Don't vote Tory

[sjseabass]

29 minutes ago, mikegday said:

 

I reiterate, the richer pay more income tax now than under labour and the poorest pay less or even no income tax. Other than taxing the poorest again, where do you suggest this money comes from? More debt? For you children to pay off in future, when we will need to eventually cut even deeper for longer?

I wish we had unlimited money, but we don't.

Saying 'the richer pay more income tax now than under Labour' is just spin. For one example of why it doesn't necessarily make the point you think you're making, if wages in the bottom few deciles stagnate or fall so that the tax take for the poorest falls, but it stays the same for the richest, then yes, a higher proportion of the total tax take will be coming from the richest. But what you've actually done is make inequality worse.

Look at this from the Institute of Fiscal Studies and try and justify Tory policy:

There's some good analysis here on it (including stuff like how a lot of the big pink bar for the richest is due to higher taxes on pensions through stuff like the Lifetime Allowance - anyone who's made over £1m in pension contributions can take the hit, frankly) http://www.sussex.ac.uk/broadcast/read/31151

And this is before we get onto how much more of a difference it makes for someone in the bottom decile to lose 10% of their income than someone in the top decile. One could be the difference between going hungry to feed their kids, one is definitely not.

[zahidf]

Bloody hell

[themuel]

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Bloody hell

Looks like they're getting desperate. Probably a good sign. 

[thatcrazypenguin]

1 hour ago, mikegday said:

 

I reiterate, the richer pay more income tax now than under labour and the poorest pay less or even no income tax. Other than taxing the poorest again, where do you suggest this money comes from? More debt? For you children to pay off in future, when we will need to eventually cut even deeper for longer?

I wish we had unlimited money, but we don't.

Yeah we dont, but we`re cutting the wrong things, we`re spending 200 billion quid on a cold war era weapons system, we`re spending billions on brexit, we`re giving high earners tax breaks, we`re cutting corperation tax, we`re refusing to call in the hundreds of billions owed to the treasury by big business and giving them sweetheart deals to get out of paying most of what they owe, we`re bailing out banks with public money......and apparently all of that comes before funding the education and the health sectors....and you wonder why people like me are fucked off!

and again stop talking about past labour.....this isnt past labour....thats why `past labour` mps have been so opposed to corbyn etc the labour manifesto is costed and makes sense.....unlike the conserative one which doesnt include a single costing in the entire document......but tories are allowed to do that arent they? I mean if it was labour theyd be a fucking uproar but as per fucking usual different standards for different people. 

Pull your head out of the fucking sand the `we dont have unlimited money` line is bullshit.....of course we dont and noones saying we do....its where the money we do have is being spent and whats being cut to pay for it that is the major issue!

[thatcrazypenguin]

2 minutes ago, themuel said:

Looks like they're getting desperate. Probably a good sign. 

the sun can go fuck themselves. seriously dont even post that shit here? blood on his hands? remember their views on Hillsborough etc? you want blood on someones hands try the fucking right wing assholes who go and kick the shit out of some poor muslim or left winger because `the sun` and the other rags made them think the nation was on their side!

[themuel]

57 minutes ago, thatcrazypenguin said:

the sun can go fuck themselves. seriously dont even post that shit here? blood on his hands? remember their views on Hillsborough etc? you want blood on someones hands try the fucking right wing assholes who go and kick the shit out of some poor muslim or left winger because `the sun` and the other rags made them think the nation was on their side!

You misunderstand me. I mean it's probably a good sign that he is more popular because he has the biased right wing press running scared. They've had to admit defeat on policy and public opinion and are now doing their best to execute a witch hunt. 

Trust me - I am with you, The Sun is scum. 

Edited May 22, 2017 by themuel

[SallyFaulknerStantonWarrio]

8 hours ago, mikegday said:

 

I reiterate, the richer pay more income tax now than under labour and the poorest pay less or even no income tax. Other than taxing the poorest again, where do you suggest this money comes from? More debt? For you children to pay off in future, when we will need to eventually cut even deeper for longer?

