Oliver Keating wrote in message
...

Because they if they are rich enough to be buying a second house (which I
regard as the ultimate frivoulous activity), they can certainly afford to
be
screwed for every penny by the tax man.

Why is owning a second home "the ultimate frivolous activity"? It's well
known that property is as a general rule a solid investment. You get the
benefit of having an appreciating asset whilst having a house in the
country, or nearer your family etc. Why should activities you consider
frivolous be taxed heavily, rather than ones I consider frivolous? Why not
tax gambling like mad?

And as people keep seeming to forget, every pound that one of these rich
kids pays is a pound that the poor don't have to pay.

The argument about heavily taxing high earners is going on elsewhere in the
thread, so I won't repeat myself here.

What I'd like to know is this: If you're so bothered why go to the frivolity
of buying a new car when you've got a couple of apparently servicable cars
knocking around? Why not give what you've lost in depreciation on the CLK to
charity? You don't actually give a toss, but like to think, and for others
to think that you do. Same goes for you being bothered about the
environment. I don't suppose you considered that manufacturing a new car is
widely acknowledged to pollute more than running an old one. If you're going
to constantly bang on about your politics you ought to have the decency to
stand by your views.