Opinion – The Guardian view on David Cameron: the warping ways of wealth | Editorial | Opinion | The Guardian

English: David Cameron Deutsch: David Cameron

English: David Cameron Deutsch: David Cameron (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This Guardian editorial argues that more important than the prime minister’s personal taxes are the rigged economic rules that govern everything, from tax havens offshore to housing policy at home.

Source: The Guardian view on David Cameron: the warping ways of wealth | Editorial | Opinion | The Guardian

Although I’m not an admirer of David Cameron’s political achievements, I take great exception to this Guardian editorial. For me Cameron has not been an effective leader. BUT the Guardian’s article is typical of the smearing and innuendo that comes with current left-wing politics – there seems to be no place for evidence.

In the mind of the typical Guardian reader David Cameron is responsible for all that’s wrong in society. What about the poison that comes with left-wing sponsorship by the unions? Are we to believe that left-wing politicians are not out for themselves?

The fact remains that the typical left-wing reader, to whom the Guardian is targeted, does not see that Cameron has operated well within the Law.

Cameron led the UK to the Brexit referendum because he could not control his party. He needs to clear the decks and concentrate on fighting for the REMAIN campaign, if not he should resign now.

How about the Guardian publishing its tax returns for the last seven years and explaining why it pays so little tax? Why doesn’t the Guardian direct the same fire-power to Tony Blair, examining Blair’s wealth, earnings and taxes? Surely Cameron is much whiter than Blair? After all, Blair had a very privileged background too.

Thoughts?

 

One response

  1. If there was ever a case of the “Pot calling the kettle black” and being guilty of rank hypocrisy it is the Guardian and its “Grande Dame”, Polly Toynbee in full cry.

    It is also guilty of jealousy and of stirring it up in order to give ammunition to Jeremy Corbyn, being interviewed yesterday by Andrew Marr whilst in a Studio in Edinburgh, Polly Toynbee herself in the studio, holding forth in a £1000 GBP outfit and just one measured and sensible interviewer from LBC to “balance” the left wing views of Marr, Toynbee, and Corbyn sounding as sanctimonious as ever–“We need to see the papers”,”I’m not satisfied” etc,etc.
    Dr Alf is right and if he saw the Andrew Marr programme yesterday he would have been incensed by the bias and choked on his breakfast as I nearly did.

    The programme failed to explain the difference between tax avoidance which is legal,tax and inheritance tax planning which is legal and which I used to undertake for more than 25 years in the insurance business in various incarnations and which the High Street banks have been doing through different administrations for even longer.

    As usual, the BBC and Marr failed to explain the true role of tax havens (something which we will know even less about on Monday because Panorama is doing another hatchet job, this time on wealthy people they dislike putting money into tax havens).

    Guardian Media Services Group uses precisely the same offshore tax arrangements as Tesco PLC and has been pilloried by the English satirical magazine Private Eye for doing so for the past 30 years.

    This is a period which covers the Blair and Gordon Brown years and the period of the Coalition in which Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats shared power with Cameron. During that time, none of the people involved as Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister or Chancellor did anything about tax havens and the Guardian which spent editorial space lambasting the Barclay Bothers (Daily Telegraph), Lord Rothermere(The Daily Mail), Rupert Murdoch (The Sun and the Sunday Times) never once looked at itself.

    David Cameron’s mother and father did nothing illegal and a £200,000 gift inter vivos from his mother is standard practice from a provincial solicitor or will writer, for inheritance tax and the sum itself is less than 60% of the price of an average house, a trivial and insignificant sum.

    Cameron to my mind has been ill advised and should have kept his affairs and those of his wife private; we knew in advance where he went to school, where he went to university, his wife’s background and the fact that he had money.Would people have preferred that he was a benefits recipient without a penny to his name, living with another benefits recipient and getting his shirts and suits from charity shops rather than Turnbull and Asser and Savile Row?

    The answer is of course not since my example is extreme and unreasonable.

    What is Cameron really guilty of?

    To my mind I have the following criticisms:

    1) Not having an industrial strategy and export strategy

    2) Wasting money on the Barnett Formula, foreign aid, the Syrian rebels and on gold plating EU regulations

    3) Not upholding Judeo-Christian values

    4) Appeasing Muslims and by inaction allowing them to radicalise and make vociferous demands

    5) Failing to reform public services

    6) Allowing our farmers to go to the wall instead of making us self-sufficient in food

    7) Failing to strengthen our defences

    8) Allowing immigration to get out of control

    9) Bringing in gay marriage

    10) Throwing away energy security and making us reliant on the French, German and Chinese Governments

    11) Failing to win the 2010 election outright and failing to win with a bigger majority this time round

    12) Failing to scrap the BBC licence fee and force that organisation to do its job

    13) Failing to reform the police or compel them to do the job we are paying them to do

    14) Failing to stop food manufacturers, chemical companies, and seed companies from polluting the environment and selling us unhealthy food

    15) Not being a true Conservative

    Certainly he should go to his new job and go now; certainly he should be replaced with a new true Conservative and certainly something needs to be done to make the gap between upper and lower income earners less wide. However, him having money and a wealthy wife is his good fortune and the good fortune which we would wish for our children and possibly even ourselves(subject to our “orientation”).

    Jealousy is at best unseemly and in my own religion a sin; the Guardian, packed with bloated overpaid reporters and directors, should know better than to engage in it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: