Steven P

Yes, it was something like Rockefeller, can't remember exactly now. It is all legal but not right when the 'profit' of a sale in one country is seen in another country (coffee being a great example). Close off that loop hole and you'd get a lot of profits taxed - a worldwide problem (however the flip side is that the big insurance firms 'own' the big corporations, get them paying more tax and our pension pots will be smaller... but our tax burden could be reduced to compensate (it wouldn't be) )

Not sure how much that would bring in, usually a lot of small amounts brings bigger returns than a few larger amounts... but the lots of small stuff is usually from the lower rungs of the ladder... his base support so perhaps not the best option (and one I wouldn't do either) Yup, though a lot of loop holes could be plugged... though that will of course affect the wealthy who can afford the accountant to tell them what to do. I'd also look at plugging companies off shore rules (example, Starbucks? I think HQ is in the Bahamas? zero corporation tax and all their shops pay a license fee to them there... equal pretty much to each stores annual profit... same with googles and so on.. that is worth few billion too So far then, plug the loopholes and don't do the tax cuts? Actually that just might be enough. Still don't buy Greenland though.

But if you were in his position, what would you be doing? Easing the taxes on the rich to pass the taxes onto poor, a blanket tax rise? Tax corporations? What do you think the best way to balance the books are?

4 years, 2 months.... And to quote another rip roaring successful politician, The Giant Trump has been telling us for 2 or 3 years that he has oven ready solutions to it all. He's been carefully thinking about this, 2 months in power - this time round - yes, but planning what to do for 2 more years before that... and still not doing a great job yet despite all his considerations. His current policies are predicted that their debt mountain will rise... even with all his thinking. My thinking is based on history and the leopard not changing his spots.

Without getting into it and to try keeping the adult theme, but read back at any negative comment about The Trump and you are leaping to his defence. He cannot do a thing wrong if we believe the words you type. Anyway, back to the finances, 105 billion is a small amount saved compared to the tax cuts I mentioned and this 105 billion is coming from the working man - the sacking and on. He's harming his voter base with that and soon enough I think they are going to realise in greater and greater numbers. Trump was already rich, that is true, but his motivation here isn't his personal wealth - those around him advising him are though - but his motivation is vengeance on all the slights he perceives have been done to him - can be seen with his obsession with Biden, Harris, Clinton and more recently Zelensky, and also for validation. He wants to be popular, to be seen to be popular and when that popularity dips he is not going to be a happy bunny. Which takes me back to the finances, the more he switches the tax from the rich to the poor the quicker his fan base will realise that they have been had. This is why there is no income tax increases to speak of but the tax increase is in the form of tariffs, still a tax and one that the poorer half of society will pay disproportionally compared to their wealth - it is a flat rate tax, it if a millionaire buys a tomato, or if the poorest buys a tomato, they are both taxed at the same rate. Switching income tax rises to tariff taxes is a tax cut for the rich and a hike for the poorest. But that is OK, tariffs are being sold to the US as 'other nations will pay' and not a tax increase

Can do this for a starter. Adultery conversation it is then, promise no insults and an aldulty reply? Save trillions of dollars. So he has implemented 4.5 trillion in tax cuts, aimed at the richest. Do nothing and there will be cash flowing in. How is that for starters? He could forget about buying Greenland, that must be a bit of a saving there? He could shut his face for a while, noting the daily news stories around the world boycotting US goods, that can't be a good thing and must be worth a few millions in tax revenue. While I am at it, he could take a lead in supporting The Ukraine - there are many billions out there in the rebuilding that at the moment look to be heading to Europe... the tax and the new jobs from that must be worth a fair bit too. Slow down the sacking of employees, when they need to get rehired that is also going to cost - redundancy pay and then back to their salary, must also be worth about a billion. I might have mentioned this before but The Great Trump (as you see him) inherited a fortune... and if he had done nothing with it history shows he would now be richer. The Great Trump has now inherited tax rates that will be pouring cash into government if he sits and does nothing, but true to form he acted and will be poorer for it. Looking at history, he has no aptitude to reduce the debt either, his track record last time around was the debt rose at exactly the same rate as it did under Obama and excluding Covid, continued at exactly the same rate afterwards under Biden - anything he did before had no effect. Doubt it will now either apart from his mates will get richer. End of it the finances are there, he just has to stop being Donald Trump essentially.

