Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov on Labour’s recent policy announcements
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov on Labour’s recent policy announcements
Few think the "mansion tax" policy is a vote-winner for Labour: our latest @TimesRedBox poll – http://t.co/0zHmHOf3qc pic.twitter.com/wZhWQiJJTj
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Lab 34.0% (-1.6)
Con 32.8% (+0.1)
UKIP 14.7% (+0.3)
LD 7.6% (+0.2)
Lab lead 1.2% (-1.7)
Note the Lab drop of 1.6% is only partly explained by the increases in the other main parties (Con barely up, in fact).
Even if they think the tax will not apply to them they are not that keen also (a lesson for some on the left who do envy politics)
For most people this argument fails because it is completely one-eyed. Cameron will be replaced, if he is, by Labour. Most people would agree, I think, that Cameron is more Conservative than Labour. Most would also agree, I think, that Miliband has moved his party much further to the left than has Cameron, although it is only the latter's supposed shift that enrages kippers.
Only a certain and unusual type of voter takes the view that if, because of me, I get Miliband instead of Cameron, that must be Cameron's fault. It's not; it's your fault for failing to take on board the above and letting it happen. You can't say you weren't warned.
Frankly your response is bollocks.
I as a voter do not want to vote for someone because they are slightly less big state than labour. I want to vote for someone who is small state. Cameron is not for a small state merely for a less big state. If I was looking for a small pet would you wouldn't think me mad for rejecting an elephant even though it was smaller than a mammoth you would think it quite sane when I said no thanks to both and went away petless
in the same vein
I as a voter do not want to vote for someone because they will infringe on my civil liberties and free speech slightly less than labour I want to vote for a party that believes in civil liberties and actually supports them.
I as a voter do not want to vote for someone who will not let the debt grow quite as fast as labour I want to vote for someone who is serious about the deficit and then going after the debt.
Do not offer me your tawdry compromises I am not interested in you being slightly better than Labour is not good enough for me nor for a million like me anymore we do not want you, we will not vote for you. Want our votes go and earn them don't whinge at us for your incapacity to do so
I should have been clearer.
When it comes to the NHS, Labour supporters do get energised by their own party on this, and other parties don't energise them in the same way.
Particularly as the question mentions reversing the coalition's changes on the NHS.
But I understand your viewpoint.
YouGov are asking the public a question on which they are entirely inexpert.
Why not just ask them what policies they themselves like?
History is very much against him. I did a thread on it once a while back, the Tories were polling above historical levels on the NHS, which still meant they were getting smashed by Labour.
This piece
http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/02/14/corporeal-on-david-cameron-and-the-nhs/
I wonder how many other people had a nasty shock when they heard the news today that, instead of checking people for ebola when they arrive in the UK, we're apparently relying on the origin country to check for the virus.
Scottish budget today has proposed a new 12% stamp duty rate on houses above £1M north of the border from April.
Punative - but easier to calculate and collect than Labour's mansion tax.
To be honest, I've never supported the Mansion Tax even though Vince Cable and many in the LDs thought it a good idea. It's a weak and lazy solution to a much bigger problem.
There is an urgent need to review the Council Tax bands in the light of property price movements since 1993 - I don't mind if that means adding two or three extra bands at the higher end if need be and extending the range of the current bands. There may even be an argument for regionalising the bands to take account of cost variations across the country but all that can be cone if there's the will to do so.
The problem is that while many in low-cost housing stand to gain through a downward movement in their banding, the wealthy (and £350k for a house isn't that much in many parts of southern England) would almost certainly lose out if new bands were created.
As always, any taxational challenge to the wealthy will be fiercely opposed by said wealthy but that doesn't make it the wrong thing to do.
When it comes to the NHS, Labour supporters do get energised by their own party on this, and other parties don't energise them in the same way.
Particularly as the question mentions reversing the coalition's changes on the NHS.
But I understand your viewpoint.Oh, I think I get it now. So you're saying that their fervour on the NHS is such that it's something Cameron can never connect to?
And a sign of that fervour is the contrast between the number of Labour voters who think the NHS policies will be a vote-winner, compared to the electorate as a whole - which is less impressed.
Whereas it is notable that current Labour voters are not more likely to think that the mansion tax is a vote winner - even though they are probably more likely to be in favour of it personally.
Of it's a defensive play: to prevent any Con voters for whom the NHS is particularly important from defecting.
Wrong, it will be fiercely opposed by the middle classes.
Because the middle classes know that fancy left wing plans to target 'the rich' never succeed in their aim.
The middle classes always end up paying. Income tax, stamp duty, you name it. The middle class is footing the bill.
This is why any more schemes to target 'the rich' are viewed with massive skepticism, as the above graphic illustrates only too well.
And a sign of that fervour is the contrast between the number of Labour voters who think the NHS policies will be a vote-winner, compared to the electorate as a whole - which is less impressed.
Whereas it is notable that current Labour voters are not more likely to think that the mansion tax is a vote winner - even though they are probably more likely to be in favour of it personally.
You've put it more elegantly than I ever could.
Each parties supporters all have their favourite topics. For Labour supporters it is the NHS.
As many on here prove day after day...
It used to be. Now we can mention the NHS in Wales, at which point the said labour supporter makes a face like a slapped ar$e.
