Jump to content

Are Tories welcome at Glastonbury


Apone
 Share

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, RichardWaller said:

I'd say that depends much more on what they want to hear.

oh, there's definitely an element of that, too. I'm not thinking they only do what the public say.

But the fact that more money is being spent shows that the tories have reacted to public pressure to at least some degree - which is why I'm saying the public reaction is important, and that how it is currently helps the tories get away with doing less than you or I would like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

oh, there's definitely an element of that, too. I'm not thinking they only do what the public say.

Well, for the most part they do what the public say within the constituencies they get elected, which usually means there are always a proportion of the electorate who are very disappointed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fairly happy with the budget, extra £130 in the back pocket with the personal allowance increase. I also agree with raising the threshold of which you pay higher rate of tax too. A lot of people work incredibly hard to get salaries in that region and taking 40 % of it is a bit crap in my opinion. 

This £400 million for schools though annoyed me, especially mixed with that ridiculous 'little extras' phrase. ugh...smacks of 'here's some money, now shut up and be quiet'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Thunderstruck said:

Fairly happy with the budget, extra £130 in the back pocket with the personal allowance increase. I also agree with raising the threshold of which you pay higher rate of tax too. A lot of people work incredibly hard to get salaries in that region and taking 40 % of it is a bit crap in my opinion. 

Lots of people work just as hard to get paid much lower salaries, quite often doing jobs which I would struggle with on an emotional or motivational level.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

oh, there's definitely an element of that, too. I'm not thinking they only do what the public say.

But the fact that more money is being spent shows that the tories have reacted to public pressure to at least some degree - which is why I'm saying the public reaction is important, and that how it is currently helps the tories get away with doing less than you or I would like.

Think there's much more of an element of that, to be honest cos people will decide what the unsaid means however they want it to. Take the People's Vote march last week, what, 700,000 people? Massive as far as protests in this country go, but as ridiculous as it sounds, 90% of the country didn't go and that's what matters. I'd have probably popped down myself if I could have afforded it, if I had the day off, if I was confident it wouldn't be panic attack inducing and if I thought it'd have made a difference. Who knows why everyone else who didn't go didn't go, but I'm sure it'll suit the people who matter to act like those who didn't are providing tacit concent to go ahead with whatever the fuck they want to go ahead with. Like the budget thing today, I picked a couple of things I didn't like in the first post I made on the matter, that doesn't mean for a second that I think this, this and that are ok and it frustrates me that this is what political debate has become. If you oppose this you should support that, if you agree with so-and-so on this you should agree with them on that, if you're not with us you're against us, I voted Remain so I must love the EU, someone else voted Leave so they must be a massive racist etc etc.

I just think largely the British electorate are taken for granted and held in such a disregard by politicians and like @Thunderstruck says above with the £400m for schools thing, I agree, it smacks of "here's some money, now shut up and be quiet". Course that doesn't mean we agree with each other on the tax cut. I just find British politics soul destroying, we're in a mess and I can't see how anything's going to get any better. We'd probably need a demonstration on the scale of The Baltic Way for politicians to even start to care what we think, but we're too divided for owt like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thunderstruck said:

Fairly happy with the budget, extra £130 in the back pocket with the personal allowance increase. I also agree with raising the threshold of which you pay higher rate of tax too. A lot of people work incredibly hard to get salaries in that region and taking 40 % of it is a bit crap in my opinion. 

Difficult to argue with but it’s all about the bigger picture. The people earning around 50k will be a bit better off and that’s great. However, the 2015 welfare changes, coupled with subsequent tax cuts means that overall between 2015 and 2023, if no further significant changes are made to either tax or welfare then the poorest 20% in the country will be on average £390 a year worse off and the richest 20% about £400 better off. It is literally taking off the poor and giving to the rich. Or taking off the shirkers and giving to the workers. Depends how you frame your politics I suppose. Although that poor 20% has a higher proportion of disabled people than the rich 20% so the shirker label is probably unfair. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, RichardWaller said:

we're too divided

which is why, I think, saying 'tories' doesn't help.

We need to work with what unites us, not what divides us - and it's not just Labour voters who think more tax needs to be paid in order to better fund public services.

Edited by eFestivals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

which is why, I think, saying 'tories' doesn't help.

We need to work with what unites us, not what divides us - and it's not just Labour voters who think more tax needs to be paid in order to better fund public services.

I dunno, I think it could be potentially great if we accept that we are a divided country but use that as fuel to unite against a common enemy. But we’re more likely to have the People’s Front of Judea arguing with the Judean People’s Front,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RichardWaller said:

I dunno, I think it could be potentially great if we accept that we are a divided country but use that as fuel to unite against a common enemy. But we’re more likely to have the People’s Front of Judea arguing with the Judean People’s Front,

Splitter!!!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RichardWaller said:

to unite against a common enemy.

to what purpose? A 'win' doesn't make them disappear or drive them into the sea. They're still people that we'd have to share this island with.

Someone who votes tory but wants to pay more taxes towards public services wouldn't be "the common enemy" anyway. They'd be someone on your side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

to what purpose? A 'win' doesn't make them disappear or drive them into the sea. They're still people that we'd have to share this island with.

Someone who votes tory but wants to pay more taxes towards public services wouldn't be "the common enemy" anyway. They'd be someone on your side.

Share’s a good word there. Course they’re not going to disappear but if people are interested in addressing inequality, poverty, homelessness and other crises exacerbated by the Tories then great. Course I’m not blaming them for all our ills and I’m not expecting everything to be sunshine and rainbows when Labour next get in, just hopefully less shit for a while at least.

