Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Politics] General Election 2024 - 4th July



peterward

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Nov 11, 2009
11,760
Of course the Monster raving Loonies are a joke, and I'd never waste a vote on them, but a mate just sent me link to their site/manifsto and I must confess to having a bloody good chuckle!

The OFFICIAL Monster Raving Loony Party Manicfesto for General Election 2024​

We are fighting this Election on the basis of CHANGE..
LOOSE CHANGE as this is all we’ll have left under a Labour/Conservative Government

The Loony Party
will build 5 million new homes, fill up 5 million potholes, employ 80,00 teachers, policemen and NHS staff and reduce taxes to 5%……….yeah right…lol

MP’s
will have to sit in stocks during their surgeries, while their constituents throw custard pies at them. This will help them judge their popularity with in the community. Companies would also be encouraged to design new versions of stocks to trade at the Stock Exchange.

Rwanda…We will send all MPs who misbehave to Rwanda.

V.A.T….We will get rid of VAT as it adds no value.

Fly Tipping..We will ban all tipping of flys, insects, and zips of any kind..

Immigration..We will replace employees of the Border Force with GP receptionists. This will dramatically reduce the number of people getting in.

Cost of Living…To help with the cost of Living and to raise money for the Treasury we will Convert Numbers 10 and 11 Downing Street into a Hair salon, Which we will call ‘Government CutZ’.

Levelling up….Along with the existing Government policy for levelling up the North with the South, we will provide free Spirit Levels to all.

M.O.T….The MOT is an annual test to ensure that your car is roadworthy. We will introduce a ROT, an annual test to make sure all roads are car worthy.

Elections….After the next General Election, we will introduce a ‘cooling-off period’ of about 3 years in case voters wish to change their minds.

NHS…In an effort to reduce the problems faced by the NHS , it is proposed to reduce pregnancy from nine to seven months.

NHS…We will reduce hospital waiting lists by using a smaller font.

Legal System…To make things fairer we will introduce a Court of Human Lefts.

Foreign Policy…Once in Government, we will replace the Foreign Secretary with a British one!

Stamp Duty….We will abolish stamp duty. Stamps are expensive enough as it is without having to pay any duty on them!

Migration of Nets…..We will reduce net migration by making sure that any nets are secured more firmly to the ground.

NHS…We propose to reduce the alphabet to 23 letters starting with the letters N.H.and S

Greener Cars……Once in Government we promise to have more green cars on our roads. Politicians will have fluorescent green cars so that everyone can see them coming.

Self-Serving….. Anyone using a self-service till in a supermarket will be given a 10% discount off their shopping.

Socially smart….. All Social Media sites will be taken down for one day a week for a “Remember when we used to talk” day.
 




nwgull

Well-known member
Jul 25, 2003
14,162
Manchester
In my experience I'd say both are extremely long shots. All the old people I know love Farage, and all of them agree with assisted dying as they've seen too many of their relatives/partners suffer from long and painful illnesses.

The Tories are totally doomed.
It's just the bitter old people that love Farage. I know plenty of old people enjoying their golden years that think he's a ****.
 


Gwylan

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2003
31,516
Uffern
You are quite correct, Reigate grammar school became a fee paying establishment during Sir Kiers time spent there after he took and passed his eleven plus exam and won a place there. This was before it became fee paying and his education there prior to them becoming a private fee paying entity was paid for from the state education budget.

It should be stressed that this wasn't a privilege for KS, all pupils who were there at the time were similarly supported. I have a work colleague who was there at Reigate Grammar at the time and benefited from this - as did one Fatboy Slim.
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,634
...Immigration..We will replace employees of the Border Force with GP receptionists. This will dramatically reduce the number of people getting in.
what a breakthrough policy. solves immigration and improved access to GPs. Monster Raving dont get enough credit.
 






Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
53,290
Faversham
And they have, but I have paid for it! I have nothing but good things to say about the NHS, but if I needed a hip or knee op as an example I am not doing it via the NHS if I have paid for medical insurance. Why should I also be taxed on that?
Because it is something you have chosen to buy.

