General Election 2017

[carteater]

A manifesto that openly pledges to helping people, albeit in a way that would quickly drain money.

Nah **** that we want Strong and Stable LeadershipTM that enables Brexit to mean BrexitTM and to be able to maul foxes.

Or there's Lib Dems who seem to just be stating that they're a better alternative to either, without any substance.

I am actually a Lib Dem supporter but none of these three seem like a decent option right now.

Doesn't matter, I live in Tory heartland, so unless I vote Tory my vote won't count.

 

[clapham_gull]

I wish you would stick to your DICK TIGHT football posts, the IRA were never funny, my Brother & Sister-in-Law were in Central Warrington on the day of the Bombing.

As a consequence the thought of Corbyn & McDonnell being anywhere near Downing Street turns my stomach. Now leave the adults to talk about this.

I was there too. I lived there at the time.

In fact if the first bomb went off (the one everyone forgets) I wouldn't be typing this. I lived down the road from the gas works.

I was very very shocked at the time. Made it all real for me.

But I've read my history. The reality is (at stated above) the Establishment were saying one thing publically and doing completely the opposite behind our backs.

What were they doing ? Trying to find peace. You just need to try and move on.

I for one didn't mourn Martin McGuiness. He did his best to blow me up, but I'm so grateful he changed his mind.

Falklands: Did the Tories utterly **** that one up before the war ? Yep: Did Argentina have a right to invade ? Nope. Did we give them the green light ? Probably.

History is usually far more complex.

Oh and I probably won't be voting. If I did what Corbyn did (or didn't do) in relation to the IRA wouldn't persuade me not to vote for him.

 

[NooBHA]

Sounds great, but it will only be you, me and a few shop-doorway dwellers left in the country - and I'm not paying £45bn in tax......

It's a myth that all the High Earners would leave the UK if taxes go up. A lot of them are employees and they are engaged in employment where their Employers are based. So they cannot always move so readily.


Yes the employers could move but they can't move overnight and by the time they can arrange to move we will get 3 or 4 years tax out of them and have spent the money on the services promised in the Manifesto.

It's an audacious Plan and Manifesto and I know all is not achievable but if we can get 50% of what is promised in that Manifesto then I would be over the moon.

I think only myself and Ernest and a few others on here truly believe Mr Corbyn, I could be wrong. I fear he won't be elected but if he isn't then all those complaining about the trains, and other public services and welfare for the less able bodied. Well you have your chance to do something about it in June.

I care not one jot whether Starbucks or Costa Coffee pay an extra 7% tax. Nor do I care whether over paid footballers or bankers pay lots more tax.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

I can't wait to see the BBC/C4 news etc all forensically examining the Tory manifesto with such vigour

Fox Hunting and no more Severn Bridge tolls so far.
The Tory think tank is really getting up and running.
I have left the looking after the working classes out on purpose because that was just a lie.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

I think they've done this manifesto roll-out very well and I find I have a new-found interest in what Corbyn has to say.

This manifesto is exactly what I want to see and such a contrast to both the Tories and the lily-livered efforts of Ed Miliband.

 

[GingerBeerMan]

It's a myth that all the High Earners would leave the UK if taxes go up. A lot of them are employees and they are engaged in employment where their Employers are based. So they cannot always move so readily.


Yes the employers could move but they can't move overnight and by the time they can arrange to move we will get 3 or 4 years tax out of them and have spent the money on the services promised in the Manifesto.

It's an audacious Plan and Manifesto and I know all is not achievable but if we can get 50% of what is promised in that Manifesto then I would be over the moon.

I think only myself and Ernest and a few others on here truly believe Mr Corbyn, I could be wrong. I fear he won't be elected but if he isn't then all those complaining about the trains, and other public services and welfare for the less able bodied. Well you have your chance to do something about it in June.

I care not one jot whether Starbucks or Costa Coffee pay an extra 7% tax. Nor do I care whether over paid footballers or bankers pay lots more tax.

Spend time abroad in second world countries and you'll realise companies would never leave the UK, no matter what the tax rate. We're such a rich economy with a very wealthy consumer base that firms are clamouring to get to sell to, we should be charging them more a to sell their products in our country. Plus 26% would still make us one of the lowest in the G8.

