white straight ciswoman mid-20s-ish. surrounded by telly. likes words,
I have a hole punch, let's not get big-headed now.
keppps << shallitellyouastory
top news in britain today: daleks hold up traffic on westminster bridge and the prime minister stars in 1D music video
i’m not even sure this is a real country anymore tbh
They weren’t kidding.
do you ever feel we British have quite odd specific problems
about tea and strangers
like serious disappointments
GENERAL SHAME i have done this more than once
and america they don’t get it why are you so polite are you mocking me
and apologising all the time
I swear I aplogogised to an old lady when she hit me with a handbag??
and saying thank you for everythin omg why whY
we need hELP AS A NATION
…and that is that multinational companies and the rules by which they can trade very obviously provide a clear, unfair and wholly unjustifiable competitive advantage to such corporations over smaller, locally owned and nationally based businesses.
This makes no economic sense. First, even the most pro-market person will say that tax should not distort markets. On this occasion I agree with them: there is no reason at all why the UK tax system should favour one company over another in this country when they are in direct competition one with another.
More than that though, if there is to be any such competition it should be the smaller, homegrown business that should very clearly get the support of the tax system. But it isn’t: the exact reverse is happening.
That’s bad for British business, bad for the prospects for growth in this economy, bad for the creation of an atmosphere of tax compliance in the small business community when they can clearly see the tax system picks on them, and bad for communities of the UK that need local initiatives to ensure that they prosper and thrive.
Starbucks avoiding tax has a knock-on effect on homegrown business Guardian Comment is Free.
The entire article is fantastic and worth a read if you have interest in UK business and related taxation system.
Also disappointingly: Google, Apple and Facebook don’t pay tax in the UK. Along with the homegrown likes of: Vodafone, Sir Philip Green (owner/director/etc of: Topshop, Topman, Dorothy Perkins, Burton, Miss Selfridge and British Home Stores), Tesco, Cadbury, Walkers Crisps, Diageo and Boots. Details from UK Uncut.
Bee-tee-dubs, the monetary amounts we’re dealing with are in the tens and hundreds of millions, sometimes billions, which are being retained by these by&by-showing-profit, woe-is-me-we-can’t-afford-tax businesses.
Tell me again how benefits and immigration and public services and the NHS are leaching government resources, Mr Osboure. I triple doggy dare you.
the reshuffle is despairing as fuck.
Most of us tend to think that black people came to Britain after the war - Caribbeans on the Empire Windrush in 1948, Bangladeshis after the 1971 war and Ugandan Asians after Idi Amin’s expulsion in 1972.
But, back in Shakespeare’s day, you could have met people from west Africa and even Bengal in the same London streets.
Of course, there were fewer, and they drew antipathy as well as fascination from the Tudor inhabitants, who had never seen black people before. But we know they lived, worked and intermarried, so it is fair to say that Britain’s first black community starts here.
There had been black people in Britain in Roman times, and they are found as musicians in the early Tudor period in England and Scotland.
So, tell me again that it’s not historically accurate to include POC in media set in Europe before slavery. Go on, reality & I will be here mocking you.
And the first Black community in England (reminder to Americans that England isn’t only London) was 1700 years earlier.
paging Mr. Gaider
The idea that there weren’t any people of colour living and working in Old Europe is hilarious