I am at a loss to understand how you are not following the reasoning here. It seems that you simply object to a cost increase. The cost has been lower due to the 'charity' status. Private school and private health are not......charities :shrug:
 


Flounce

Well-known member
Nov 15, 2006
2,551
Because it is something you have chosen to buy.

I am at a loss to understand how you are not following the reasoning here. It seems that you simply object to a cost increase. The cost has been lower due to the 'charity' status. Private school and private health are not......charities :shrug:
I can only assume that you have never had private medical insurance or paid school fees. I am at a loss to understand the “charity” comments. You pay for private school fees and you pay for medical insurance what has any of that got to do with charities as far as the person paying the bills is concerned. It is the parents who will be charged 20% on top of what they already pay for school fees, unless I have misunderstood. It is NOT fair, just an extra tax on those that choose to do it.

Only half private schools are registered as charities btw and seeing as they provide spaces that would otherwise need to be filled by state schools it seems a punitive tax to me.
 
Last edited:


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
53,290
Faversham
mixing up charity status and VAT. currently all education and training is VAT exempt, the policy is to apply VAT for a select segment of education (for now). charity status is a different matter, i recall they were going to change that for private schools but no longer. (probably VAT is easier?)

we also dont charge VAT on healthcare either. private healthcare might be a new target to pay for nurses?
I didn't mention VAT.

The discussion as far as I understand it is about Labour ending the charity status of private schools. @Flounce says this is 'disgusting' because he thinks this will mean he will have to pay twice for something he has already paid for.

I have been trying, as gently as possible, to point out that he's just annoyed that he will have to pay more for something he has chosen to buy, and is backfilling his annoyance with a perverse narrative.
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
53,290
Faversham
I can only assume that you have never had private medical insurance or paid school fees. I am at a loss to understand the “charity” comments. You pay for private school fees and you pay for medical insurance what has any of that got to do with charities as far as the person paying the bills is concerned. It is the parents who will be charged 20% on top of what they already pay for school fees, unless I have misunderstood. It is NOT fair, just an extra tax on those that choose to do it.
It is not an extra tax. It is tax. Tax you were not paying previously for something that was wrongly classified as a charity.
 


Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
17,186
Fiveways
Have any of the opposition parties given a clear statement of intent to go after the scammers (ie pals of the Tory party) who sucked hundreds of millions from the economy over PPE contracts? Is there any will, anywhere, to investigate the "fast lane" contracts that were dished out to pals / supporters of Boris and his ilk?

The party who goes after these shiesters, prosecutes them and recovers the money they stole from this country is likely to get my vote.
See the Devi Sridhar :blush: article in here:

 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
53,290
Faversham
Except you are not being asked to pay MORE for not using what you mention, private school parents and people who pay for private health care ARE or in the case of private school education will be. Perhaps you’d be OK with paying an extra 20% on what you don’t use or being taxed on what you don’t use for the NHS?
No, you are not being asked to pay MORE. You are being asked to pay SOME.

But you will be asked to pay more by the service provider (the shcool) because it is them that will be asked to pay SOME (not more, some) tax that they previously didn't pay due to their ludicrous 'charity' status.

They are simply passing on their tax obligation to the customer - you.

If you feel the product is no longer value for money, consider your options.

Just because you don't like it does not make it disgusting.
 




beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,634
I didn't mention VAT.

The discussion as far as I understand it is about Labour ending the charity status of private schools...
the change is to VAT exempt status, not charity status. looking up, they droped changes to private school's charitable status last autumn.
 


Flounce

Well-known member
Nov 15, 2006
2,551
It is not an extra tax. It is tax. Tax you were not paying previously for something that was wrongly classified as a charity.

VAT on school fees is an onerous tax which given how much the fees are already will lead to one thing, more children being sent to State School and private schools folding. I am struggling to see how this is a good idea.
 


Flounce

Well-known member
Nov 15, 2006
2,551
I didn't mention VAT.