 

[Buzzer]

It's a myth that all the High Earners would leave the UK if taxes go up. A lot of them are employees and they are engaged in employment where their Employers are based. So they cannot always move so readily.


Yes the employers could move but they can't move overnight and by the time they can arrange to move we will get 3 or 4 years tax out of them and have spent the money on the services promised in the Manifesto.

It's an audacious Plan and Manifesto and I know all is not achievable .

The very rich already pay disproportionately more. The top 1% paid 27% of all income tax. The top 10% paid 59% of all income tax.

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9178

This plan to tax them even more and heavily is likely to incentivise them either to reduce taxable income by, say, increasing pension contributions. They could also work less or emigrate as other very high-earners have done from Scandinavia and France all of which would have a negative effect on tax receipts. Quote from Nuffield Foundation sponsored study says:

"On the basis of the available evidence it does seem more likely than not that the proposal would raise money, but the amount is very uncertain."

https://election2017.ifs.org.uk/art...-income-tax-rises-for-high-income-individuals

And from the report, Labour's planned £4.5bn a year would require a very low responsiveness from high earners to the tax rises however "A sizeable international literature finds evidence of such responses to income tax changes, ...of significant responses to that change."

You say you don't care about bankers and footballers paying lots more tax...I think you might care if they decide to move their tax status to another country and these are the people with the greatest mobility when sorting out their taxes.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

I think they've done this manifesto roll-out very well and I find I have a new-found interest in what Corbyn has to say.

This manifesto is exactly what I want to see and such a contrast to both the Tories and the lily-livered efforts of Ed Miliband.

I can't see a lot wrong with it, it's mostly reversing all the things that have gone so badly wrong and making it fairer for the less well off, it's time for the rich and business to put their hand in their pocket because it's the JAMS that have mostly done it so far.
Also getting sick of people living in the past as an excuse, grow up, times have changed, many countries in Europe and around the world are run very successfully on this model, Austerity just has not worked for the vast majority of people and cannot continue.

 

[crookie]

Brilliant. Won't vote for it as a pig in a blue rosette would win here, and as someone who is aspirational and self employed I'm approaching the increase in tax threshold, but great to see the country have a choice between 2 parties with radically different philosophies for a change. I have to say, a fascinating manifesto, and plenty in there I'd support. Ideology aside, privatisations of monopolies have rarely ended in cheaper/better services for customers as we were promised

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

Brilliant. Won't vote for it as a pig in a blue rosette would win here, and as someone who is aspirational and self employed I'm approaching the increase in tax threshold, but great to see the country have a choice between 2 parties with radically different philosophies for a change. I have to say, a fascinating manifesto, and plenty in there I'd support. Ideology aside, privatisations of monopolies have rarely ended in cheaper/better services for customers as we were promised

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

You are self employed, so don't pay yourself over the threshold, in fact nowhere near it.
I am not going to elaborate.

 

[crookie]

You are self employed, so don't pay yourself over the threshold, in fact nowhere near it.
I am not going to elaborate.

Sorry ? Please do

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

 

[beorhthelm]

...Ideology aside, privatisations of monopolies have rarely ended in cheaper/better services for customers as we were promised

what no one ever takes in to account is the possibility costs would have gone up with a nationalised company, and ignore the investment side which would have been paid for by borrowing. and few had a good word for the service when BT/Electric/Rail where in public ownership either. personally, i see little benefit to water being privatise as it was, with no markets, on the other hand wouldnt a not-for-profit, non public ownership be idea for them (and other utilities) - issue bonds recycle 100% revenue into infrastructure. ideolgy prevents either Labour or Conservative adopting such a middle ground.

 

[Buzzer]

You are self employed, so don't pay yourself over the threshold, in fact nowhere near it.

The self-employed are taxed on income generated not what they pay themselves.

I am not going to elaborate.

...because you're already out of your depth?

