We missed out here!

[Ham_N_Eggs]

4 minutes ago, Josem said:

Indeed, the registers of interest of the sitting MHKs were actively removed weeks prior to election day!

I don't often swear but Jesus fucking Christ it was actively removed because they were no longer Members of Tynwald and... you'll like this... it would potentially fall foul of GDPR as we (the actual Manx Taxpayers) were no longer entitled to that information. It wasn't a conspiracy. Stop deflecting. 

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, Josem said:

The simple reality is that it is illegal to answer your question. If you don't like the law, you should lobby to get it changed. I didn't make the laws, I just obey them.

The simple reality is that it is a convenient modesty shield. 

The law does not stop a voluntary disclosure. 

[Josem]

4 minutes ago, Sheldon said:

I don't know if you said this, or something like it, in your campaign, but it makes you appear a lot more electable than letting yourself get dragged into arguments on social media (and whatever MF is.)

That's my top tip to you for next time, and it's entirely tax deductible. 

Thanks. I find it difficult to imagine there will be a "next time" - it would be like Lazarus having a triple heart bypass. I'll continue to have a deep interest in policy, and continue to have a deep contempt for politics. I ran, the public chose others, so be it!

Just look at the awfulness of this thread. I ran as a candidate because I want to discuss ideas about making our world better. And instead, we live in a social media world focused on petty personal trivialities that make SW1 look like a place of great strategic leadership. Perhaps it would have been better to ignore all of it. Oh well.

[Josem]

2 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

Way back machine from around Election Day. Still no sign of any disclosure of that type on your website at all. 

https://web.archive.org/web/20200927063402/michaeljosem.com/about/

The Isle of Man election was held in 2021, not 2020.

[Josem]

1 minute ago, offshoremanxman said:

If you answered the question I’m sure those trivialities would go away quite quickly.

Well, if you get the law retrospectively, I would? But then it would move on to some other distraction or triviality.

Ultimately, I don't think it is a good faith search, because none of this nonsense was directed at any of the other candidates. Indeed, some candidates were closely associated with establishing charities, or owned multiple properties, and no one ever asked them to identify either the donors or the people paying for the other properties.

Edited December 2, 2021 by Josem

[Josem]

1 minute ago, offshoremanxman said:

You’re a fraud. Nothing more. Nothing less. The last two pages above confirm that categorically. 

I guess this conversation has run its course. 

[Gladys]

1 minute ago, Josem said:

Well, if you get the law retrospectively, I would? But then it would move on to some other distraction or triviality.

Please do share the law which prevents voluntary disclosure.  If your funders are not happy for that, are you happy to continue to be funded/employed by them?

[Will Halsall]

2 minutes ago, Josem said:

I guess this conversation has run its course. 

As have you hopefully!

[James Blonde]

So @Josemare you yourself a funding supporter of MTA? 

[Josem]

7 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Please do share the law which prevents voluntary disclosure.  If your funders are not happy for that, are you happy to continue to be funded/employed by them?

If you are unfamiliar with the various laws, rules and regulations that protect privacy, there's a comprehensive website online here: https://www.inforights.im/

[Josem]

5 minutes ago, James Blonde said:

So @Josemare you yourself a funding supporter of MTA? 

I am a member of the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance, and yes I contribute financially. But that contribution is obviously more than offset by the fact that I am employed by the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance. As a result, I am a member and an employee of the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance, and a net recipient of money (in the form of my salary) from the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance.

[Josem]

7 minutes ago, Manx17 said:

 What is a better world for you on our island?

I think a better world would be improving the ability of people to prosper in different aspects of life, while improving our efforts to honour the heritage of our community.

Different people want to prosper in different paths (some are driven by money; some are driven by family; some are driven by sport; some are driven by service; some are driven by faith; some are driven by community) and I think we can improve those opportunities for more people.

Simultaneously, I think that we should honour, and be grateful for, the heritage of our community. That is partly the economic inheritance (because eating is important!), but more importantly, the cultural and legal heritage that allows many people to prosper in different ways, but also the service of our predecessors in different channels of life.

7 minutes ago, Manx17 said:

Why are you hiding Manx taxpayer alliance? It’s strange for a person to ruin their own character, if these people or person was legit.

I'm not hiding the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance. There are some people in this thread (and elsewhere) who have asked questions about the identity of supporters, and I think it is illegal for me to answer such questions. There are some other people who have asked about various statistical/demographic aspects of revenue from the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance, and I'm declining to answer such questions because as far as I can tell, literally no other not-for-profit organisation is expected to answer such questions. I do not think that any charity has provided such information (I don't know on this point for sure)  and I suspect that not even political parties have provided such information (maybe they will in the future if they see a political advantage to doing so? maybe the newest laws require it? I'm not sure).

[Ham_N_Eggs]

12 minutes ago, Josem said:

I think a better world would be improving the ability of people to prosper in different aspects of life, while improving our efforts to honour the heritage of our community.

Different people want to prosper in different paths (some are driven by money; some are driven by family; some are driven by sport; some are driven by service; some are driven by faith; some are driven by community) and I think we can improve those opportunities for more people.

Simultaneously, I think that we should honour, and be grateful for, the heritage of our community. That is partly the economic inheritance (because eating is important!), but more importantly, the cultural and legal heritage that allows many people to prosper in different ways, but also the service of our predecessors in different channels of life.

I'm not hiding the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance. There are some people in this thread (and elsewhere) who have asked questions about the identity of supporters, and I think it is illegal for me to answer such questions. There are some other people who have asked about various statistical/demographic aspects of revenue from the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance, and I'm declining to answer such questions because as far as I can tell, literally no other not-for-profit organisation is expected to answer such questions. I do not think that any charity has provided such information (I don't know on this point for sure)  and I suspect that not even political parties have provided such information (maybe they will in the future if they see a political advantage to doing so? maybe the newest laws require it? I'm not sure).

You use far too many words to say absolutely nothing. 

Most not-for-profit organisations on the Island aren't set up for the sole purpose of lobbying the Government. Most of them actually contribute to the betterment of Island life (or try to).

Edited December 2, 2021 by Ham_N_Eggs

[Amadeus]

24 minutes ago, Josem said:

If you are unfamiliar with the various laws, rules and regulations that protect privacy, there's a comprehensive website online here: https://www.inforights.im/

I’ll hazard a guess here that Gladys knows more about law than you. 

[Amadeus]

14 minutes ago, Josem said:

 

I'm not hiding the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance. There are some people in this thread (and elsewhere) who have asked questions about the identity of supporters, and I think it is illegal for me to answer such questions. There are some other people who have asked about various statistical/demographic aspects of revenue from the Manx TaxPayers' Alliance, and I'm declining to answer such questions because as far as I can tell, literally no other not-for-profit organisation is expected to answer such questions. I do not think that any charity has provided such information (I don't know on this point for sure)  and I suspect that not even political parties have provided such information (maybe they will in the future if they see a political advantage to doing so? maybe the newest laws require it? I'm not sure).

I know personally that at least one political party has provided way more than you were asked to provide, and could provide if you wanted to. Stop the BS please.