Not sure the going rate but I don't think you are being unreasonable to ask for something - incidental expenses you wouldn't have if you went home every night. Simple things like the option to make a lunch at home for say £1, or a Greggs for £5, a morning paper - get one delivered at home as usual for the family, but you might still want to be keep up to date, a pint in the bar at £7, or a tin at home for £1.50 (or whatever the hotel bar is - might be cheaper some of the dives we stayed in), all adds up as an extra expense to you. Not done weeks on site for a while but I guess mobile data should be added in too opposed to home wifies. Don't forget either the option to do laundry either so you don't go home a minger. So, not unreasonable but the amount might depend on what they are offering on the hotel expenses.

Darlington,

Ring count requested.

I've known the tree for near 50 years* and it was a good height then, estimating from before about 1970 though * Though I was also smaller then. 1980s was good enough to climb high enough to scare mum... so we didn't when she could see. A couple more shots:

So back to the statistics and title of the thread, many polls are indicating that The Trump is not as popular as he wants us to believe, from some of the big polling companies who are less biased then the smaller ones... I'd be inclined to believe those polls.

Exactly the point, statistics can show what you want depending on your view point. So the polls and statistics that I might quote here are very correct, but polar opposites to the polls and statistics that you post here... and yet yours might be very correct as well. That was the basic GCSE maths, many years ago. Ask a loaded question, and you get the answer you want that fits your opinion. Doesn't mean that the answer is the full story.

... your half of the conversation Gareth are made up of course .... and the other half confusions of data. I remember school days (the old RE teacher of them all), in Sweden in the 80's they'd corrollated nesting stalks on chimneys and new born children in the house. Though for these statistics, depends on the questions asked, there are a few different polls corroborating the same findings, The Trump isn't as popular as his minions are telling him that he is (emperors new clothes story has parallels to Trump).

Didn't Boris Johnson spend millions on a similar media suit for exactly the same purpose? Hardly in need of an outrage. Teleprompter outrage.... because The Trump cannot use a teleprompter perhaps? I reckon if you go around the world most governments will have or be considering similar.

As mentioned above, they are your number I am using.

You need a better acountant. But thanks, I was just about to ask you to humour me, "to take home your £10k a month what would you need to take in a day".... £1250 a day nearer the mark?... and you think the tax increase on that will be too much for your customers? You need a better customer too if so. Of course, that £1250 is just for you, there are the other 2 you share the cab with say a bit over £2k a day

They're going to, but interested also to see what the opinion on here might be too

Not running a business at the moment, and the numbers are rule of thumb from my 'corporate world' world of work... however from comments on here (OK from smaller concerns than JohnsonDs £120k take home pay) not too far off from what you need to pay a man for a days work, and what you need to take to pay for the big machines he runs. I might be way off the mark, and perhaps best I don't run a business - never make any sales or money if so.

Whoops - I'd be the first to ask for a photo too if it helps others. It's this fella in the middle, was. Reckoned it was 25m to the top - the trees around it are all mature for example sycamore and so on. 4m at ground level, a little less at chest height. I'll grab a couple of photos tomorrow of work in progress.

Haven't looked but this thread suggests there will be loads of cheap double cabs flooding the market any day soon

Your numbers, 7 year old motor, 107k, or about 15k miles a year, works out to be 20 or 30p a mile . If my sums are a fantasy, they are done off the numbers you suggested. And what can your customers afford... going back to your numbers, you've suggested previously that your wage is about £120k, I'd estimate for that you'd need to be taking closer to £160 to cover taxes, expenses, equipment (loans, maintenance, replacements), training, accountancy, holidays, pensions, and everything else... just for you. £1000 a day. Add to you - checking numbers above - 2 passengers on your jobs, £300 daily wage - specialist stuff I am guessing, wouldn't get out of bed for any less, needs £450 for the business, makes about £1700 day rate for your team... and your customers cannot afford an extra £15? I'm not believing that.

Had a conversation earlier, a Lawson Cyprus I knew when I was younger, damaged in the storms so taken down this week.... question was how old do you think it was - 25m high and about 4m girth.. the little calculator I had didn't go to that size though. Any thoughts? Minimum age is 75 A good climbing tree.

but if the tree surgeon said apple....

I'll see your 30m.... Had a couple of Wild Slings knocking about somewhere, they were good

But that is the basis of all business taxes, eventually the cost gets added onto the ultimate purchaser... which is usually you or me. If taxes have to rise to pay for all the stuff we want, (or wanted) then eventually we have to pay and then we are just discussing how they are disguising the cost increase to me and you. Direct taxes or hidden taxes, how do you want to pay? If it is a personal vehicle - Chelsea Tractor style - then that is no bad thing, if it is business use only then the business owner only passes on the cost if they have done their sums.... and likely that all similar businesses will be doing the same. Those that buy from a knock at the door by a wandering man with a transit wouldn't be giving you the business anyway, only those that want the job done right... and giving your customers credit... they are smart enough to know that prices rise.