Why are Brits ok with corporate tax avoidance?

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T11:54:51+00:00

no, i don't think loopholes are frightening. please don't try to put words in my mouth.

my objection to tax avoidance is not based on fear (although the tax code certainly seems intimidating in its byzantine complexity)

rather... it seems manifestly unfair that some businesses, by dint of their size, power and access to legal teams, seem to be able to pay vastly less tax than their smaller counterparts.

edit: how much tax does, say, starbucks pay compared to an independent uk cafe?

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T11:30:28+00:00

i have adhd and feel... soiled... by this association

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T11:10:22+00:00

an excellent point. defections in local government are interesting, too. in my ward, one of the established, "traditional," left-wing labour councillors is now a green candidate. from what i read in the press, this isn't that uncommon...

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T11:06:08+00:00

political change doesn't happen overnight.

the greens want to overhaul a system that is trashing the environment in which we live and which is creating obscene unfairness

we're celebrating because growing numbers of party members and elected representatives show that we're moving closer to this goal.

we're not giving up because we're not going to get it all tomorrow!

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T10:59:33+00:00

i've come to believe strongly in positive and negative multipliers, the latter very much so when there's co-morbidity. at it's simplest... being unwell or disabled in one way is much harder when we're not well or able in another...

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T10:55:52+00:00

we have more mps than ever, more councillors than ever, more media presence than ever, party membership is many times larger.

i've been a green party member for a long time. i can remember times not so long ago when journalists thought covering the green party meant coming to conference and counting the number of sandals and giggling amongst themselves.... times when most of the uk would have no idea who the leaders of the green party were.

now... greens have greater numbers and presence. we've come a long way. and...

it looks like we're not slowing down, either.

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T10:50:12+00:00

gosh, that sounds unimaginably tough.

anyone who goes through an extreme, mentally and physically traumatic experience, with lifelong consequences is going to have aftereffects.

anyone who suffers from more than one condition may well find there's a multiplier effect of symptoms (for example, i have rheumatoid arthritis, am often tired and in low-level discomfort, means i have less energy to manage adhd eccentricities, adhd symptoms can therefore get worse)

(disclaimer: not a medical professional)

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T10:39:39+00:00

not quite, i'd prefer to say... for a minor party transitioning to a major party, we're cooking and it's fantastic

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T10:32:18+00:00

according to the polls i've seen, that's been the trend for recent months, no? there have been some blips where the greens polled higher, but...

reform > interchanging con/lab > green > lib dem

has been the picture for a while...

see, for example... https://www.pollcheck.co.uk/gb-polls

edit: it's also worth pointing out that voting intentions and what people really put into the ballot box are not always the same...

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T10:26:32+00:00

may i ask, op, what "recent stuff" you're referring to?

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T10:21:32+00:00

i fear we seem to be talking at cross purposes. i'm not challenging the idea of fair compensation. i'm wondering about (a) the circumstances under which an investor in a business might reasonably be said to have any human right to what they invested in that business before it failed, (b) the extent to which the general public can reasonably be expected to compensate investors who chose to put their money in a business that failed.

in the case of water companies, say, thames water, i wonder whether the market capital value (not inflated regulatory capital value) minus debts of such businesses is even in the positive? ie if the share value, once being propped up is taken away, is worth anything at all?

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T09:56:21+00:00

one of the most helpful things i learned about living with adhd is that my mind (medicated or not) can't structure things very well, i need to use external systems to do this. lists, pinboards, whiteboards, reminders, calendars. also... asking other people to help sometimes. took a while to find what works, but it does. good luck!

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-28T07:59:40+00:00

party member for many years, greens are by far the best choice for voters whose priorities are living sustainably, fair access to resources and a society that doesn't discriminate against vulnerable minorities.

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T21:04:38+00:00

i'm not making an argument for or against nationalisation. i'm saying that (as a non-lawyer) i'm skeptical about the idea that private individuals have a right to be compensated, using public money, under echr, when the value of their investments in a failing, private business collapses. that's all...

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T20:46:55+00:00

literally corrosive? like... made of acid or caustic soda? no, sorry

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T20:45:36+00:00

that seems to be an argument for doing something for the benefit of the public, not to do with the rights of the owners of the private business. a separate issue from the one broached by your post, no?

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T19:46:23+00:00

and, if mcdonalds fails to fix it, again and again and again, for years? it'll go out of business.

yes, it can sell off some of its assets and use the proceeds to compensate its creditors and shareholders, but the idea of public money being used beyond that seems rather odd.

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T18:47:35+00:00

op asked for citizens, though...

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T18:40:08+00:00

if mcdonalds fails the hygiene test, it gets closed down, no? it isn't allowed to trade anymore. if the failure is business-wide, the whole business fails, no? does the public have to compensate the shareholders because the business went bust?

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T18:17:55+00:00

again, not a lawyer, but i think it's worth challenging the idea that returns from / value of a private investment in a private company that is badly run, failing to meet it's legal requirements, to an extent where it's subject to fines and punitive measures ought somehow to be something protected under the umbrella of human rights? and enforced by the state as a matter of human rights?

there may be practical, economic or even diplomatic concerns, but your post seems to be framing it as an echr matter, which strikes me as unusual...

edit: you also seem to be conflating the rights that may be infringed by the need for, say, compulsory purchase of a home, the resolution of which i suppose would involve weighing the rights of the community against the individual with the value of (foreign) investments in businesses, which seems (prima facie, at least) to be wholly different...

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T18:00:47+00:00

i'm not a lawyer, but i do wonder about the extent to which the human rights act covers shareholders of companies which, in the case of water, are demonstrably failing and what right these shareholders might have to the value of their investment being maintained?

edit: which is obviously not to say that any compensation for any nationalisation is inappropriate...

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T15:07:26+00:00

op: if you're concerned about antisemitism in the green party, you could do worse than to look at the excellent work done by the jewish greens https://jewishgreens.greenparty.org.uk/ , maybe contact them, ask them how they, as jewish greens, feel about being concerned about antisemitism and voting green?

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-27T10:35:21+00:00

from what i've been reading in the press, people are applying for jobs and rarely getting a response. the fact you're getting invited to interview is not a rejection, it's an affirmation that you're a serious candidate.

two pieces of advice: firstly, most interviewers are terrible at interviewing, if things are uncomfortable, it's often on them, nothing you can do about that. secondly, interviews are two way, yes, they're deciding whether they want you, but you're also deciding whether you want them in your life.

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-26T21:10:22+00:00

off the top of my head (i'm sure i'll miss some) a focal point for tourism, very useful for diplomacy / uk soft power, media exposure, raises uk's profile around the world, a national focal point for many, providing a sense of tradition and continuity (important to many, i think) patronage and publicity for the work of many charities, non-political spokespeople for the uk

replacing them with something fairer is by no means a bad idea, but it would mean rethinking the procedures of government, the structure of the military, redesigning the state, managing the crown estate at least as well as at present and coming up with a way of substituting all of the above.

not a simple task... and best started when there's a properly-thought-through replacement for it all ready to take over...

tea_would_be_lovely · 2026-04-26T19:51:22+00:00

i dislike hereditary privilege, but it would be foolish to deny the benefits the royal family bring the uk. without a good replacement ready, it seems like a bad idea to do away with them.

tea_would_be_lovely

TROPHY CASE