[Marc Stock]

And guess what the bank of England isn't even the bank of England its a private bank owned by private individuals since the 1600's  to today. Rothchilds are one of those families who own these banks and their wealth is yours, mine, the banks, everything. Something like several trillion trillion £ it truly is staggering.

No it's not.  That is totally, completely and utterly incorrect.

Here's the relevant section from the 1946 Bank of England Act.  This was the bill that nationalised the Bank of England.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/9-10/27/section/1

If you bother to read it you'll see it details the transfer of all shares to the Treasury.   I know it's boring and full of "facts" rather than "internet facts" but if you read it with an open mind you'll see that for the past seventy years the Bank of England has belonged to the treasury and hence to the UK.

If the idiots feeding you this conspiracy theory tripe can't even find an Act of Parliament that took me 30 seconds to find, I think the sensible thing to do would be to stop listening to them, pay your taxes correctly (to the government, who spend it on the NHS and suchlike rather than channelling it to the Rothschilds for some freakish reason) and go and have a lie down.

But we are blinkered and blind.

Indeed some of us are.

Vin

Thats a little aggressive Vin.

You are correct. I must be a complete fool to believe this utter nonsense.

I must be blind, and of course you are correct i should pay my taxes, what a naughty boy for my mistakes, and beliefs that there is a fundamental selfish interest of those in power over the masses.

I hasten to add, if our taxes are going to pay for the NHS and etc (all the doogooding points that make you sound correct) why is there a massive deficit that just keeps increasing?

Yep you are correct that the Bank of England was nationalised after the war. But you also forget that in 1977the BANK OF ENGLAND NOMINEES LIMITED was formed to control 97% of the private equities and has exemption by the Secretary of Trade, from the disclosure requirements under Section 27(9) of the Companies Act 1976.  Also weirdly enough the total shared issues have remained at £2 since its inception. How can a company of only £2 worth of issued shares have 97% of national private banking equities i ask?

Now when the government need money its sold as a bond with interest. The government pay that bond back through taxes and many beleive that it is now the Bank Of England Nominees Ltd that underwite these bonds.

In additon to this the Bank of England Nominees is protected by the royal charter which protects it from any investigation even HMRC or prying eyes.

No one really knows but I personally think there is still some involvement of a few super elite welathy family's that are somehow involved with this.

But dont beleive any of it Vin is all BS so you have nothinf to worry about 

[Perfect Windows]

Where did I say anything about you?  Amazing how often on here there's a post about what someone says and it's taken as an attack on the person themselves.  The only personal point what a subtle dig where I reflected your VICIOUS ATTACK* on me where you implied I was "blinkered and blind"

Nowhere did I say you were stupid.  I said that what you were repeating was not true.  The fact that conspiracy nutters are convincing does not make you stupid.  There ability to convince is why they are so widespread.  There's a big gulf between "What you've read and repeated isn't true" and "you're stupid".

Also, nowhere did I say, or even imply that you were "a naughty boy".

However, once again I have to take issue with the facts you've been fed.  Not you. Not your intelligence, but the facts that you have been told.  They are not true.  Bank of England Nominees Ltd is completely owned by the Bank of England.  That's rather different from saying that BOENL owns the Bank.  I did track the details of that down once before elsewhere but I'm just out of the door so I don't have time to dig again.  So, that isn't an attack on you, it's an attack on people who lie to back up their cases.  Not you, the lazy liars who make stuff up to back up their case. 

" many beleive that it is now the Bank Of England Nominees Ltd that underwite these bonds."  Doesn't matter how many people believe it; doesn't make it true.

Why is there a deficit?  Government spends more than it takes.  No conspiracy, just idiocy (on their behalf, not yours).

You can believe anything you want but five minutes research to check the credibility of the sources you're quoting  might be worthwhile.

Vin


*Joke

[Marc Stock]

Ahah

Well my comment of blinkered and blind was more directed in the rhetoric tense.

Anyway...like i said. I do believe there is something going on. But hey lets not fall out over it. 

[AuRavelling79]

Look Vin - you know it was the Rothschilds. Everything goes back to the Rothschilds. The Holocaust which didn't happen was down to the Rothschilds and the moon landing which didn't happen is down to the Rothschilds and the Twin Towers which didn't happen was down to the Rothschilds.

And Jack the Ripper was financed by the Rothschilds too.

In fact Rosskeseva is really "Roth the saver" who has salted away  trillions of ill-gotten loot while pretending to be a humble window cleaner.

You know it's true.

 

[Marc Stock]

Look Vin - you know it was the Rothschilds. Everything goes back to the Rothschilds. The Holocaust which didn't happen was down to the Rothschilds and the moon landing which didn't happen is down to the Rothschilds and the Twin Towers which didn't happen was down to the Rothschilds.

And Jack the Ripper was financed by the Rothschilds too.

In fact Rosskeseva is really "Roth the saver" who has salted away  trillions of ill-gotten loot while pretending to be a humble window cleaner.

You know it's true.

  

Im just going to hoover the grass and cut the carpet.  Is it wrong that i find toasters intriguing, im sure mine is bugged by the Bank Of England, HMRC are in my pillow at night. I like painting my teeth though it helps with the cheese.

Night night. 

[Bay View WCS]

Will someone please mention Chemtrails?

[Spruce]

For vehicle costs, rather than 45p per mile is it not allowed for you to claim all the fuel and other maintenance bills?

https://www.gov.uk/expenses-if-youre-self-employed/travel

As it seems to suggest there that you can just add up all your fuel receipts and other van related receipts and claim that figure?

Tom

Its either one  (mileage - pence per mile) or the other (van expenses, depreciation, fuel, etc., etc.) for the duration you have the vehicle is the way I understand it.

So if he's already claimed the 45p a mile on a previous tax year then that's it until the van is replaced. He can't chop and change between them when the figures look better the other way one year.

I claim all the running costs of the van as a full working vehicle less a % for personal use.

The car is charged at 45p a mile for business use (mostly collecting on a Friday evening). Its insured for business but the only thing I claim is pence per mile. The additional insurance costs, fuel, depreciation etc., is all included in that mileage allowance.

[Cookie]

For vehicle costs, rather than 45p per mile is it not allowed for you to claim all the fuel and other maintenance bills?

https://www.gov.uk/expenses-if-youre-self-employed/travel

As it seems to suggest there that you can just add up all your fuel receipts and other van related receipts and claim that figure?

Tom

Its either one  (mileage - pence per mile) or the other (van expenses, depreciation, fuel, etc., etc.) for the duration you have the vehicle is the way I understand it.

So if he's already claimed the 45p a mile on a previous tax year then that's it until the van is replaced. He can't chop and change between them when the figures look better the other way one year.

I claim all the running costs of the van as a full working vehicle less a % for personal use.

The car is charged at 45p a mile for business use (mostly collecting on a Friday evening). Its insured for business but the only thing I claim is pence per mile. The additional insurance costs, fuel, depreciation etc., is all included in that mileage allowance.

Since my van is a 54 plate,  and therefore the depreciation is small, I calculated that I would be better off claiming 45p per mile rather than all van costs (particularly with the recent low fuel prices). If/when I change my van for a newer one I will re-consider.

[NBwcs]

water

I'm not on a water meter - so are you saying I can claim a portion of the water bill against the business? What percentage of the bill do you claim Dave just out of interest?

"If you aren't on a meter then no you can't claim anything. You are paying that anyway - Receiver informed us of this."



That makes sense but in that case, doesnt this principle apply to mobile phones? Most people are on a contract so its the same cost whether you use it for business or not.