I wish we had unlimited money, but we don't.

 

I don't normally weigh in on this kind of thing on here (real life is a different story). The rich paying more income tax thing just isn't true. The top rate of income tax hasn't changed, apart from when the tories lowered it at the start of the 2010 parliament. If the rich have paid more tax in total, it is because they have got richer, because inequality has increased. If you look at changes on ISAs, tax on savings etc, there has been a reduction in taxes if you're the kind of person who has a load of money in the bank. 

In terms of the overall debate on levels of taxation, you can look at most other countries in the rich world, particularly in Europe, and find that they have higher rates of tax. It is completely viable for the UK to do this. It's not a case of unlimited money, it's about how its shared.

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, thatcrazypenguin said:

Yes but this isnt that labour and their manifesto promises on schools are very encouraging. I woukdnt vote for blairs version of labour I base my vote on current policy not the past 

Hmmmm ... all of Labour's manifesto is very encouraging, but *only* if the economics works out as they've said - otherwise it's all a crock of undo-able shite.

Chavez had some encouraging ideas too, and Jezza said that was the socialist model all good socialists should emulate. How's that working out?

Any manifesto is just words until what's said is implemented successfully, and it's easy to promise the world. Delivering it is something else.

9 hours ago, thatcrazypenguin said:

Oh yes you can, dont forget with labour it isnt just a new leader, its an entire shift in ideology from what they were before

And that shift in ideology is...? Essentially it's nothing more than everything is available and for free, and nothing of getting everything for free can negatively impact 95% of the population.

If you were a debating man, we could debate that and talk about how realistic that is, using facts as the benchmark. Wanna give it a go?

Edited May 23, 2017 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, thatcrazypenguin said:

Yeah we dont, but we`re cutting the wrong things, we`re spending 200 billion quid on a cold war era weapons system, we`re spending billions on brexit,

so what you're saying is that Corbyn is backing the wrong things?

[nikkic]

Anyone else thinking they'd sooner vote for Neil than any of the choices currently in front of us?! 

[uscore]

15 minutes ago, nikkic said:

Anyone else thinking they'd sooner vote for Neil than any of the choices currently in front of us?! 

 

pretty much the opposite.

[mjsell]

19 minutes ago, nikkic said:

Anyone else thinking they'd sooner vote for Neil than any of the choices currently in front of us?! 

I'm sure there is nothing he would want less. by all accounts he's up to his eyeballs as it is, let alone having to run a country on top of it all

Also, I would say it's easier to say what you think wont work, bit more difficult to put forward a viable alternative that will, and I don't often see those alternatives being shared.

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, mjsell said:

I'm sure there is nothing he would want less. by all accounts he's up to his eyeballs as it is, let alone having to run a country on top of it all

But you're right about it's nothing I'd want. I know I couldn't sell myself any better than Corbyn will manage - and that's just as an important factor as the policies that might try to be sold.

 

9 minutes ago, mjsell said:

Also, I would say it's easier to say what you think wont work, bit more difficult to put forward a viable alternative that will, and I don't often see those alternatives being shared.

On that part I've made many suggestions over many years (decades) - and you just can't sell what people don't want to buy, no matter how good an idea that unsellable idea might be.

That's something Blair worked out - along with the implementation of what he was selling. Corbyn is promising the world on a stick, but the implementation won't be anything like what he's sold (see Hollande in France for a working example).

[clarkete]

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Chavez had some encouraging ideas too, and Jezza said that was the socialist model all good socialists should emulate. How's that working out?

The tories have loved more than their fare share of dictators too  

[eFestivals]

Just now, clarkete said:

The tories have loved more than their fare share of dictators too  

But they haven't lauded them as perfection personified, which makes it very different.

Tho my comment there was less about Corbyn's lauding, and much more about pointing out that just because something sounds a good idea it doesn't mean it'll be everything that's claimed of it.

Words are easy: getting the outcome claimed in words is something else.

