and at that point I should pay tax. I should not be taxed now on possible future gains, anymore than I should be taxed now on a possible pay raise if I get a promotion.

Fairer and more effective tax is essential- and to advocate for it effectively a grasp of the basics is essential. Otherwise you’re counter productive. I feel I’ve made my points and shall withdraw

[–] MoonManKipper -2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Something can be legally liquid, but not practically liquid. Like a house. For example the Board of the company could give me permission to sell, but why would they?

[–] MoonManKipper -4 points 5 months ago (5 children)

That’s my point - I’m not making any profit from my ownership of the shares. If I were I’d pay tax on it. All I have a bit of paper which might be worth some real cash in the future. It would become a liability if I had to pay a simple wealth tax on it.

If I use the shares as collateral on a loan and they come good then I have to sell the shares to repay the loan (and pay tax on the sale). If they don’t then I suppose the loan company takes a loss, they’ll have factored that in on to the interest I pay. So probably won’t be so low interest

I completely agree on the economy but and happily pay all the tax I should. But ‘wealth’ is not a simple concept- it comes in many forms, it’s not just a pile of bags of cash with a fat bloke in a top hat sitting on. Even measuring it is hard. So taxing it is really hard and inefficient, which is completely glossed over in these kinds of campaigns

[–] MoonManKipper -1 points 5 months ago (4 children)

And that creates a loophole that is trivially easy to exploit, which is the problem. I simply wrap up any asset I want to hold onto into a fund or trust that stops me doing the above…

[–] MoonManKipper 2 points 5 months ago

Also require greater transparency around money movement and proper auditing. Governments need to spend more on auditing.

view more: ‹ prev next ›