• Thank you all very much for sharing your time with us in 2025. We hope you all have a safe and happy 2026!

AND HERE WE GO - THE 2019 GENERAL ELECTION THREAD

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 18645
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Old Skier said:
Seems labours fiscal rules lasted less than 3 days and that's without being in power. Anyone like to hazard a guess where the £58bn is coming from. Could it be you and me?
Click to expand...
Binning off the RAF. ;)
Navy can have the planes and MPGS to replace RAF Regiment, jobs a goodun.:p
 
Blue in Munich said:
'twasn't aimed at you, was the following post about knowing what everyone voted for & using yours for the comparative, we're good, sorry if it came across the wrong way. (y)
Click to expand...
No worries mate, my posts are way more confusing than yours.:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Blue in Munich said:
'twasn't aimed at you, was the following post about knowing what everyone voted for & using yours for the comparative, we're good, sorry if it came across the wrong way. (y)
Click to expand...
Was aimed at me?
It was a generic term used for all the preceding governments who had a majority and ruled but offered tax cuts that we could ill afford ..
hope that clears it up for you, Patrick followed up with the “I am alright jack @@@@ the rest of you” post.
 
pauldj42 said:
You’re wasting your time, people invent stories to meet their agenda.
The whole system is crap from all parties, but they focus on the poor rather than arguing the top should be focused on to ensure a Government has the funds to provide a decent standard of care for all.
Click to expand...

Paul refers to people, the voters.

harpo_72 said:
Your right, because the argument undermines their point.
I suppose also the fact that they have been voting on short term tax benefits is coming home to roost.
Click to expand...

You respond to that mentioning voting, no mention of majority Governments.

harpo_72 said:
Was aimed at me?
It was a generic term used for all the preceding governments who had a majority and ruled but offered tax cuts that we could ill afford ..
hope that clears it up for you, Patrick followed up with the “I am alright jack @@@@ the rest of you” post.
Click to expand...

And now the attempt to weasel out, complete with the sarcastic "hope that clears itup for you" ad the attempt to deflect to Patrick.

I at least expected you to stand by what you'd written, not try to slide out of it. Disappointing.
 
pauldj42 said:
Of course there is, but as you’ve agreed the issue is the rich.
You’ve given one version of what can happen and the tories are offering nothing to address the situation.

You could raise the IHT to 500K and there would be even more people happy, it still wouldn’t make it right if the super rich are still paying nothing.

So rather than just focussing all my anger at Labour, I’d rather focus on both them and the tories and ask why we don’t have a fair system for all.

I’ve already been questioned about a supposed fixation with the Duke of Westminster, but by him using “legal” loopholes before he died his son inherited over 8 Billion and paid very little if anything in inheritance tax.
Under Government rules and avoiding loopholes that amounted to billions in lost revenue to the Government.
But instead of us getting angry and annoyed at that the present government allow it, we get angry at a policy that may or may not actually happen.
Click to expand...

No doubt if you were in charge of the tax laws, the Dukes liability would have been much different. And I see where you are coming from and I agree it is wrong that clever accountants and lawyers can find ways to circumvent the intentions of the laws.
If I were in charge I should see to it that the very rich pay a fair share of tax for a fairer society. ( Than they do)
But that doesn't mean that you should support a proposed taxation system that penalises ordinary people who have made an effort to provide for their children.
Income and other taxes is a good tax if managed fairly , and it isn't at the moment. That's a different situation.
But IhT ( death duties) is by definition, IMO , not fair , nor desirable because of the attitudes it raises, and the aspirations it punishes.
Come on- I save more for my kids than you choose to save. So it's right that the Government takes some of it from them, but not from your kids.?
 
Blue in Munich said:
Paul refers to people, the voters.



You respond to that mentioning voting, no mention of majority Governments.



And now the attempt to weasel out, complete with the sarcastic "hope that clears itup for you" ad the attempt to deflect to Patrick.

I at least expected you to stand by what you'd written, not try to slide out of it. Disappointing.
Click to expand...
Not sliding or deflecting ..pointing out gently that Patrick got the gist.
But in a harsh note, you didn’t and I won’t resort to name calling or making allegations.
As far as I am concerned this is closed and your points have been countered. Good luck with your IFA tomorrow.
 
National Grid and SSE create holding companies offshore as a protection measure against Labour's nationalisation plans. This is on top of 2 water companies that have already done this, and another that is in the process of doing so. In reality, this doesn't stop re-nationalisation but it does guarantee the company's value under Swiss law - been through a similar process with my last employer, as protection from a hostile buyout.

No driving the share price down prior to nationalisation by leaking intentions etc...

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-50536205
 
Here at independent fact check UK we've crunched the numbers and gone through the conservative manifesto in depth and can exclusively inform you of the truly inspirational polices, the new transformative policies to give the country hope, to inspire us to forge our path in an uncertain and at times frightening world, to bring the country together, to truly address the issues impacting our great nation at the moment.



Potholes



So vote Conservative if you want your potholes fixed as it's ruining the ride in your 4 by 4/BMW/Audi/Jaaaaaaaaag. And they may get Brexit done*





*Please don't tell anyone there's Bob Hope of them getting a decent trade deal by the end of 2020.
 
