Suzy Brewster
@suzybrew.bsky.social
Labour. Dog lover. Don't use a whistle.
Lawyers and accountants don't want to contribute to society by paying their fair share of tax. Limited Liabiltiy Partnerships, LLPs, have given partners in the legal profession 20 years of exemption from any reasonable taxation. It's time for the wealthy to make a fair contribution to society.
October 23, 2025 at 7:07 AM
Lawyers and accountants don't want to contribute to society by paying their fair share of tax. Limited Liabiltiy Partnerships, LLPs, have given partners in the legal profession 20 years of exemption from any reasonable taxation. It's time for the wealthy to make a fair contribution to society.
Yes! Go Rachel Reeves. Tax the Limited Liability Partnerships. Tax the rich lawyers who couldn't wait to become LLPs. Let those disgustingly rich partners pay some tax and contribute towards society.
October 22, 2025 at 5:43 PM
Yes! Go Rachel Reeves. Tax the Limited Liability Partnerships. Tax the rich lawyers who couldn't wait to become LLPs. Let those disgustingly rich partners pay some tax and contribute towards society.
Chancellor finally gets LLPs to pay tax! At last the legal profession will have to make a more proportionate contribution to society. Believe me, they couldn't wait to convert to LLPs (Limited Liability Partnerships). These were a tax gift to the profession.
October 22, 2025 at 7:15 AM
Chancellor finally gets LLPs to pay tax! At last the legal profession will have to make a more proportionate contribution to society. Believe me, they couldn't wait to convert to LLPs (Limited Liability Partnerships). These were a tax gift to the profession.
No wonder people do bother to vote.
October 1, 2025 at 12:01 PM
No wonder people do bother to vote.
Is Reeves ‘heading for IMF bailout’ or has the Torygraph just decided to headline with the opinion of one person?
August 24, 2025 at 5:56 AM
Is Reeves ‘heading for IMF bailout’ or has the Torygraph just decided to headline with the opinion of one person?
ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standard...
‘DO NO HARM’ especially when you’ve just had a bloody good pay rise and are being offered another. There’s obviously no sense of vocation left in this ‘profession’. Ironic that police can’t strike whilst a doctors’ strike can potentially kill. Sympathy for Wes.
‘DO NO HARM’ especially when you’ve just had a bloody good pay rise and are being offered another. There’s obviously no sense of vocation left in this ‘profession’. Ironic that police can’t strike whilst a doctors’ strike can potentially kill. Sympathy for Wes.
July 24, 2025 at 6:48 PM
ichef.bbci.co.uk/ace/standard...
‘DO NO HARM’ especially when you’ve just had a bloody good pay rise and are being offered another. There’s obviously no sense of vocation left in this ‘profession’. Ironic that police can’t strike whilst a doctors’ strike can potentially kill. Sympathy for Wes.
‘DO NO HARM’ especially when you’ve just had a bloody good pay rise and are being offered another. There’s obviously no sense of vocation left in this ‘profession’. Ironic that police can’t strike whilst a doctors’ strike can potentially kill. Sympathy for Wes.
But couldn't a lack of motivation to protect human welfare and millions of lives also be true of the far left? Look at this photo. Doesn't it pose a choice of welfare for a minority with unaltered PIP benefits or defence spending in the interests of the welfare of the entire nation?
July 6, 2025 at 6:32 PM
But couldn't a lack of motivation to protect human welfare and millions of lives also be true of the far left? Look at this photo. Doesn't it pose a choice of welfare for a minority with unaltered PIP benefits or defence spending in the interests of the welfare of the entire nation?
Well, as the PIP claimants chose to portray it, one of the many choices the PM has to make is between PIP for a sector of society or defence for the whole nation. Personally, I believe the choices are even more far ranging, complex and nuanced than portrayed in this picture from last Tuesday.
July 5, 2025 at 7:05 PM
Well, as the PIP claimants chose to portray it, one of the many choices the PM has to make is between PIP for a sector of society or defence for the whole nation. Personally, I believe the choices are even more far ranging, complex and nuanced than portrayed in this picture from last Tuesday.
