Tory Monopoly (4 Viewers)

Forums New posts
dutchman

dutchman

Well-Known Member
martcov said:
Is that true? Corbyn is 70's and 80's labour and we all had enough of that. If your genuine Labour candidates are the same "old school" people, then Labour has really had it.
Click to expand...

And "New Labour" did so well did it, losing the last two general elections and condemning millions to a life of unending poverty and misery under the Tories.
 
mrtrench

mrtrench

Well-Known Member
dutchman said:
And "New Labour" did so well did it, losing the last two general elections and condemning millions to a life of unending poverty and misery under the Tories.
Click to expand...

New Labour were electable under Blair and the right Miliband. They did so much right under their first term and it all went wrong when Brown started over-spending: creating a deficit and then building it up year after year until the shit hit the fan.

Ed Miliband wasn't New Labour; he was a Chief Weasel in New Labour's clothing and had a defeat coming to him. Corbyn's not a weasel - he's genuine but unfortunately also a nutter with no understanding of economics and would lead the country like the Pied Piper into extreme poverty.
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
mrtrench said:
New Labour were electable under Blair and the right Miliband. They did so much right under their first term and it all went wrong when Brown started over-spending: creating a deficit and then building it up year after year until the shit hit the fan.

Ed Miliband wasn't New Labour; he was a Chief Weasel in New Labour's clothing and had a defeat coming to him. Corbyn's not a weasel - he's genuine but unfortunately also a nutter with no understanding of economics and would lead the country like the Pied Piper into extreme poverty.
Click to expand...

New Labour has left me with perpetual SNP government and representation and the prospect of another fecking referendum.
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
The lower income earners in the country generally have more disposable income under a Tory government as the Tory philosophy is to lower the tax burden.
Click to expand...

Cuts to tax credits outstrip increase in the tax-free threshold and minimum wage try again.
 
dutchman

dutchman

Well-Known Member
Terry Gibson's perm

Terry Gibson's perm

Well-Known Member
All we need is the denial from the pig now and then somebody to say they have saved the pigs head and it is going to be the main star on the next celebrity big brother.
 
mrtrench

mrtrench

Well-Known Member
Ian1779 said:
I understand it plainly. I just don't believe the Tory proganda.
Click to expand...

You are right to ignore propaganda from all sides - the glib statements and soundbites at best paper over the cracks and at worst are no more than myth. Instead look at what the parties are actually doing. Every government needs to collect tax, however the Tories usually cut income tax (for everyone - not just the rich as Labour would have you believe) and corporation tax and reduce spending. In my opinion this is the best approach: it makes working more attractive and as a result unemployment goes down, welfare costs reduce and it creates a virtuous circle. I accept the point re VAT however the last rise was inevitable due to the appalling debt situation inherited from Brown and Balls and I believe that once we have the finances healthy again it will be reduced. I'd also like to point out that VAT is to some degree a voluntary tax as food and essentials are VAT-free. Hence it taxes people with disposable income who know at the point of purchase that they can afford it. Wealthier people spend more on consumables and so they pay more.

If you look at what Corbyn is proposing as a tax regime it is crazy (gathering evaded tax an exception - of course we should do that). I've seen a video of him saying that 70% tax 'may not be enough'. This would result in wide scale emigration and tax revenue would decrease. No, I wouldn't be in the 70% tax bracket - I believe it is wrong because it would be bad fro the country, not me. I also really like the Tories plans to reduce Corporation Tax. Companies more than individuals can choose where to be registered and this will bring more incorporations to the UK resulting in higher tax revenue and more jobs. Corbyn's plans would cause a mass exodus of companies with the opposite results.

I don't like everything the Tories do: I disagree with the new dividend tax and the new tax rules on Buy to Let; I wouldn't have even considered bringing back fox hunting - but I've taken the view that the economy is more important than anything else and so they are the best choice for now.
 
mrtrench

mrtrench

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
Cuts to tax credits outstrip increase in the tax-free threshold and minimum wage try again.
Click to expand...

This is a deliberate policy to force companies to shoulder the burden of paying well for less esteemed work. Why should the state provide funding so companies can take the piss? It's not going to happen overnight but if you create the right macro-economical environment it will happen.
 
Ian1779

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
mrtrench said:
You are right to ignore propaganda from all sides - the glib statements and soundbites at best paper over the cracks and at worst are no more than myth. Instead look at what the parties are actually doing. Every government needs to collect tax, however the Tories usually cut income tax (for everyone - not just the rich as Labour would have you believe) and corporation tax and reduce spending. In my opinion this is the best approach: it makes working more attractive and as a result unemployment goes down, welfare costs reduce and it creates a virtuous circle. I accept the point re VAT however the last rise was inevitable due to the appalling debt situation inherited from Brown and Balls and I believe that once we have the finances healthy again it will be reduced. I'd also like to point out that VAT is to some degree a voluntary tax as food and essentials are VAT-free. Hence it taxes people with disposable income who know at the point of purchase that they can afford it. Wealthier people spend more on consumables and so they pay more.

