Ge 2017

[ColchesterFC]

Sorry Jeremy. No matter that you are OK guy and a pretty good constituency MP - you are the face of an unacceptable Tory Party and an unacceptable Brexit. Never mind the ongoing NHS shambles and crisis. If your Supreme Leader was making less of Brexit in this GE you might have a good chance of retaining your seat - but that she isn't I think puts you at serious risk. Anyway - if you lose out you won't suffer given you recently sold your business for £17m - so you are really just like the rest of us.

Were you this upset about the wealth of MPs when Ed Milliband had at least 7 millionaires in the shadow cabinet? Or is it just Tory MPs that you are willing to attack for being wealthy?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

The danger of Labour's version of Marxism/communism is it is more Marxism-Leninism in that it retains central control with an Islington elite. This version of backhanded state capitalism has never worked because it dumbs down entrepreneurship. Everyone ends up with a little grey workers uniform with a red book in the top pocket. No managers, all drones.

In terms of a distribution of wealth it doesn't work because that level of central government costs an absolute fortune to create and run - sounds like Brown's creation of thousands upon thousands of state jobs with less and less revenue producers...

At the very outset a vast war chest will be needed to buy back the Post Office, railways and the utility companies. For any government to achieve the buy backs and fund a welfare state to the extent that Labour are proposing, taxation will go back to the heady days of the 70's. 35% basic rate and a whooping 83% as the higher rate. No way am I voting to bring back those penal days.

Labour's version of Marxism/Communism being having key public services in public ownership? as the services have not improved all the while the shareholders have taken billions out of the UK - after all most of the owners of our privatised public services are non-UK.

Might I suggest that the chancellors £60bn war chest he has for mitigating Brexit risks, and as a contingency for issues arising, could go quite some way towards the nationalisation war chest.

And yet again you talk of income tax as being something that should be avoided as it is 'penal'. Back in the days of the 83% higher rate the difference between the rich and the poor was a lot less and there are a lot more individuals with absurdly huge incomes that could easily accommodate an 83% marginal rate.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

Can anyone really see anyone getting near tories ?

In all my lifetime I don't recall ever seeing an opposition so weak and pathetic - and it's of their own choosing

You don't remember Michael Foot, William Hague, Ian Duncan Smith, Michael Howard? All very shabby yet their respective parties all recovered and regained power.

Next time around the conservatives are likely to have run out of steam and ideas, the cycle of a governing party coming to an end, and they may be suffering from a post Brexit economy slump. If Labour have a half decent leader by then they have a good chance of winning again. Just not this time.

 

[Raesy92]

So Labour have a fully costed manifesto and the Tories have not. Yet Labour still getting stick from many.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Ah! thats different. remember everything Tory is complete tosh and everything Labour is manna from heaven. Tories have to prove funding for their plans but Labour don't. You know the drill.

I assume then that you have not watched the Channel 4 news this evening when Emily Thornbury was grilled on funding the manifesto. It'll be easy for the Tories to explain the funding of their programme because they'll either say 'from existing budgets' and aoid explaining how that would be achieved - or have pledges that will not be for the government to deliver - and so no money required.

Meanwhile as this is May's (Strong and Stable) Brexit Election I will be looking for clear explanation on how she is going to get net immigration down to the tens of thousands - something you have not yet (I don't think) explained how that sits with your oft stated insistence that 'immigration will be what is required by the economy' approach.

And even if I missed it I think your explanation would be worth hearing again. I'm all ears. So @SR - immigration down to 10s of thousands - how and when?

 

[Old Skier]

So Labour have a fully costed manifesto and the Tories have not. Yet Labour still getting stick from many.

Listening to the Corbyn interview it didn't appear to be be fully costed but I'm not the kind of voter that believes any party ever comes up with a fully costed manifesto or believes everything I hear.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

So Labour have a fully costed manifesto and the Tories have not. Yet Labour still getting stick from many.

Is a manifesto ever worth the paper it's written on ?

It's always a bunch of promises that are later broken

 

[SocketRocket]

Labour's version of Marxism/Communism being having key public services in public ownership? as the services have not improved all the while the shareholders have taken billions out of the UK - after all most of the owners of our privatised public services are non-UK.

Might I suggest that the chancellors £60bn war chest he has for mitigating Brexit risks, and as a contingency for issues arising, could go quite some way towards the nationalisation war chest.