Con 32 (31), Lab 34 (36), LD 8 (8)
As a consequence, it is showing Labour now winning 331 seats, down 23 seats compared with last week, with a majority therefore of 12 seats compared with 58 seats previously.
Doubtless this updated averaging of the polls will form the basis of Stephen Fisher's latest GE Seats projection, due to be published tomorrow morning.
From that lousy question we can't tell whether they are popular or not!
Lab 34%
Con 32%
UKIP 15%
LD 8%
Green 5%
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/uk-polling-report-average-2
Edit: just seen that peter_from_putney posted this a few comments below.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/john-kampfner-is-any-party-brave-enough-to-tackle-the-superrich-9782174.html
When will it come fully into effect?
Imagine how bad things could have been in an independent Scotland though - good job they saw sense.
Even if the ground fought over is his favourite topic.
That's before leadership ratings are taken into account, of course. Still plenty of time for black swans, but it almost feels like the real fight now is between the Tories and UKIP.
What a rubbish, lazy article.
The kampfner approach is being tried in France, with predictable results for its economy.
Indeed, its going so well they are now ditching it.
Example: LBTT is charged at the appropriate rate on the amount of the chargeable consideration within each band. Therefore, LBTT on a house bought for £275,000 is charged at:
0% for the first £135,000, then
2% for the next £115,000 and
10% for the remaining £25,000
So £4,800 must be paid in LBTT.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Government/Finance/scottishapproach/lbtt/lbtttaxcalculators
Its good that Scotland is trying out different approaches - the ones that work can be tried in the rest of the UK.
(A YES would have seen a pretty much bankrupt Scotland in short order because of currency issue - SNP insanity would have been mere icing on that cake).
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Government/Finance/scottishapproach/lbtt/lbtttaxcalculators
Still seems high. I'd have thought 5% on 250-500k and then 7% above that would be more fair.
Under stamp duty the tax would be £7860
Under the new rates it's £3500
It's tiered progressive system not a "whole value" system like stamp duty.
It may sound harsh to say this, but the coalition have a bit of a rat trap going in Kobane, with the brave, noble kurds as the bait.
Very communist.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0045/00450762-910.jpg
Each parties supporters all have their favourite topics. For Labour supporters it is the NHS.
Would Labour's supportes favour the NHS if they were paying £1400 per person in compulsory insurance (by employees and employers) as in France? Wheras we spend £970. And that through taxation and of course borrowing - which labour look on as free money.
In other words the French spend half as much again. Stand up the people who want to spend that. Lets remember that the 'per person' included lots of non workers so the cost to you would be more, and there are lots of employers who would think twice about taking on a new worker when faced with the added insurance overheads.
Labour supporters want something for nothing and are happy in their prejudice.
The breakeven point is a fraction north of £320000.
The only way you can do it without too many losers is if you brought in some measure to cut council tax at the same time.
http://tompride.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/child-abuse-cover-up-witness-statements-sent-by-unregistered-post-and-opened/
Incidentally the brilliant, charming consultant was Eastern European.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/3-30092014-BP/EN/3-30092014-BP-EN.PDF
I just can't understand it - in this age of computers, surely it's simplicity itself to update their polling average on a daily basis.
The Scottish CiviI Service has been working very hard to win the Independence Neverendum.
The Sovereign WiII of the Scottish PeopIe has been expressed but they got it wrong so the SNP isn't going to be bound by its promise to Iisten.
It's a pity [though understandable] that, having decided to reform the system, the Scottish Government have decided to maintain the penalisation of mobility that Stamp Duty represents.
From a Labour copying point of view it wouldn't raise much as transactions are small - back to the drawing board.
I much prefer the marginal rate approach though.
£250k property in Scotland = £2,300 tax
£500k property in England = £15,000 tax
£500k property in Scotland = £27,300 tax
£2 million property in England = £100,000 tax
£2 million property in Scotland = £197,300 tax
Value - Tax
£124,999 £0
£125,000 £1250
£250,000 £2500
£250,001 £7500.03
Is that correct ?
Genuine question.
Good for you, I sincerely hope you're feeling better.
Perhaps labour should pitch to run the health service of the people of England based on its record in Wales, then.
The exact figures for the marginal rates are open to debate - moving to a marginal system just seems like a no brainer though.
>Socrates
>Allegations of the authorities covering up child abuse in Jersey:
>http://tompride.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/child-abuse-cover-up-witness-statements-sent-by-unregistered-post-and-opened/
ConspiraIoons R Us. Do they reaIIy think that a reaI spy wouIdn't pack it back up?
In a poll out yesterday 58% want flights stopped to and from West Africa.
For interest, Stamp Duty rates in 1997:
Up to £60,000 - 0%
Over £60,000 - 1%
http://www.stampdutyrates.co.uk/historic-rates.html
Note the subsequent raising of rates combined with the non-raising of thresholds (apart from the lowest one).
If you lived slap bang along the line of the Scottish/English border, there is certainly a tax incentive to buy in Scotland at £251,000 rather than England at the same price. Meanwhile, if you're relatively loaded, the tax incentive is to buy in England.
I sold a fairly standard 4 bedroom 3 bath home in rural North Yorkshire - next to a farm - for 390,000 pounds 9 years ago.
Has the market crashed since that badly?
4:48PM
TheScreamingEagles said:
» show previous quotes
Indeed. No one has ever been given the title Malleus Londinium either
You can't hammer a sponge!