If you look at what Corbyn is proposing as a tax regime it is crazy (gathering evaded tax an exception - of course we should do that). I've seen a video of him saying that 70% tax 'may not be enough'. This would result in wide scale emigration and tax revenue would decrease. No, I wouldn't be in the 70% tax bracket - I believe it is wrong because it would be bad fro the country, not me. I also really like the Tories plans to reduce Corporation Tax. Companies more than individuals can choose where to be registered and this will bring more incorporations to the UK resulting in higher tax revenue and more jobs. Corbyn's plans would cause a mass exodus of companies with the opposite results.

I don't like everything the Tories do: I disagree with the new dividend tax and the new tax rules on Buy to Let; I wouldn't have even considered bringing back fox hunting - but I've taken the view that the economy is more important than anything else and so they are the best choice for now.
Click to expand...

I take issue with the fact that tax avoidance/evasion is so easily overlooked by this government. As it probably no doubt was when Labour was in power and even the Tories before that. Dealing with this for me is paramount and supersedes everything else. If this is properly addressed then everything else probably no longer becomes necessary.

People are disillusioned by politicians, the government and the media as they are essentially told that it has to be shit for them because that's the way it's always been.

Corbyn may not ultimately have the policy and capability to any of the things he is saying. But he is at least saying something different - which people want to hear.

The way that the media have gone after him almost makes it feel like they are desperately trying to hide something... which again is why people want to hear what he has to say.
 
mrtrench

mrtrench

Well-Known Member
Ian1779 said:
I take issue with the fact that tax avoidance/evasion is so easily overlooked by this government. As it probably no doubt was when Labour was in power and even the Tories before that. Dealing with this for me is paramount and supersedes everything else. If this is properly addressed then everything else probably no longer becomes necessary.

People are disillusioned by politicians, the government and the media as they are essentially told that it has to be shit for them because that's the way it's always been.

Corbyn may not ultimately have the policy and capability to any of the things he is saying. But he is at least saying something different - which people want to hear.

The way that the media have gone after him almost makes it feel like they are desperately trying to hide something... which again is why people want to hear what he has to say.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it is overlooked. There is always more that can be done and I agree with Corbyn that we should try and get it. However nobody believes there is as much out there we can get as Corbyn claims and it's certainly not a cure all. It would all be academic if all high earners and companies left the uk as he raised tax to rediculous levels.
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
mrtrench said:
This is a deliberate policy to force companies to shoulder the burden of paying well for less esteemed work. Why should the state provide funding so companies can take the piss? It's not going to happen overnight but if you create the right macro-economical environment it will happen.
Click to expand...

What of the small businesses who are clearly less well placed to shoulder substantial increases to their wage bill? At the end of the day these measures will see people's net incomes go down rather than up and will incur greater costs to business. It doesn't 'make work pay' and it isn't business-friendly.
 
mrtrench

mrtrench

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
What of the small businesses who are clearly less well placed to shoulder substantial increases to their wage bill? At the end of the day these measures will see people's net incomes go down rather than up and will incur greater costs to business. It doesn't 'make work pay' and it isn't business-friendly.
Click to expand...

If a company cannot afford to pay staff then it cannot afford to be in business. Are you seriously suggesting that the state should support ventures that aren't viable?
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
mrtrench said:
If a company cannot afford to pay staff then it cannot afford to be in business. Are you seriously suggesting that the state should support ventures that aren't viable?
Click to expand...

No but I am saying that larger companies are naturally better placed to cover significant rises in staff costs than smaller ones. The state should be supporting its citizens and I reiterate that reducing people's net income is a contradiction of that.
 
dutchman

dutchman

Well-Known Member
ADAMS20151007_3465628k.jpg
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
No but I am saying that larger companies are naturally better placed to cover significant rises in staff costs than smaller ones. The state should be supporting its citizens and I reiterate that reducing people's net income is a contradiction of that.
Click to expand...

I'd be fully in support of reducing taxes and even giving welfare to SMEs who had trouble meeting the Living Wage.

The long and the short of it economically, is it's far better for the market for lots of people to have some cash than a few people to have lots and everyone else to be scraping by. Money spent out in wages to low earners comes back to government really quickly from taxation, as opposed to profits and other large payments which go off shore or at best into a savings account and not the economy.

Small British business needs all the support it can get, and I'd be happy to see the welfare bill transferred from tax credits to corporate welfare to help small companies make the transitions they need, including productivity investments. What I'm not happy about is Amazon paying their warehouse staff fuck all while they dodge tax, or Starbucks moving their profits off shore. My local corner shop can't do that and neither can I if I set up a new enterprise. The money those business owners make stays in our economy and becomes other people's income.
 
