Current Affairs The General Election

[zzr45]

Because the Tories have run the country into the ground for 10 years and massive investment is needed, that's why we need to raise Corp Tax, keep up mate.

Oh no, I understand that. I also understand that Tax revenues have risen as the rate was dropped, to the point now where it actually won't generate additional income if its cut any more. How is the 7% increase going to affect small businesses, that often work on single digit profit margins, for example?

 

[Billy Dean]

Oh no, I understand that. I also understand that Tax revenues have risen as the rate was dropped, to the point now where it actually won't generate additional income if its cut any more. How is the 7% increase going to affect small businesses, that often work on single digit profit margins, for example?

This was published in September. I haven't read the manifesto in full yet to check if it's born out

Loading…

www.forbes.com

 

[zzr45]

Are you happy with the way things are mate? Do you think things are gonna get a lot better for the working class when we get another 10 years of Tory austerity?
I understand that you think Labour's ambitions are unrealistic, but what would you do?

Of course I'm not. I don't think there's anyone that can realistically turn round and say they are happy. But squeezing SME's iisn't going to help and will only exacerbate the situation in my opinion. It's a case, for me at looking at small changes - again I keep harping back to it, but the digital services tax France has brought in has been a missed opportunity for a new tax revenue stream for about 10 years now. Scrapping HS2 which is a white elephant at this point and using the money budgeted for that to develop new homes is a must. Reviewing drug laws to reduce the burden they put across the system, be that cost to the health service, policing, cost of crime etc needs to be done (as well as again opening up another taxable source as Canada has done with cannabis.)

This was published in September. I haven't read the manifesto in full yet to check if it's born out

Loading…

www.forbes.com

The £300,000 profit part of that article is incorrect. Labour are putting the small profits rate on companies with under £300,000 turnover. Anyone else will be paying full rates. SPR also pushes that rate paid up slightly again to 21%. There's also a bit of a misdirection from Labour in regards to the level of investment in the country by companies (linked to the Corporate Tax) being lower than expected shows corporate tax cuts don't work, but don't mention the uncertainty caused by Brexit which is also having an effect here.

 

[catcherintherye]

That's not the deal on the table though, is it? There are undoubtedly arguments about short-termism and so on from our electoral system, and I can get on board with that, but the reality is that people are going to the polls on the basis that the winning party will be the government for a maximum of five years, before people are asked again. By all means outline a longer-term vision, but surely a manifesto should be things you believe are doable in the five year term people are giving you? Otherwise what's the point of it?

A manifesto is your ideal situation plan. If everything works to plan, taxes come in in line with the projections then this is what you intend to implement.

In my lifetime of watching politics it's rare any manifesto is entirely implemented. I also have serious doubts over all the plans, including the Conservatives (that they will cut tax and spend tens of billions more).

However I can't really stress this enough I don't think people vote on who will implement every aspect of their manifesto. You are a clued up individual who is engaged in the process. 99% are not like that. They will vote for the most part out of tribal loyalty. A few will be won round by the headline of a policy they see. The average voter has no idea what is or isn't feasible by any political party.

 

[Agent Blue]

Yet still all the dimwits in the country will vote the Tories in, Question Time last night had a few beauts in the crowd.

Labour are trying to transform your life and you vote for more Tory rule putting you on the breadline...

Saw QT last night and was left absolutely gobsmacked at Labour getting the blame for austerity and the Labour guy just sat there and nodded, the same happened with Corbyn at the leaders debate.

It's like Lehman Bros never went bust, there was NO sub-prime mortgage scandal, none of what happened in Trump land affected us over here and we never actually handed over 137 billion to the banks...........moooove along now, nothing to see here, nothing to do with banking at all.

If Labour are not willing to defend this point I am starting to think they don't deserve to be in power.

 

[catcherintherye]

All Labour's manifesto says to me is that they've gave up trying to win and Corbyn has chose to go out on an ideological high when he loses.

The harm that plan would do if ever given the chance to be put into effect is incalculable. It assumes it can milk the economy and it will remain the same as they do. It wouldn't. There'd be an exodus from Britain, massive price rises, lower wages, lower employment. Big business will go elsewhere wherever possible, while smaller businesses will be suffocated by the total lack of faith in enterprise and Corp Tax increases.

Thankfully the idiot will never be in power to enact it.

I happen to agree with much of the first point. It seems a manifesto to strengthen up the support for a follower of his after the election. That being said, it's not as radical as it might have been (see slippage on private schools, green targets and use of nuclear energy).

However I am a bit confused by the 2nd part mate. If the country would fall apart due to "incalculable" damage due to tax increases outlined why didn't the country fall apart before when we had those tax rates? After the war the tax rates were upwards of 90% and we enjoyed the greatest boom in capitalism's history. Why are other country's with comparable tax rates not falling apart?

I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm open to persuasion on Corbyn's manifesto, but nobody seems to be able to answer those questions.

