Re: Naselus
Whilst I agree that you have clearly outlined the "lefty" grievance from paragraph two downwards, and I would even agree the tax system is not perfect, you have failed to explain the one-sided nature of that viewpoint. For example, you have conflated "big corporations" with "the rich", failing to include that many of "the poor" have their money tied up in pension funds also benefiting from the tax rules that allow tax planning. As far as you are concerned, tax planning/avoidance only benefits "the rich", which the pensions fund case shows to be untrue. Your bias makes you blind to inconvenient facts. You also fail to understand that big corporations employ lots of people in the UK - HMG have to balance how much they whack them with a tax stick with the possibility they will take their business elsewhere, which means lots of "the poor" you claim to care about will be unemployed. Your failure to understand this is on par with such "geniuses" as the unions that trashed the British car industry, doing themselves out of work. What you and a lot of other "lefties" need to understand is not all "big business" is "evil" and you need to strike a compromise in a modern economy, by changing taxation laws if required (as TW pointed out) rather than just relying on spreading lies and bile.
But you then get a downvote for insisting that TW uses "strawmen" and "cherrypicks" arguments, neatly avoiding actually stating when or how he has done so. That is a standard denigrating tactic amongst poor losers that don't like to admit when they cannot argue the point. I would like to give you a second downvote if I could for your use of "aggressive tax avoidance", which is just typical and mindless repeating of a purpose-made slur. Please try harder.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