B

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
I'd be fully in support of reducing taxes and even giving welfare to SMEs who had trouble meeting the Living Wage.

The long and the short of it economically, is it's far better for the market for lots of people to have some cash than a few people to have lots and everyone else to be scraping by. Money spent out in wages to low earners comes back to government really quickly from taxation, as opposed to profits and other large payments which go off shore or at best into a savings account and not the economy.

Small British business needs all the support it can get, and I'd be happy to see the welfare bill transferred from tax credits to corporate welfare to help small companies make the transitions they need, including productivity investments. What I'm not happy about is Amazon paying their warehouse staff fuck all while they dodge tax, or Starbucks moving their profits off shore. My local corner shop can't do that and neither can I if I set up a new enterprise. The money those business owners make stays in our economy and becomes other people's income.
Click to expand...

Then I don't think we have much to disagree on.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Brighton Sky Blue said:
No but I am saying that larger companies are naturally better placed to cover significant rises in staff costs than smaller ones.
Click to expand...

I'm getting very annoyed at companies who make 10s if not 100s of million profit claiming they will have to put the prices up to cover the wage increase. Its absolute rubbish and the numbers don't anywhere near add up but they aren't getting challenged on it at all.
 
Houchens Head

Houchens Head

Fairly well known member from Malvern
This has got to be the most boring fucking thread I've ever come across! Pull it NOW FFS! No-one ever wins in politics!
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Houchens Head said:
This has got to be the most boring fucking thread I've ever come across! Pull it NOW FFS! No-one ever wins in politics!
Click to expand...

Don't join in then - it should be pulled as YOU find it boring? Extraordinary.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sick Boy

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
Clicking on posts on a football forum to see if they've closed doesn't sound like much of a life to me. ;)
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
mrtrench said:
I don't believe it is overlooked. There is always more that can be done and I agree with Corbyn that we should try and get it. However nobody believes there is as much out there we can get as Corbyn claims and it's certainly not a cure all. It would all be academic if all high earners and companies left the uk as he raised tax to rediculous levels.
Click to expand...

Corbyns figures are from Richard, Murphy who literally invented the measurement of the tax gap.
 
shmmeee

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
mrtrench said:
You are right to ignore propaganda from all sides - the glib statements and soundbites at best paper over the cracks and at worst are no more than myth. Instead look at what the parties are actually doing. Every government needs to collect tax, however the Tories usually cut income tax (for everyone - not just the rich as Labour would have you believe) and corporation tax and reduce spending. In my opinion this is the best approach: it makes working more attractive and as a result unemployment goes down, welfare costs reduce and it creates a virtuous circle. I accept the point re VAT however the last rise was inevitable due to the appalling debt situation inherited from Brown and Balls and I believe that once we have the finances healthy again it will be reduced. I'd also like to point out that VAT is to some degree a voluntary tax as food and essentials are VAT-free. Hence it taxes people with disposable income who know at the point of purchase that they can afford it. Wealthier people spend more on consumables and so they pay more.

If you look at what Corbyn is proposing as a tax regime it is crazy (gathering evaded tax an exception - of course we should do that). I've seen a video of him saying that 70% tax 'may not be enough'. This would result in wide scale emigration and tax revenue would decrease. No, I wouldn't be in the 70% tax bracket - I believe it is wrong because it would be bad fro the country, not me. I also really like the Tories plans to reduce Corporation Tax. Companies more than individuals can choose where to be registered and this will bring more incorporations to the UK resulting in higher tax revenue and more jobs. Corbyn's plans would cause a mass exodus of companies with the opposite results.

I don't like everything the Tories do: I disagree with the new dividend tax and the new tax rules on Buy to Let; I wouldn't have even considered bringing back fox hunting - but I've taken the view that the economy is more important than anything else and so they are the best choice for now.
Click to expand...

Man there's so much wrong in this post. First Income Tax is one of the most progressive taxes. VAT however is not hitting the poorest hardest by far and is always raised under the Tories. Taxing consumption while trying to get out of a recession is stupid and put us back into recession in 2010/11. Our growth since has been anemic and only recently has got us back to where we were with a big increase in private debt along the way.

Expect the same model this time. Though he's getting lucky with oil prices keeping inflation down. Big ideological cuts that hurt the economy, then lots of giveaways pre election and a missing of his own targets. Add in housing bubble and mass immigration to keep the growth figures up and everybody's happy.

Factually, the most successful period economically for everything from reduction of debt to wages to economic growth and raising of living standards was during the post war Keynesian consensus.

Labour have consistently run the lowest deficit in normal times as well.