And yet again you talk of income tax as being something that should be avoided as it is 'penal'. Back in the days of the 83% higher rate the difference between the rich and the poor was a lot less and there are a lot more individuals with absurdly huge incomes that could easily accommodate an 83% marginal rate.

I just dont understand this Socialist idea of punishing people who are successful. They have already paid their tax and as we know 30% of tax is already paid by the top 1% of UK earners. Is it a crime to work hard create wealth, provide work for others because that's what people like you seem to want to destroy.

You keep mentioning this £60 Billion war chest that the chancellor keeps under his bed. Where exactly did he get this amount of money from? Did he borrow it, I dont think so, so please explain where it came from if it exists.

The Tories have taken millions of low paid out of income tax with their policy of raising the tax free threshold year on year. labour had the opportunity to do this in their term of office but decided not to. But hey ho! what ever the Tories do will not change your rabid blinkered view of them. Sad really.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

If you go back a few days amongst your posts you say you say you won't vote Labour, and now you're saying you will. Just like Mary Poppins when the wind changes.

I liked what Corbyn said in his manifesto launch today; I have liked his engagement with voters; I did not like his pusillanimity during the Brexit debate but I liked what I heard from him on Brexit today - 'No Deal' will be rejected as an option and there will be an immediate guarantee of existing rights for all EU nationals living in Britain.

Now I still think that Corbyn is unelectable as a PM - as May is making this a Brexit GE and her buddies in the right wing press are focussed on trashing Corbyn round the block. But I like the boldness and vision of the Labour PArty manifesto - and much of that will have come from the pen of Jeremy Corbyn.

Meanwhile I expect May (SaS) to also explain her 180 degree about turn on Brexit - from Leave EU terrible - to severest severance with EU great. Because she is being dishonest pretending that she can get a great free trade agreement with the EU without accepting any oversight by the ECJ or accepting any form of, or variant on, free movement.

 

[Raesy92]

Is a manifesto ever worth the paper it's written on ?

It's always a bunch of promises that are later broken

Sure Labour said on QT that they wanted to put their costings to an independent body along with the Tories costings to make sure it all added up. Tories refused.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Were you this upset about the wealth of MPs when Ed Milliband had at least 7 millionaires in the shadow cabinet? Or is it just Tory MPs that you are willing to attack for being wealthy?

What makes you think I'm upset by his wealth? Did I say I was upset by his wealth? No! What I was saying was that Hunt needn't pretend that whatever the outcome of Brexit and with him being unemployed he's in it like the rest of us. Because he won't be.

 

[Raesy92]

I just dont understand this Socialist idea of punishing people who are successful. They have already paid their tax and as we know 30% of tax is already paid by the top 1% of UK earners. Is it a crime to work hard create wealth, provide work for others because that's what people like you seem to want to destroy.

You keep mentioning this £60 Billion war chest that the chancellor keeps under his bed. Where exactly did he get this amount of money from? Did he borrow it, I dont think so, so please explain where it came from if it exists.

The Tories have taken millions of low paid out of income tax with their policy of raising the tax free threshold year on year. labour had the opportunity to do this in their term of office but decided not to. But hey ho! what ever the Tories do will not change your rabid blinkered view of them. Sad really.

Many that are at the top, and in the top 1% earners have had a privileged lifestyle in order to be able to create that wealth. There are many low earners that work 50+ hour weeks and hold down 2 or more jobs to do their best for their families. Do these people not work equally as hard, if not harder?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

I just dont understand this Socialist idea of punishing people who are successful. They have already paid their tax and as we know 30% of tax is already paid by the top 1% of UK earners. Is it a crime to work hard create wealth, provide work for others because that's what people like you seem to want to destroy.

You keep mentioning this £60 Billion war chest that the chancellor keeps under his bed. Where exactly did he get this amount of money from? Did he borrow it, I dont think so, so please explain where it came from if it exists.

The Tories have taken millions of low paid out of income tax with their policy of raising the tax free threshold year on year. labour had the opportunity to do this in their term of office but decided not to. But hey ho! what ever the Tories do will not change your rabid blinkered view of them. Sad really.

Paying tax is not a punishment - it is contributing more to the common weal when you can afford to contribute more. It is appreciating that when you are fortunate enough to have wealth and/or a high income that there are many who are not so fortunate - who live lives much less fortunate and gilded - and for whom life is a daily struggle. And being grateful that you are able to able to make a larger contribution without that significantly affecting your lifestyle. It may mean not replacing your car every two years, or taking one less weeks holiday a year. But in return you get the peace-of-mind from knowing that you are doing the right thing - you are part of what made the UK great - a caring and compassionate country of people for whom self is not the most important thing in life.