The discussion as far as I understand it is about Labour ending the charity status of private schools. @Flounce says this is 'disgusting' because he thinks this will mean he will have to pay twice for something he has already paid for.

I have been trying, as gently as possible, to point out that he's just annoyed that he will have to pay more for something he has chosen to buy, and is backfilling his annoyance with a perverse narrative.

I do not pay school fees, I just feel pretty strongly that those who do are about to be fleeced.
 




Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
13,175
Central Borneo / the Lizard
I do not pay school fees, I just feel pretty strongly that those who do are about to be fleeced.
I pay school fees for my daughter, the school has already written to us to say they will absorb the tax and the fees will only go up a 'normal' amount. They charge a bloody fortune anyway, they must be so loaded.

fwiw I agree with the tax, never understood why it was charitable. There's plenty of cheaper options, or I could just get the education for free. Its a choice. Class sizes are dropping all the time now with the change in our demographics, so there are loads of places available in state schools.

End of the day taxes have to be raised from somewhere and VAT on luxury goods and services is a perfectly reasonable tax to apply. So many people who send their kids to public school are bloody rich (not me I hasten to add!), keep their money in offshore accounts, utilise every tax-dodging scheme going, it s damn hard for the government to get them to pay their fair share of tax, charging VAT on private education is one way to do it.

Seems like a decent idea to make VAT scaleable, the more expensive something is, the higher the rate.
 


CheeseRolls

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jan 27, 2009
6,092
Shoreham Beach
No, you are not being asked to pay MORE. You are being asked to pay SOME.

But you will be asked to pay more by the service provider (the shcool) because it is them that will be asked to pay SOME (not more, some) tax that they previously didn't pay due to their ludicrous 'charity' status.

They are simply passing on their tax obligation to the customer - you.

If you feel the product is no longer value for money, consider your options.

Just because you don't like it does not make it disgusting.
If you pay for private healthcare, you pay to shorten the wait and to stay in some comfort. What you are typically not paying for is critical care in the event of complications arising from the procedure. if there are complications which require intesive care, you may well then fall under NHS care and this would not be the best opportunity to determine whether you have paid for and are entitled to this care or not.
 




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
53,290
Faversham
I do not pay school fees, I just feel pretty strongly that those who do are about to be fleeced.
Fleeced = paying tax for something they choose to buy? :shrug:

Anyway, I don't want to argue with you any more. You're someone I like to chat with on NSC. :thumbsup:
 




rippleman

Well-known member
Oct 18, 2011
4,745
Several people have commented on Starmer being weak. I'm curious to know where this idea has come from. I can't say I'm a big fan of everything he's done but I can't argue with his story. The fella comes from an ordinary background (OK, he's piled on the toolmaker a bit thick but he's still not privileged brat), went to state school and a red-brick uni (although to Oxford for his postgraduate work).

He them became a lawyer and not just any lawyer - the head of the CPS. He then went into politics, became leader of his party in fewer than five years and since then he has taken Labour from their worst defeat in about 90 years to a position where they're predicted to win by a landslide -having rooted out the Corbynistas. That's not a history that suggests a weak personality.
And don't forget he accepted his knighthood from a Tory government.

Let's not kid ourselves here. Labour is heading for a landslide despite Starmer not because of him.

Larry the Cat at No.10 could defeat Sunak and his obnoxious, self-serving cartel they are so shit.
 


Since1982

Well-known member
Sep 30, 2006
1,543
Burgess Hill
VAT on school fees is an onerous tax which given how much the fees are already will lead to one thing, more children being sent to State School and private schools folding. I am struggling to see how this is a good idea.
Lots of things are very expensive - cars, yachts, houses - just because something is costly doesn’t mean it should be exempt from tax. If a private school has such a poor business model that it cannot deal with being appropriately taxed then it shouldn’t be in business. There is simply no good argument for asking the taxpayer to subsidise the education of 7% of children at the expense of the remaining 93% and I speak as someone who has paid private school fees.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here