A pictorial image of just one of the choices that has to be made when 'the Parliamentary Labour Party’s understanding of the frailty of Labour’s fiscal situation is risible.' Does Corbyn have a better understanding?
July 5, 2025 at 7:46 AM
A pictorial image of just one of the choices that has to be made when 'the Parliamentary Labour Party’s understanding of the frailty of Labour’s fiscal situation is risible.' Does Corbyn have a better understanding?
In the context of Trump and Putin, ideology isn't going to help.
Starmer's self declared pragmatism is a far better approach in a rapidly changing world. Ideology tends to be unadaptable. In the context of this picture, defence vs PIP, what's the ideological choice and what's the pragmatic one?
Starmer's self declared pragmatism is a far better approach in a rapidly changing world. Ideology tends to be unadaptable. In the context of this picture, defence vs PIP, what's the ideological choice and what's the pragmatic one?
July 5, 2025 at 6:34 AM
In the context of Trump and Putin, ideology isn't going to help.
Starmer's self declared pragmatism is a far better approach in a rapidly changing world. Ideology tends to be unadaptable. In the context of this picture, defence vs PIP, what's the ideological choice and what's the pragmatic one?
Starmer's self declared pragmatism is a far better approach in a rapidly changing world. Ideology tends to be unadaptable. In the context of this picture, defence vs PIP, what's the ideological choice and what's the pragmatic one?
I found these calls to cut defence, in the context of the modern world, quite disturbing.
July 4, 2025 at 1:01 PM
I found these calls to cut defence, in the context of the modern world, quite disturbing.
Jan Moir: 'Reeves made ALL women look weak'. On the contrary. She displayed the human emotion of quietly shedding a tear. The next time we saw her she was making a speech at a hospital and then she was laughing. All perfectly normal. She's made shedding a tear acceptable. Thank you Rachel Reeves.
July 4, 2025 at 5:50 AM
Jan Moir: 'Reeves made ALL women look weak'. On the contrary. She displayed the human emotion of quietly shedding a tear. The next time we saw her she was making a speech at a hospital and then she was laughing. All perfectly normal. She's made shedding a tear acceptable. Thank you Rachel Reeves.
According to Kemi Badenoch, the British people know when they are being misled.
May 20, 2025 at 11:57 AM
According to Kemi Badenoch, the British people know when they are being misled.
Hopefully, Labour will start collecting more N.I. from those earning over £4k a month. The discrepancy between the 8% paid by lower earners and the mere 2% paid when earnings reach £4k is unfair and unsustainable.
March 20, 2025 at 7:36 AM
Hopefully, Labour will start collecting more N.I. from those earning over £4k a month. The discrepancy between the 8% paid by lower earners and the mere 2% paid when earnings reach £4k is unfair and unsustainable.
Re: That BBC headline on PIPS. 'with the government expected to MAKE billions'.
March 16, 2025 at 7:24 AM
Re: That BBC headline on PIPS. 'with the government expected to MAKE billions'.
<img src="blob:https://web.whatsapp.com/c1c93d59-40ba-424b-8faa-9c0efd8df33a"/>
MAN WITHOUT A SUIT MEETS SUIT WITHOUT A MAN
MAN WITHOUT A SUIT MEETS SUIT WITHOUT A MAN
March 5, 2025 at 8:41 AM
<img src="blob:https://web.whatsapp.com/c1c93d59-40ba-424b-8faa-9c0efd8df33a"/>
MAN WITHOUT A SUIT MEETS SUIT WITHOUT A MAN
MAN WITHOUT A SUIT MEETS SUIT WITHOUT A MAN
Headlines like this, using the word 'confront' are incredibly unhelpful and not in the national interest. Polite view, devoid of the expletives used when first seen.
February 27, 2025 at 8:31 AM
Headlines like this, using the word 'confront' are incredibly unhelpful and not in the national interest. Polite view, devoid of the expletives used when first seen.
