General Election 2019 thread (47 Viewers)

[Otis]

Was one his bumbling contradiction of his own policies while visiting Northern Ireland? Even by Boris’ standards it was especially non coherent, bumbling, rambling.

Yup, that's the one.

 

---

[stupot07]

My household has lost more than £20 per month in tax credits in recent times and our combined household income wouldn’t put us in the £80k tax bracket. People earning over £80k a year will have to do what people earning under £80K a year have to do when government policies take money of them. Suck it up. Snowflakes.

The child benefit system changes is a joke. You can have just one working parent earning £50k pa, a single wage in the household and your child benefit stopped. Yet, you can have both parents earning £49k pa each a combined income of £98k they would keep their child benefits.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[stupot07]

It’s already starting to smell like the 2017 Conservative campaign. Attack Labour’s plans while not being able to explain their own. Both Sajid Javid and Kwasi Kwarteng have been on TV this morning banging on about how they’ve done their sums on Labour’s manifesto (worth pointing out that it’s not published yet) and it doesn’t add up yet neither could confirm the costs of their own manifesto because they haven’t put the work into adding it up. Just waiting for someone to say magic money tree now.

Come on they just dont want to bandy about figures...



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[djr8369]

Come on they just dont want to bandy about figures...



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

What’s a few hundred billion amongst friends anyway?

How on Earth labour haven’t become more adept at defending themselves on spending is beyond me. All they need to do is keep pointing out the hypocrisy.

*before anyone has a meltdown I’m not implicitly defending every labour policy just think they get a rough ride from the media compared to the tories.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[M&B Stand]

The child benefit system changes is a joke. You can have just one working parent earning £50k pa, a single wage in the household and your child benefit stopped. Yet, you can have both parents earning £49k pa each a combined income of £98k they would keep their child benefits.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

mad isn’t it?

the system has loads of inequality, a working class fella on a council estate could save into a pension and then get to retirement and have to still pay rent and council tax because he’s got a small monthly income, whereas the geezer next door who chose not to pay into a pension and pissed his all up the wall, gets free council tax and a rent rebate above the value of his neighbours pension.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

The child benefit system changes is a joke. You can have just one working parent earning £50k pa, a single wage in the household and your child benefit stopped. Yet, you can have both parents earning £49k pa each a combined income of £98k they would keep their child benefits.

It's because we all know that the only way children should be brought up is by a daddy and mummy at home. They never look at the many different circumstances and things that could happen that stop that being the case and just say single parents are assumed to be irresponsible even though many of them are absolutely stoic troopers who put up with more pressures than middle class mums living off hubby could ever imagine and would crumble under the strain.

 

[Grendel]

It's because we all know that the only way children should be brought up is by a daddy and mummy at home. They never look at the many different circumstances and things that could happen that stop that being the case and just say single parents are assumed to be irresponsible even though many of them are absolutely stoic troopers who put up with more pressures than middle class mums living off hubby could ever imagine and would crumble under the strain.

Well no it was done that way as it’s the only way the revenue said they’d be able to administer it. Anyone earning £50,000 should not get a free handout anyway - the whole system is bizarre and should be scrapped

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Well no it was done that way as it’s the only way the revenue said they’d be able to administer it. Anyone earning £50,000 should not get a free handout anyway - the whole system is bizarre and should be scrapped

Why would that be the only way they could administer it? They could choose to administer it other ways if they wanted to. They didn't want to because it wouldn't fit into their ideology of what a family should be.

I agree those over 50k shouldn't be getting handouts but two parents earning a combined £98k shouldn't either. The system, as ever, needs a rethink, but it doesn't need scrapping altogether. It helps a lot of children in low-income families and it is supposed to be about the kids.

 

[Astute]

???

Have fun going around in circles and making up straw man arguments. I'll go outside.

So you are still not going to make a comment about when I caught you out but you continue to make more stories up. Says it all to me.

 

[Astute]

The child benefit system changes is a joke. You can have just one working parent earning £50k pa, a single wage in the household and your child benefit stopped. Yet, you can have both parents earning £49k pa each a combined income of £98k they would keep their child benefits.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Bit if the woman isn't working while bringing up kids and her husband earns over 60k....which is the point where no benefit is paid.....she still has to claim child benefit to become entitled to her old age pension. The Tories recently put the amount of years up. Then she has to say she doesn't want the money or pay it back at the end of the year.

The more money earned over the 50k base the less benefit paid up to the 60k. Can't remember exactly how much is lost to each extra grand earned though.

 

[skybluetony176]

Anyone earning £50,000 should not get a free handout anyway

Including a tax cut?

 

[olderskyblue]

TBF I used the number Eastwoods Dustbin used in the original conversation. I appreciate that you could use a number that contradicts it hence I said I understand where you’re coming from but the reality is to lose enough profit from the difference to negate employing someone full time on the higher rate of minimum wage you’re talking of a profit over £150k. I also believe that labour in line with their last manifesto will have a lower rate for smaller businesses anyway.