 

[crookie]

what no one ever takes in to account is the possibility costs would have gone up with a nationalised company, and ignore the investment side which would have been paid for by borrowing. and few had a good word for the service when BT/Electric/Rail where in public ownership either. personally, i see little benefit to water being privatise as it was, with no markets, on the other hand wouldnt a not-for-profit, non public ownership be idea for them (and other utilities) - issue bonds recycle 100% revenue into infrastructure. ideolgy prevents either Labour or Conservative adopting such a middle ground.

Govt of course can borrow cheaper than a private company, hence the disastrous PFI. I certainly had no issue with BT BP BAE etc being privatised but you don't have a choice what train you get in. That was always a last minute disastrous privatisation by Major. Look at how much the ROSCOs were 'bought' for by their management and then sold on for immediately. Disgraceful. Utilities is another area that never should have been privatised. We flogged off all our generating capacity and nuclear capability and now have to go cap on hand to foreign companies/countries to bail us out on that score offering well above market rates as a sweetener. Absolutely humiliating

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

 

[pastafarian]

In fairness to Jeremy at least he is being socialist in the manifesto.
Everyone will be equally poor and everyone will be equally miserable when his ideas kick in. What a boring life the no aspiration socialist world view offers.

Thank heaven socialism is on its last legs.

 

[jakarta]

In fairness to Jeremy at least he is being socialist in the manifesto.
Everyone will be equally poor and everyone will be equally miserable when his ideas kick in. What a boring life the no aspiration socialist world view offers.

Thank heaven socialism is on its last legs.

Even Len McCluskey agrees. Apparently 200 seats will be a good result. It certainly will be for Theresa May...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39944331

 

[ManOfSussex]

Right. So despite me pointing out that the clause was brought in specifically as extra help in extreme cases, you've decided, without any knowledge at all of it, that the 3rd party contractor who may or may not be the ones responsible for running it will be right *******s and the very existence of this measure is proof that the Tories are being nasty.

Maybe focus less on the hashtags and more on the substance in future.

I really don't know how a woman who has been raped and now has to disclose this fact to the DWP, as well as the child's name and a declaration that they're not living with the rapist, by virtue of Conservative and Unionist Party policy, is being helped by them. How exactly is a victim of domestic violence being helped in this case?

 

[portlock seagull]

I was there too. I lived there at the time.

In fact if the first bomb went off (the one everyone forgets) I wouldn't be typing this. I lived down the road from the gas works.

I was very very shocked at the time. Made it all real for me.

But I've read my history. The reality is (at stated above) the Establishment were saying one thing publically and doing completely the opposite behind our backs.

What were they doing ? Trying to find peace. You just need to try and move on.

I for one didn't mourn Martin McGuiness. He did his best to blow me up, but I'm so grateful he changed his mind.

Falklands: Did the Tories utterly **** that one up before the war ? Yep: Did Argentina have a right to invade ? Nope. Did we give them the green light ? Probably.

History is usually far more complex.

Oh and I probably won't be voting. If I did what Corbyn did (or didn't do) in relation to the IRA wouldn't persuade me not to vote for him.

Christ, that's a bit too close to call. Shockingly close. Glad you're still with us Clapham!

 

[GingerBeerMan]

Brilliant. Won't vote for it as a pig in a blue rosette would win here, and as someone who is aspirational and self employed I'm approaching the increase in tax threshold, but great to see the country have a choice between 2 parties with radically different philosophies for a change. I have to say, a fascinating manifesto, and plenty in there I'd support. Ideology aside, privatisations of monopolies have rarely ended in cheaper/better services for customers as we were promised

Sent from my SM-G928F using Tapatalk

It's a marginal tax rate... Going over the limit won't affect you much if you're currently under it.

 

[Buzzer]

I really don't know how a woman who has been raped and now has to disclose this fact to the DWP, as well as the child's name and a declaration that they're not living with the rapist, by virtue of Conservative and Unionist Party policy, is being helped by them. How exactly is a victim of domestic violence being helped in this case?

I've already answered it. It's a well-meaning clause to provide extra help for rape victims but the process for claiming is clearly badly created and after seeing that form I'll readily admit that. However, the Tories created the policy, the DWP have designed the process and were in charge of the consultation. You're trying to give the impression that Theresa May and Philip Hammond sat down and personally designed the form. Direct your anger at the DWP.