Meanwhile - the 10s of thousands. Got an answer for that one yet.

 

[Hobbit]

Labour's version of Marxism/Communism being having key public services in public ownership? as the services have not improved all the while the shareholders have taken billions out of the UK - after all most of the owners of our privatised public services are non-UK.

And yet again you talk of income tax as being something that should be avoided as it is 'penal'. Back in the days of the 83% higher rate the difference between the rich and the poor was a lot less and there are a lot more individuals with absurdly huge incomes that could easily accommodate an 83% marginal rate.

And the railways are a public service? The Post Office is a public service? Utilities are essential as is the NHS.

When have i said avoid income tax? I've twice in recent posts suggested raising the basic rate, but taking more of the lower paid out of income tax completely. And if you go back far enough you will find I have said I'd welcome an increase. What I've also said is a disagree with this fashionable inverted snobbery of attacking people who earn more than £80k. It's a soft target for Labour as it affects very few voters.

Where am I looking to avoid income tax?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Sure Labour said on QT that they wanted to put their costings to an independent body along with the Tories costings to make sure it all added up. Tories refused.

And on Channel 4 news this evening Emily Thornbury laid down the same challenge to the Tories. The OBR to review the manifestos and costings.

 

[SocketRocket]

Many that are at the top, and in the top 1% earners have had a privileged lifestyle in order to be able to create that wealth. There are many low earners that work 50+ hour weeks and hold down 2 or more jobs to do their best for their families. Do these people not work equally as hard, if not harder?

You have missed my point completely. You seem to have double standards with this. If someone works 50 hours a week and struggles to get by then they are OK and doing their bit, if someone else works 50/80 hours a week and is successful then they are greedy, privileged and should pay a higher rate of tax even though they are already paying more anyway. If you think all successful people had a privileged start in life then you dont understand how most business get underway. Most are started by people who work their bits off, take chances, borrow money and put their selves completely on the line, very few are inherited or started by rich boys. Hard working employees are worthy of support but if you want to punish the people that create their jobs then you are very shortsighted.

 

[Old Skier]

There are many low earners that work 50+ hour weeks and hold down 2 or more jobs

Interesting, where are these figures from. I presume jobs 2 and 3 are not many hours.

 

[SocketRocket]

Paying tax is not a punishment - it is contributing more to the common weal when you can afford to contribute more. It is appreciating that when you are fortunate enough to have wealth and/or a high income that there are many who are not so fortunate - who live lives much less fortunate and gilded - and for whom life is a daily struggle. And being grateful that you are able to able to make a larger contribution without that significantly affecting your lifestyle. It may mean not replacing your car every two years, or taking one less weeks holiday a year. But in return you get the peace-of-mind from knowing that you are doing the right thing - you are part of what made the UK great - a caring and compassionate country of people for whom self is not the most important thing in life.

Meanwhile - the 10s of thousands. Got an answer for that one yet.

Wake up and roll back to post 200 You wont like it though

 

[Hobbit]

Many that are at the top, and in the top 1% earners have had a privileged lifestyle in order to be able to create that wealth. There are many low earners that work 50+ hour weeks and hold down 2 or more jobs to do their best for their families. Do these people not work equally as hard, if not harder?

I would have dearly loved to work less than 50+hours a week for the last 20 years. Most of that time salaried, which means no overtime. I'm now a senior manager, and have worked my butt off to get there. Whilst I wouldn't fall foul of Labour's tax hike I would be mightily miffed if I did.

So where is the incentive to better yourself?

 

[Raesy92]

You have missed my point completely. You seem to have double standards with this. If someone works 50 hours a week and struggles to get by then they are OK and doing their bit, if someone else works 50/80 hours a week and is successful then they are greedy, privileged and should pay a higher rate of tax even though they are already paying more anyway. If you think all successful people had a privileged start in life then you dont understand how most business get underway. Most are started by people who work their bits off, take chances, borrow money and put their selves completely on the line, very few are inherited or started by rich boys. Hard working employees are worthy of support but if you want to punish the people that create their jobs then you are very shortsighted.

Punish? I'm pretty sure them paying a few extra % in taxes won't affect their lifestyle too much.