Not to criticise, but just to add to this discussion. Your calcs are not necessarily correct. if you have had a decent years profits, taken a reasonable dividend, you consider what remains and how to re-invest it back into the business. If you anticipate an increase in profits monthly, then you can plan to hire someone working those next year monthly profits into the equation. If it works well, the gamble pays off, if not, then you may not have a dividend at the end of that year at all, but maybe it pays off the following year.

Point being, The Profit remaining is only part of the equation, and an increase in CT may affect whether you take that gamble or not. Not that everyone works that way of course, but lots do. You gamble on the future of the business longer term, based on your business plan and projected profits. Hopefully, it pays off.....

Lower rate for small business is an old idea, also, the rate dropped a few years ago to 19% for all business', and the current government has announced it will fall to 17% in 20/21 tax year for small business'. Is Labour promising an even lower rate?

 

[Philosoraptor]

This whole Twitter thread is glorious and just about sums up week 2 of the election.

 

[Ian1779]

Ah yes food banks. Ah yes zero hour contracts.

I wonder why you never attack the strongest economy in Europe by far for their use of food banks. And you won't have a go at Labour for employing people on zero hour contracts.

Germany’s hidden hunger: On the breadline in Europe’s richest country

Firstly this comment is about the UK... I’ll be honest I was not aware about the usage of food banks in other countries - I’m interested in why this exists in the 5/6th richest country in the world in the 21st Century.

Secondly - my issue with zero hours contracts is the notion that a) counting these as gainful employment and removing people from the jobless total is a nonsense b) the assumption that because of the increasing ‘working’ population that tax revenue is increasing. Have Labour been in government for the last 9 years where this reporting has become commonplace?

 

[Grendel]

Firstly this comment is about the UK... I’ll be honest I was not aware about the usage of food banks in other countries - I’m interested in why this exists in the 5/6th richest country in the world in the 21st Century.

Secondly - my issue with zero hours contracts is the notion that a) counting these as gainful employment and removing people from the jobless total is a nonsense b) the assumption that because of the increasing ‘working’ population that tax revenue is increasing. Have Labour been in government for the last 9 years where this reporting has become commonplace?

It’s claimed Food bank useage is much higher in France and Germany. As labour pledge to remove this in the uk would you like to explain how when wonderful social democratic EU countries have failed?

 

[fernandopartridge]

It’s claimed Food bank useage is much higher in France and Germany. As labour pledge to remove this in the uk would you like to explain how when wonderful social democratic EU countries have failed?

France and Germany both have right wing or centrist at best political parties in government

 

[Grendel]

France and Germany both have right wing or centrist at best political parties in government

Which seems to be working well especially for Germany?

 

[fernandopartridge]

Which seems to be working well especially for Germany?

I thought you just said that food bank usage was higher there?

 

[Grendel]

I thought you just said that food bank usage was higher there?

im talking about the general economy. Corbyn and co say they want to stop what they portray as a unique British disease. The most successful economic powerhouse in Europe it seems has a worse issue - which suggests to me a rather fringe socialist government in the UK will do nothing to resolve it

 

[Ian1779]

im talking about the general economy. Corbyn and co say they want to stop what they portray as a unique British disease. The most successful economic powerhouse in Europe it seems has a worse issue - which suggests to me a rather fringe socialist government in the UK will do nothing to resolve it

Whether it is a uniquely British disease or not... it is shameful in the 21st Century.

 

[Grendel]

Whether it is a uniquely British disease or not... it is shameful in the 21st Century.

i suggests you get out a bit more - poverty in the uk is a land of luxury to many places I’ve travelled

 

[Ian1779]

i suggests you get out a bit more - poverty in the uk is a land of luxury to many places I’ve travelled

I don’t disagree... doesn’t stop it being shameful.

 

[Philosoraptor]

I know this a General Election thread but I am amazed for the last few years no one has mentioned the connection between zero hour contracts and our very own current Mayor of the West Midlands Combined Alliance - Andy Street.

Whoever finds the link gets ten points.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

im talking about the general economy. Corbyn and co say they want to stop what they portray as a unique British disease. The most successful economic powerhouse in Europe it seems has a worse issue - which suggests to me a rather fringe socialist government in the UK will do nothing to resolve it

So you're point is that in general the German economy is doing well under a right wing govt but they have larger poverty because food bank usage than here amongst other things. Surely this shows how a Conservative model would likely look to work in this country, but we'd be on our own. According to you Germany has another 26 nations help it along.

I don't believe you to be a heartless individual but it's basically suggesting that you want the businesses and rich to do well on the pretence that it will be good for all due to job creation etc, when this shows that isn't going to be the case. Why do you want that here? Maybe you need to question the validity of the model a bit more?

 

[Astute]

Firstly this comment is about the UK... I’ll be honest I was not aware about the usage of food banks in other countries - I’m interested in why this exists in the 5/6th richest country in the world in the 21st Century.