Last edited:
Swinglowandslow said:
No doubt if you were in charge of the tax laws, the Dukes liability would have been much different. And I see where you are coming from and I agree it is wrong that clever accountants and lawyers can find ways to circumvent the intentions of the laws.
If I were in charge I should see to it that the very rich pay a fair share of tax for a fairer society. ( Than they do)
But that doesn't mean that you should support a proposed taxation system that penalises ordinary people who have made an effort to provide for their children.
Income and other taxes is a good tax if managed fairly , and it isn't at the moment. That's a different situation.
But IhT ( death duties) is by definition, IMO , not fair , nor desirable because of the attitudes it raises, and the aspirations it punishes.
Come on- I save more for my kids than you choose to save. So it's right that the Government takes some of it from them, but not from your kids.?
Click to expand...
Without sounding rude, have you missed all the posts were I have said I am angry at this policy and don’t agree with it?

But our anger is misplaced because “WE” will stay pay IHT even if Labour don’t get in, we should be directing that to all parties, especially those who are allowing the rich to get richer and the gap between rich and poor grow.

Just because this policy would affect me or you as being the only reason to get angry, doesn’t make it ok if it doesn’t happen.
tory manifesto today not a thing about closing the loopholes.

All any of these taxes do whether it’s £125,000 per person or £325,000 per person is encourage ways to avoid it.
 
Hacker Khan said:
Here at independent fact check UK we've crunched the numbers and gone through the conservative manifesto in depth and can exclusively inform you of the truly inspirational polices, the new transformative policies to give the country hope, to inspire us to forge our path in an uncertain and at times frightening world, to bring the country together, to truly address the issues impacting our great nation at the moment.



Potholes



So vote Conservative if you want your potholes fixed as it's ruining the ride in your 4 by 4/BMW/Audi/Jaaaaaaaaag. And they may get Brexit done*





*Please don't tell anyone there's Bob Hope of them getting a decent trade deal by the end of 2020.
Click to expand...

Potholes for Government perhaps, but dog poo has always been the No1 complaint with Local Authorities.
If the Greens had dog poo clear up as their No 1 priority they would up in the 30% voting preference now.
 
Hacker Khan said:
Here at independent fact check UK we've crunched the numbers and gone through the conservative manifesto in depth and can exclusively inform you of the truly inspirational polices, the new transformative policies to give the country hope, to inspire us to forge our path in an uncertain and at times frightening world, to bring the country together, to truly address the issues impacting our great nation at the moment.



Potholes



So vote Conservative if you want your potholes fixed as it's ruining the ride in your 4 by 4/BMW/Audi/Jaaaaaaaaag. And they may get Brexit done*





*Please don't tell anyone there's Bob Hope of them getting a decent trade deal by the end of 2020.
Click to expand...
I've #Twazzockchecked this post and it passed with flying colours.
 
Now we have the Conservative manifesto we'll see if this actually makes a difference.

It seems a document fairly lacking in ambition and very much with the intention of 'don't mess this up, lets just nurse things over the line for the next couple of weeks'.

1st of all - a Sunday afternoon launch. Aimed very much at keeping as low profile as possible given that fewer people will engage with the news on a Sunday and things will have died down as people consume news on a Monday. If they wanted to create a splash, then it should have been Thursday morning - get as much coverage as possible during the day with weekend reflection on their plans.

Already by Monday morning before 9am, the Conservative Manifesto is not one of the 13 stories at the top section of the BBC news.

As @Doon frae Troon has pointed out, even if you thought they could deliver 50,000 more nurses, and other socially motivated policies, do you really believe they want to - especially if they happen to win a big majority and can avoid (parliamentary) scrutiny (at least)?

Potentially we will see a bump in the polls following the QT event on Friday evening. But it seems Labour have it all to do.
 
Doon frae Troon said:
Any Tory supporters on here believe the Johnson/Gove Government will deliver 40 new hospitals or 50,000 new NHS nurses.
If so I would like some facts on how this will be achieved.
Just simple answers please no deflection.
Click to expand...
Why do you look into it yourself and tell us,

On second thoughts!
 
Grant85 said:
Now we have the Conservative manifesto we'll see if this actually makes a difference.

It seems a document fairly lacking in ambition and very much with the intention of 'don't mess this up, lets just nurse things over the line for the next couple of weeks'.

1st of all - a Sunday afternoon launch. Aimed very much at keeping as low profile as possible given that fewer people will engage with the news on a Sunday and things will have died down as people consume news on a Monday. If they wanted to create a splash, then it should have been Thursday morning - get as much coverage as possible during the day with weekend reflection on their plans.

Already by Monday morning before 9am, the Conservative Manifesto is not one of the 13 stories at the top section of the BBC news.

As @Doon frae Troon has pointed out, even if you thought they could deliver 50,000 more nurses, and other socially motivated policies, do you really believe they want to - especially if they happen to win a big majority and can avoid (parliamentary) scrutiny (at least)?

Potentially we will see a bump in the polls following the QT event on Friday evening. But it seems Labour have it all to do.
Click to expand...
I don’t think Peston laid into him, the extra police claim needed to be raised.
I think we can tell from the spending profile they are kicking the tax avoidance can down the road ..or they are really scared about Brexit and want some reserves
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top