Lots of people are very happily pointing out things May has said (tho often warps of them) and saying how impossible they'll be to deliver, while those same people are accepting everything Corbyn says as going-to-happen as stated. 

Valid critiques of all sides are possible for the open-minded.

[p.pete]

18 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

But they haven't lauded them as perfection personified, which makes it very different.

They just sell them arms

[babyblade41]

IMO the difference between the two Is Mr Corbyn has promised all things to so many people.... it just isn't possible and I think the majority can see this.

 

Mrs May has a lot lower expectations of what can be achieved , but again after the count we shall see who agrees with who the most 

 

 

[eFestivals]

Just now, p.pete said:

They just sell them arms

yup, while not doing that would sell some Brits their unemployment. 

It's a complex world.

[p.pete]

Just now, eFestivals said:

yup, while not doing that would sell some Brits their unemployment. 

It's a complex world.

Yep, and a loss of tax from those lost jobs, and they'd get the arms elsewhere anyway and then be in the pocket of different foreign powers.  But still - Tories selling guns to dictators is a side of the complexity often forgotten when we're focusing on someone else 'speaking well' of a dictator.

[mjsell]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

On that part I've made many suggestions over many years (decades) - and you just can't sell what people don't want to buy, no matter how good an idea that unsellable idea might be.

That's something Blair worked out - along with the implementation of what he was selling. Corbyn is promising the world on a stick, but the implementation won't be anything like what he's sold (see Hollande in France for a working example).

Yeah reading it back I realise my comment would have come across with an insulting tone, that's not what I intended. I meant, in relation to nikkic's claim that he would vote for you regarding your comments on here, that its a fair bit easier explaining yourself or discussing the frailties of proposed policiies on a forum of generally fairly likeminded people.

[eFestivals]

Just now, p.pete said:

Yep, and a loss of tax from those lost jobs, and they'd get the arms elsewhere anyway and then be in the pocket of different foreign powers.  But still - Tories selling guns to dictators is a side of the complexity often forgotten when we're focusing on someone else 'speaking well' of a dictator.

But as you've pointed out in what you've said, that's nothing about "speaking well" of them, and everything of pragmatism from politicians who'd be held responsible for the consequences of a different decision.

[p.pete]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

But as you've pointed out in what you've said, that's nothing about "speaking well" of them, and everything of pragmatism from politicians who'd be held responsible for the consequences of a different decision.

 

2 hours ago, mjsell said:

I'm sure there is nothing he would want less. by all accounts he's up to his eyeballs as it is, let alone having to run a country on top of it all

lol - he's clearly saving the world already

[zahidf]

The same Tories who say they need to sell weopens for 'jobs' are the same one attacking the victims of those guns and bombs coming here as refugees 

 

If we sell guns to dictators, we are responsible for their victims.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, zahidf said:

The same Tories who say they need to sell weopens for 'jobs' are the same one attacking the victims of those guns and bombs coming here as refugees 

 

If we sell guns to dictators, we are responsible for their victims.

We've sold weapons to Syria? When? And if we provide guns to those to fight the dictators, as we have?

It's not the simple you're pretending, and the UK is not the only source of weapons in the world. We could have had no involvement in Syria and there'd be almost nothing different going on there (tho probably many more deaths caused by dictators and ISIS).

Fascists need to be fought, not given free reign as you suggest.

[clarkete]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

But they haven't lauded them as perfection personified. 

Words are easy: getting the outcome claimed in words is something else.

Valid critiques of all sides are possible for the open-minded.

Seem to have lost my first reply... 

Not perfection personified but a "true friend". 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/oct/06/pinochet.chile

For the other two paragraphs I've included, wholeheartedly agree and as I've indicated before look forward to your similar critique of May. 

For refugees and weapon sales, we  sell tonnes to Saudi Arabia who bomb civilians in Yemen. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/12/british-arms-deals-with-saudi-arabia-high-court

I don't read the grauniad, just the first links I found.