youreavinalaff

Taxing the working people wasn't in their taxation plans either. Unfortunately for the workers, Labour's definitions are as unclear as yours.

You've not given a definition of what you consider rich.

Being Non Dom doesn't make one a tax dodger.

As usual, you have failed to answer my question.

How much salary/wealth would one need to have to fit your idea of "rich"?

That's up to you. I haven't watched either for decades. Still lots to talk and joke about while having a beer or three.

I've always stood by the " no talking about sex, religion and politics" in pubs. When I go to the pub I want to enjoy myself. This new law won't affect me.

I've always thought the biggest dicks in the world were on AN.

Do it yourself. Speak as you go. Learning by doing.

Why would I? I'm just saying, if you have issues, complain to the people you have issues with.

Irrelevant to your original post. You're yet to post a link showing rates around 9% for 90/91.

The original poster you quoted said his mortgage rate in 1990 was 15.4%. You said that was wrong. The link I posted shows he wasnt wrong. You now say only new mortgages would pay that. The link I posted shows the rates as variable rates. So, no, not just new mortgages but those on variable rates also. If you read the link fully, you'll see fixed rates were averaging over 13%. Well above your unsubstantiated figures. Once again, the poster you quoted is correct. You are incorrect to question him/her. As my link proves.

"SVR peaked at 15.40% in 1990 — throughout the year the 'average' SVR was 14.30%, but the average fixed rate mortgage was available at a lower amount of 13.75%." Link https://www.mpamag.com/uk/news/general/15-years-since-the-peak-of-mortgage-rates/365633#:~:text=* In October 1990%2C a month,between February and November 1990.

He said in 1990/1991 his mortgage rate was 15.4%. The rate did reach that level during 1990. You then changed the date to only 1991 and used "average" in attempt to debunk his claim. His claim is correct.

He said 1990/1991. His figure of 15.4% is accurate. I can't see where he said "average".