What would happen if Labour were to win, would be we would all still be going to work every day, all receiving a pay packet etc. Public services would likely be improved due to more money being available, and the wealthiest in society would see a small share of their wealth decrease.

I can understand why people might either support or oppose it. I can fully understand why the wealthiest may be a bit frustrated by it, and that they are heavily congregated in sections of society such as the media, politicians, newspapers owners/editors etc so can provide a certain picture of armageddon. However either the benefits or drawbacks of anyone's political plans are rarely as extreme as people make out.

 

[catcherintherye]

Saw QT last night and was left absolutely gobsmacked at Labour getting the blame for austerity and the Labour guy just sat there and nodded, the same happened with Corbyn at the leaders debate.

It's like Lehman Bros never went bust, there was NO sub-prime mortgage scandal, none of what happened in Trump land affected us over here and we never actually handed over 137 billion to the banks...........moooove along now, nothing to see here, nothing to do with banking at all.

If Labour are not willing to defend this point I am starting to think they don't deserve to be in power.

It's nuts and really unsettling. Forget Labour, if they want to accept blame thats on them. However the idea that teachers, doctors, social workers, nurses, soldiers, police officers, fire officers, ambulance drivers etc caused the economic crash is insulting in the extreme. That is the real logic behind their claim as well. Ordinary people are to blame, so they must take the hits.

Meanwhile Boris Johnson brags at a leadership event in 2019 that he's the most "pro banker Conservative MP there's every been".

They are openly proud of not holding those who caused the damage to account and forcing the pain onto ordinary people. It's not that he regrets it having to be done in the least, it's one of his greatest achievements.

 

[Thomasc]

Saw QT last night and was left absolutely gobsmacked at Labour getting the blame for austerity and the Labour guy just sat there and nodded, the same happened with Corbyn at the leaders debate.

It's like Lehman Bros never went bust, there was NO sub-prime mortgage scandal, none of what happened in Trump land affected us over here and we never actually handed over 137 billion to the banks...........moooove along now, nothing to see here, nothing to do with banking at all.

If Labour are not willing to defend this point I am starting to think they don't deserve to be in power.

I had to turn it off, couldn’t be arsed at that point.

 

[OnlyBlueWillDo]

Saw QT last night and was left absolutely gobsmacked at Labour getting the blame for austerity and the Labour guy just sat there and nodded, the same happened with Corbyn at the leaders debate.

It's like Lehman Bros never went bust, there was NO sub-prime mortgage scandal, none of what happened in Trump land affected us over here and we never actually handed over 137 billion to the banks...........moooove along now, nothing to see here, nothing to do with banking at all.

If Labour are not willing to defend this point I am starting to think they don't deserve to be in power.

It's the biggest lie that was ever peddled by the Tories against Labour and it brainwashed the public, Labour did nothing to ram home the facts whenever they were accused of crashing the economy, I saw Labour MP after MP just let the Tories pin it on them.

They brought a revolutionary manifesto to the table yesterday that would transform working people's lives, and countless times I've heard several Joe Public's say on TV they don't trust it because Labour crashed the economy, the Tories told me so.

 

[abelard]

That's not the deal on the table though, is it? There are undoubtedly arguments about short-termism and so on from our electoral system, and I can get on board with that, but the reality is that people are going to the polls on the basis that the winning party will be the government for a maximum of five years, before people are asked again. By all means outline a longer-term vision, but surely a manifesto should be things you believe are doable in the five year term people are giving you? Otherwise what's the point of it?

This is a fair point, but sadly, in today's media environment, the manifesto is just about the only thing that makes the headlines, and virtually the only time the media stops talking about Czech conspiracy plots, or appropriate posture, or the pronunciation of 'Epstein' long enough to cover actual policy ideas.

In an age of widespread cynicism and disengagement - another 'Third Way' gift that keeps on giving - boldness is the only way to get most people to take notice, and to signal that your party is different, and serious. Marginal tweaks to boutique tax credits do not resonate with people on overlapping zero-hours contract jobs trying to raise children. It is unfortunate that that's the world we live in now, but that ship has long since sailed - and not on the left's watch.

Labour's manifesto is a gamble, to be sure, but it is a calculated one, whereas the failure of more timid and insipid centrism is certain. If Labour loses again, it will likewise be due more than anything else to Brexit - Leavers are united, Remains aren't. But, the notion that once again handing everything back over to the geniuses who came up with this will produce better results is far more delusional and utopian than anything the Labour left has come up with.

And (in the manner of Thatcher hailing Blair), Labour is winning the war even if it loses the battle (not that that's an acceptable outcome, mind). The Liberal Democrats have promised to both tax and spend more than Labour did in 2017, and there is not a Kopite's-odds-of-modesty in Javid's budget coming into being without Corbyn having put the almighty fear of god into them.