Yeah, I don’t understand that but each to their own, it’s a bit like voting UKIP if you want open borders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Blisterpack said:

Difficult to argue with but it’s all about the bigger picture. The people earning around 50k will be a bit better off and that’s great. However, the 2015 welfare changes, coupled with subsequent tax cuts means that overall between 2015 and 2023, if no further significant changes are made to either tax or welfare then the poorest 20% in the country will be on average £390 a year worse off and the richest 20% about £400 better off. It is literally taking off the poor and giving to the rich. Or taking off the shirkers and giving to the workers. Depends how you frame your politics I suppose. Although that poor 20% has a higher proportion of disabled people than the rich 20% so the shirker label is probably unfair. 

Calling people shirkers because they don't have much money is shameful behaviour.  There's no basis to conclude that those who get paid higher work harder, unless you've got some credible source to back this up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, clarkete said:

Lots of people work just as hard to get paid much lower salaries, quite often doing jobs which I would struggle with on an emotional or motivational level.

Very true, but punishing people who are better off isn't the solution. Not that I know what is by the way!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Blisterpack said:

Difficult to argue with but it’s all about the bigger picture. The people earning around 50k will be a bit better off and that’s great. However, the 2015 welfare changes, coupled with subsequent tax cuts means that overall between 2015 and 2023, if no further significant changes are made to either tax or welfare then the poorest 20% in the country will be on average £390 a year worse off and the richest 20% about £400 better off. It is literally taking off the poor and giving to the rich. Or taking off the shirkers and giving to the workers. Depends how you frame your politics I suppose. Although that poor 20% has a higher proportion of disabled people than the rich 20% so the shirker label is probably unfair. 

It seems quite unclear to me actually when you look at the net effect of austerity. 

https://fullfact.org/economy/has-austerity-hit-most-vulnerable-hardest/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Thunderstruck said:

Very true, but punishing people who are better off isn't the solution. Not that I know what is by the way!

No, but you did say "A lot of people work incredibly hard to get salaries in that region", thereby making a distinction between those on higher and lower salaries.  It won't be a higher rate tax payer that's lifting you off the bog and wiping your a*se when your in your dotage ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, clarkete said:

No, but you did say "A lot of people work incredibly hard to get salaries in that region", thereby making a distinction between those on higher and lower salaries.  It won't be a higher rate tax payer that's lifting you off the bog and wiping your a*se when your in your dotage ;) 

Some do work incredibly hard. That says absolutely nothing about how hard people work on lower salaries - but it does say something when someone is quite reluctant to acknowledge that the wealthy do sometimes actually work very hard to get where they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, clarkete said:

Calling people shirkers because they don't have much money is shameful behaviour.  There's no basis to conclude that those who get paid higher work harder, unless you've got some credible source to back this up?

They are clearly not my words or sentiments. I’m reflecting the language used by the Tories during the 2015 GE. Skivers v strivers was the other. Nonsense obviously. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Thunderstruck said:

Some do work incredibly hard. That says absolutely nothing about how hard people work on lower salaries - but it does say something when someone is quite reluctant to acknowledge that the wealthy do sometimes actually work very hard to get where they have.

I've worked hard as a higher rate tax payer and as a regular tax payer.  

It means nowt, just that sometimes I've managed to through a combination of skills and effort get a better rate of pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RichardWaller said:

Is tax really a punishment?

Potentially yes,I suppose it depends if you yourself think the amount you pay is fair and also if the taxes are being used properly. Personally I kinda see tax as a punishment and that is because I don't see any improvement in my community. I know taxes pay for a whole range of things but folks rightfully get pee'd of when there's still pot holes in their street or can't get gp appointment till sometime next year or like I already said when schools can't afford books. Tax is not a bad thing per say but where it goes is the problem for me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, RichardWaller said:

Share’s a good word there. Course they’re not going to disappear but if people are interested in addressing inequality, poverty, homelessness and other crises exacerbated by the Tories then great. Course I’m not blaming them for all our ills and I’m not expecting everything to be sunshine and rainbows when Labour next get in, just hopefully less shit for a while at least.

Yeah, I don’t understand that but each to their own, it’s a bit like voting UKIP if you want open borders.

elections aren't binary votes on just one thing. There's a million different reasons why people vote as they do.

I don't think it helps anything to reduce a chunk of the population to a single idea, which is often false anyway. Think about it; do you agree with everything about 'the left'? Think about it; that sort of stereotyping is frowned upon if used against minorities.

There's more than enough real shit in the world. Why invent some extra?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, glastolover19 said:

 Tax is not a bad thing per say but where it goes is the problem for me

Health and Social Care: Defence: welfare/pensions: Education: Local and national infrastructure (roads, transport etc.). There you go. That’s over 3/4 of where all your taxes go. Which bits don’t you like? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

elections aren't binary votes on just one thing. There's a million different reasons why people vote as they do.

I don't think it helps anything to reduce a chunk of the population to a single idea, which is often false anyway. Think about it; do you agree with everything about 'the left'? Think about it; that sort of stereotyping is frowned upon if used against minorities.

There's more than enough real shit in the world. Why invent some extra?

We had a chance address this to an extent with the PR referendum; the STV system would have allowed people to consider policies from more than one party and to balance their own contribution. Labour should have supported it in my opinion; missed opportunity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...