Secondly - my issue with zero hours contracts is the notion that a) counting these as gainful employment and removing people from the jobless total is a nonsense b) the assumption that because of the increasing ‘working’ population that tax revenue is increasing. Have Labour been in government for the last 9 years where this reporting has become commonplace?

So you question why it happens in the UK because we are seen as a rich nation but what about Germany? A very rich country. They don't need to borrow to invest. They have the money sitting there. They haven't had a population boom like us. Their population has stayed steady. So their population has somewhere to live. Yes their infrastructure needs updating in places but at least it is there.

This isn't an excuse. I don't need excuses as I want to pull everyone up for what they have done or said. What is going on in Europe? Foodbanks have become a way of life. Food prices are kept artificially high because about half the EU budget is spent giving rich people money not to grow anything. This in turn makes meat more expensive as it costs more to feed the livestock.

Are those on zero hour contracts working? Should they be counted as not working?

 

[Astute]

So you're point is that in general the German economy is doing well under a right wing govt but they have larger poverty because food bank usage than here amongst other things. Surely this shows how a Conservative model would likely look to work in this country, but we'd be on our own. According to you Germany has another 26 nations help it along.

I don't believe you to be a heartless individual but it's basically suggesting that you want the businesses and rich to do well on the pretence that it will be good for all due to job creation etc, when this shows that isn't going to be the case. Why do you want that here? Maybe you need to question the validity of the model a bit more?

Sounds like you are trying to prove a point.

Left wing. Right wing. No wings. Who cares? It is what a government does that matters. Having a government that borrows too much is bad for the future. This money has to be paid back. When paying it back there is less money to spend. So more is borrowed. Austerity happens. Look at the austerity around Europe. These countries owe too much. Credit ratings go down. It costs more to borrow. Even more is needed to pay back what is owed.

What we need is a party that treats everyone fairly. The Tories do austerity. It pays back what Labour spend. Labour spends to make up for the austerity of the Tory years. The Tories do austerity. It pays back what Labour spends. Labour spends to make up for the austerity of the Tory years...........

 

[shmmeee]

is that the time when we had a massively government subsidised car industry? That went well when people realised it couldn’t last forever.

Says the man asking the government to subsidise his business or he won’t hire people

 

[shmmeee]

Sounds like you are trying to prove a point.

Left wing. Right wing. No wings. Who cares? It is what a government does that matters. Having a government that borrows too much is bad for the future. This money has to be paid back. When paying it back there is less money to spend. So more is borrowed. Austerity happens. Look at the austerity around Europe. These countries owe too much. Credit ratings go down. It costs more to borrow. Even more is needed to pay back what is owed.

What we need is a party that treats everyone fairly. The Tories do austerity. It pays back what Labour spend. Labour spends to make up for the austerity of the Tory years. The Tories do austerity. It pays back what Labour spends. Labour spends to make up for the austerity of the Tory years...........

That’s simply not true. There’s an optimal debt and deficit level and it’s not zero. Macroeconomics is not personal economics. The world could end with us in debt and that’s fine. We don’t pass it on to U.K. Jr.

What matters is growth outstripping interest so the size of debt compared to GDP falls. You cut back government intervention when the private market can pick up the slack. Not when it’s sluggish or you kill growth.

 

[Astute]

That’s simply not true. There’s an optimal debt and deficit level and it’s not zero. Macroeconomics is not personal economics. The world could end with us in debt and that’s fine. We don’t pass it on to U.K. Jr.

What matters is growth outstripping interest so the size of debt compared to GDP falls. You cut back government intervention when the private market can pick up the slack. Not when it’s sluggish or you kill growth.

So who pays the debt that we run up? Yes the next generations.

We have growth. We are not in recession....at the moment. Money needs to be spent in the right way. Putting future generations hundreds of billions in debt isn't a wise idea. You mentioned debt to GDP. So how good would it be if we took it to the max then have a recession?

 

[eastwoodsdustman]

Says the man asking the government to subsidise his business or he won’t hire people

Not biting. You're clearly admitting defeat.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

Both parties are making a right cock up of things... still predict a comfortable Conservative majority though

 

[Astute]

Both parties are making a right cock up of things... still predict a comfortable Conservative majority though

It is going to be a strange one. It could end up being the one who gets voted in is the leader who worries us the least. And now the tactical voting talks are underway.

I now wouldn't even want to bet your money on the result.

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

It is going to be a strange one. It could end up being the one who gets voted in is the leader who worries us the least. And now the tactical voting talks are underway.

I now wouldn't even want to bet your money on the result.

Brexit party conference is massive today..... IF Farage comes out and says he won't run against the conservatives then labour will be worried

I hope Brexit party and the conservatives can make a pact quickly

 

[SkyBlueDom26]

Apparently there have been talks about a pact between the brexit party and conservatives

 

[Astute]

Apparently there have been talks about a pact between the brexit party and conservatives

And the remain parties in Wales. The Greens will keep their seat.