Try looking a bit beyond what they say and check what they do. You'll be hard pushed to find an economist that thinks Osborne has been doing a great job.

All this aside we are facing massive costly crises in health housing and climate change that we could make big strides on with a little sensible investment when rates are low and returns on here projects high.

If you ran your budget like the Tories propose you'd never own a house and likely never go to uni.
 
J

Jack Griffin

Guest
shmmeee said:
Labour have consistently run the lowest deficit in normal times as well.

If you ran your budget like the Tories propose you'd never own a house and likely never go to uni.
Click to expand...

Some nonsense here..

1) Bollards, remember Denis Healy & the IMF, remember Brown/Darling & their screwed up bank regulation http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13032013.

2) Uni used to be for better students & fully funded, it is the mad idea that everyone goes that has resulted in massive student debts and bugger all trained apprentices. Result screw up!

3) Houses, we need to build social/council houses & keep them, not sell them off. That is why there is this huge rental market & loads of people in rent arrears or being evicted. Like back to the 30's when my Dads Family were known to have done the old moonlight flit, except of course these days you can't easily disappear to evade your unaffordable debts.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
shmmeee said:
Man there's so much wrong in this post. First Income Tax is one of the most progressive taxes. VAT however is not hitting the poorest hardest by far and is always raised under the Tories. Taxing consumption while trying to get out of a recession is stupid and put us back into recession in 2010/11. Our growth since has been anemic and only recently has got us back to where we were with a big increase in private debt along the way.

Expect the same model this time. Though he's getting lucky with oil prices keeping inflation down. Big ideological cuts that hurt the economy, then lots of giveaways pre election and a missing of his own targets. Add in housing bubble and mass immigration to keep the growth figures up and everybody's happy.

Factually, the most successful period economically for everything from reduction of debt to wages to economic growth and raising of living standards was during the post war Keynesian consensus.

Labour have consistently run the lowest deficit in normal times as well.

Try looking a bit beyond what they say and check what they do. You'll be hard pushed to find an economist that thinks Osborne has been doing a great job.

All this aside we are facing massive costly crises in health housing and climate change that we could make big strides on with a little sensible investment when rates are low and returns on here projects high.

If you ran your budget like the Tories propose you'd never own a house and likely never go to uni.
Click to expand...

You really should do stand up.

This post is comedy genius.
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
Jack Griffin said:
Uni used to be for better students & fully funded, it is the mad idea that everyone goes that has resulted in massive student debts and bugger all trained apprentices.
Click to expand...

This really annoys me. Its so pointless. Why get £30K plus of debt to do a degree that gives you zero chance of getting a job?

When I went to uni (back in 92) you went to do something relatively academic, science, engineering etc. It was bloody hard work, our lectures started at 7am and went on till 9pm some days! Numbers were lower but it was sustainable, no need to pay fees and all students were on campus in halls so no issues for local residents.

A mate of mine sent his 18 year old daughter to some agencies to get some office admin work over the summer and couldn't even get signed up without a degree. Why on earth do you need a degree for that?

Jack Griffin said:
Houses, we need to build social/council houses & keep them, not sell them off. That is why there is this huge rental market & loads of people in rent arrears or being evicted. Like back to the 30's when my Dads Family were known to have done the old moonlight flit, except of course these days you can't easily disappear to evade your unaffordable debts.
Click to expand...

Read a report recently about right to buy. 8/10 that were sold are now rented out by private landlords, often back to local councils at a huge premium. And only 1 replacement is built for every 10 sold off. Housing is a joke, the conservatives obviously find in funny the way they were laughing about it at PMQs today.

The only people who are buying places are those with money who want more buy to lets. I'm going to be moving up to Cov at some point in the not too distant future and I've been keeping an eye on properties. A lot of them sit on the market, at a reasonable price, for months. Then the price drops and they sell straight away, within days they are listed as rentals. You could easily stop it, make it hard to get buy to let mortgage and hike up tax on income from rent.
 
mrtrench

mrtrench

Well-Known Member
chiefdave said:
You could easily stop it, make it hard to get buy to let mortgage and hike up tax on income from rent.
Click to expand...

They already have. Do you think it is fair to tax people different rates on their incomes depending on how they earn it?
 
chiefdave

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
mrtrench said:
They already have. Do you think it is fair to tax people different rates on their incomes depending on how they earn it?
Click to expand...

Yes, if they are creating a problem for everyone else. Other countries have rent control, if you don't want to tax them bring in rent control. Easy to do, we already have a council tax band for each property, tie it to that. Why should rent be so much higher than a mortgage?

From what I've been looking at a property that would be £400 a month on a 90% mortgage is around £800 to rent. Why should people be able to buy up housing stock, just because they have money in the bank, and hike the price up to levels people are struggling to afford?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Top