The difference is that precisely because of messaging which upsets centrist sensibilities, target voters - whatever they think of Corbyn - all actually believe that he will sincerely try to deliver, whereas the other two have no credibility whatsoever, now that chickens of taking 'left behind' voters for granted have come home to rest.

 

[abelard]

Why would we have higher levels than Scandinavia when these countries are held as the Gold standard when it comes to taxation?

The wanton slash tax n' privatise model has been a disaster in Sweden, just as it has everywhere else: https://www.iffs.se/media/22171/2017_1.pdf

And the enormous collective wealth fund from nationalising natural resources that allows Norway to get away with it is exactly along the lines of what Labour is proposing.

 

[peteblue]

All Labour's manifesto says to me is that they've gave up trying to win and Corbyn has chose to go out on an ideological high when he loses.

The harm that plan would do if ever given the chance to be put into effect is incalculable. It assumes it can milk the economy and it will remain the same as they do. It wouldn't. There'd be an exodus from Britain, massive price rises, lower wages, lower employment. Big business will go elsewhere wherever possible, while smaller businesses will be suffocated by the total lack of faith in enterprise and Corp Tax increases.

Thankfully the idiot will never be in power to enact it.

this really.....

 

[Bruce Wayne]

This is a fair point, but sadly, in today's media environment, the manifesto is just about the only thing that makes the headlines, and virtually the only time the media stops talking about Czech conspiracy plots, or appropriate posture, or the pronunciation of 'Epstein' long enough to cover actual policy ideas.

In an age of widespread cynicism and disengagement - another 'Third Way' gift that keeps on giving - boldness is the only way to get most people to take notice, and to signal that your party is different, and serious. Marginal tweaks to boutique tax credits do not resonate with people on overlapping zero-hours contract jobs trying to raise children. It is unfortunate that that's the world we live in now, but that ship has long since sailed - and not on the left's watch.

Labour's manifesto is a gamble, to be sure, but it is a calculated one, whereas the failure of more timid and insipid centrism is certain. If Labour loses again, it will likewise be due more than anything else to Brexit - Leavers are united, Remains aren't. But, the notion that once again handing everything back over to the geniuses who came up with this will produce better results is far more delusional and utopian than anything the Labour left has come up with.

And (in the manner of Thatcher hailing Blair), Labour is winning the war even if it loses the battle (not that that's an acceptable outcome, mind). The Liberal Democrats have promised to both tax and spend more than Labour did in 2017, and there is not a Kopite's-odds-of-modesty in Javid's budget coming into being without Corbyn having put the almighty fear of god into them.

The difference is that precisely because of messaging which upsets centrist sensibilities, target voters - whatever they think of Corbyn - all actually believe that he will sincerely try to deliver, whereas the other two have no credibility whatsoever, now that chickens of taking 'left behind' voters for granted have come home to rest.

Trust in politicians is incredibly low, and that's something that has a long back story for sure. I'm just not sure more fantasy is going to resolve that, even though I fully accept that it's probably required to cut through the garbage.

It's become self perpetuating, as people don't like politicians lying, but only listen to them when they spin fantastical yarns.

What a state.

 

[abelard]

Trust in politicians is incredibly low, and that's something that has a long back story for sure. I'm just not sure more fantasy is going to resolve that, even though I fully accept that it's probably required to cut through the garbage.

It's become self perpetuating, as people don't like politicians lying, but only listen to them when they spin fantastical yarns.

What a state.

Public trust: easy to squander, impossible to restore.

Shame we didn't cash it in on something more edifying than Iraq and austerity though.

Oh well, there is always losing to Norwich to console us.

 

[catcherintherye]

Trust in politicians is incredibly low, and that's something that has a long back story for sure. I'm just not sure more fantasy is going to resolve that, even though I fully accept that it's probably required to cut through the garbage.

It's become self perpetuating, as people don't like politicians lying, but only listen to them when they spin fantastical yarns.

What a state.

Yes good points. There is a 3rd category in this which is the media.

While I can accept that Corbyn hasn't followed the jingoist international policy, or wants to redistribute from people who aren't happy about it, or at times is a bit standoffish as a leader in trying to tackle difficulties one thing he is not is a liar.

Boris Johnson is a liar. He continually lies. The Conservatives have not reduced their election approaches to trying to cheat electoral law in much the same way the Leave Campaign did.

Yet the condemnation is minuscule on this, compared to what Corbyn gets. The other day he got criticised for his pronunciation of Epstein, yet Johnson stated the Royal family (and Pricne Andrew who the question was aimed at) is beyond rebuke and I have heard no criticism on it.

I've come to accept the inherent bias of the media. Thats sort of the problem though. That we've all become to conditioned to their bias, and that there's hardly any criticism at what is arguably fraudulent conduct outside of electoral law.

Yet it will often be the same media people who will come on board saying how politics is in the toilet. Are they really surprised?