- This topic has 22 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 6 months, 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
Taxes are needed to pay for public services; racing should pay it’s share. This ‘strike’ is ridiculous.
The only thing that anyone seems to agree on with taxes is that it’s somebody else’s responsibility to pay them.
Pretty pointless ‘strike’ given that the meetings have simply been moved. You might well ask why they can’t do that more often and have a few more blank days.
A prime example of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing:
Check out the Flightline reference!
I think that horse racing protests too much. Tax is not the problem – in the 1970’s betting tax was set at 10%, meaning we paid tax of 10% or our stake and if we didn’t our winnings were reduced by 10%. Racing still flourished because in those days it was exciting.
These days it is dull overall – there is too much and most of it is low quality. It all went pear-shaped when racing kept on pandering to bookmakers by introducing irrelevant all-weather meetings, giving them another advantage as poor quality racing is more difficult to predict.
Tax paid by bookmakers has no adverse impact on punters, unless they increase margins in their favour. In which case sensible punters should not bet. The solution is to revive racing to make it interesting again and put pressure on bookmakers to stop being greedy by offering fair odds.
From my post of Aug 17:
“Because the arguments they’re deploying this time won’t sound so convincing when the Treasury comes for the VAT concessions enjoyed by ‘millionaire owners’, as I’m sure the government will label them.”
A piece in today’s Telegraph, which I’d guess is based on Treasury leaks designed to assess public reaction:
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.