Teaching British history and the arguments of political thinkers and writers like Locke, Hobbes, Mill, Wilkes, Paine, Burke and Orwell would do far more.
Not sure Wilkes or Paine are good examples - neither were exactly perfectly behaved and Paine in particular had a bit of a penchant for violence and terrorism. Locke, Mill (and Bentham) were both very arrogant, but neither said anything new or meaningful. Burke might be a better example - but at the same time, he was prone to angry outbursts that might not exactly encourage rational thought.
As for Enlightenment values - I teach the French Revolution and Soviet Russia. They are both based on those values and they are both damning indictments of the logical results of them. As a result the idea of teaching 'values' leaves me fairly uneasy.
What I would rather see is a commitment to uphold and promote the value of democracy and the rule of law. I'm happy to go with that because it's (a) simple to understand and (b) allows for some flexibility as the law changes.
Peasants woken you up with early their wailing again Mr W? You have only yourself to blame. Stop feeding the dogs!
The only wailing to be heard is on PB as some of the wobble bottom Conservatives pull up their skirts and run around like maiden great aunts who have gone all unnecessary at the sight of an uncovered piano leg.
The fundamentals of this campaign have not changed and let me be utterly clear. From day one of his "leadership" Labour were doomed to defeat and on 8th May all of PB will know that, no ifs no buts :
Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister
Good morning Jack!
I agree, it's worse than Chicken Little, It is headless Chicken Little on here.
What happened to the steadfast Brit with a stiff upper lip?
There are a fair few PB Tory posters on here that you wouldn't want close to you in the trenches, that is for sure.
Conservatives are capable of thinking for themselves, and saying what they think. We aren't all blind tribal loyalists like the Labour Party.
I think we all recognise that Tories are *better* than Labourites. But some of them still seem to be in a blind panic for no real reason. It's no way to fight an election.
I say it how it is, perhaps you do too. The reason for the concern is Labour clocking regular leads barely 3 weeks out from the election, where the polls were tied or with small Tory leads up until a week ago.
The direction of travel is the opposite to what I expected. It does not bode well.
Weird story, two pages about the content of a "report" but nothing about who is actually writing the report. The only actual source they have is a quote of something someone said to the Sunday Times - is the whole thing a paraphrase of a Sunday Times story, or is there an actual report by somebody else?
That's why I said "if" the story is true. It is infuriating that we get stories like this with very few facts. There certainly was a story in the ST a few weeks back saying that a number of the teachers involved in the Trojan Horse affair were facing disciplinary action against them to ban them from teaching.
At the moment, in my professional standards, there is a commitment to 'uphold and promote British values'. These are badly defined and candidly, as a history and citizenship teacher, mostly completely wrong - they seem to owe more to the French secular left based on La Droits de L'Homme than to actual British history. However, the mere fact that it is there is I suspect an excuse clause for a professional tribunal to act in such cases. Clearly teaching people about the nobility of suicide bombing, if it is indeed happening, is not a British value - our notions of self-sacrifice tend to be allied more closely to Calvinistic ones of discipline and self-denial.
(The particular 'value' I'm not sure about is 'tolerance'. This is partly because it isn't defined but largely because Britain and the British people historically have tended to tolerate differences - i.e. put up with them - rather than be 'tolerant' that is to say, be happy with/about difference. This led to an awful lot of casual racism and sexism that certainly would not be considered appropriate today. However, the clerk who drafted these standards and presumably had them approved by Gove appears to be unaware of that.)
To the extent that I could make sense of it the claim in the mysteriously unsourced Telegraph piece seems to be that people are doing an end-run around the whole thing by officially home-schooling their kids, then sending them along to something that isn't officially a school.
I'm in two minds on this one but I think ultimately religious nut-jobs should have the right to keep their kids out of normal schools and teach them all kinds of crazy shit instead, assuming they're prepared to pay for it themselves. Tricky one, though.
Let's not forget the only health minister to ever effectively privatise an NHS hospital was a Labour one.
You can put out these sort of comments as often as you like but the stronger perception is that the Tories can't be trusted with the NHS and when push comes to shove side will look after the wealthy first. In a nutshell that is the Tories image problem, they have been stuck with it for years, it is not improving and that's why the tories could easily go 50 years without winning a majority.
And Burnham has shown that he will side with the producers within the NHS rather than the patients.
I would expect Labour supporters who really loved and wanted the best for patients to be disgusted with this. But their (mostly) silence on it shows that too many are more interested in the NHS as a nebulous concept that can be used to attack 'uncaring Tories' than the health of patients.
People can't bear to look at the true, ugly face of the NHS, so they shroud themselves in delusion and get very angry with people who threaten that delusion. They're scared to take responsibility for their health.
We need more of this drivel from Tories/the Right to ensure their unelectability.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Our employees are well rewarded for both the business they bring in and for the projects they manage/undertake. (We also use specialist contractors where required). All are employees are innovators and are highly motivated.
They decided that the company should look to relocate out of the UK and preferably outside western Europe and probably organise on a regional global basis.
Their reasons for this change are:
(i) As they work very hard they wish to be able to retain the vast majority of their earnings. (ii) They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. (iii) They want their families to have access to the best education and best health care. (iv) They want to live in a country where the aspiration for excellence is prized and where governments/local authorities are not happy to remain with average or less than average standards. (v) They are very unhappy at the political parties seeming intent to level down rather than level up.
They seem a bunch of self centred arseholes without any stake in society or community, and lacking any appreciation of the value of other people.
I suggest they go and form their perfect liberal fantasy republic somewhere.
Typical reply from a person who deplores success by people and wishes everyone to be equal regardless of the individual effort they put in. The socialist dogma of equality of outcome and not equality of opportunity.
So according to you we should all sit back on our sofas, watching daytime tv and eating and drinking - all at the governments expense.
I actually own a small technology business and employ staff, I adore success, including my own.
However I recognise that I came from a community and my success brings me obligations towards it. I recognise that I became well off because I benefited from a public education system. I don't seek to pull the ladder up behind me.
i don't want to hide behind walls and run away from people.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Our employees are well rewarded for both the business they bring in and for the projects they manage/undertake. (We also use specialist contractors where required). All are employees are innovators and are highly motivated.
They decided that the company should look to relocate out of the UK and preferably outside western Europe and probably organise on a regional global basis.
Their reasons for this change are:
(i) As they work very hard they wish to be able to retain the vast majority of their earnings. (ii) They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. (iii) They want their families to have access to the best education and best health care. (iv) They want to live in a country where the aspiration for excellence is prized and where governments/local authorities are not happy to remain with average or less than average standards. (v) They are very unhappy at the political parties seeming intent to level down rather than level up.
Well said.
The company I own is also UK and international . For pretty much the same reasons we have now been developing outside the UK since late last year as we came to very similar conclusions . We are now actively looking to buy / lease construction yards certainly outside the UK and probably outside Europe. I really would much prefer to remain operating from the UK but just cannot with the uncertainties and definite threats that a Labour government will bring to the business. We now have a massive project with years of business development ahead so cannot just risk being here. Amongst others in similar business we seem to be not alone. People saw what Labour did last time and just will not risk it again.
Morning all and I hope we are all wearing our Red Ed Hell Yes T shirts this morning.
For me the reaction of the day thus far came from Jasmine Birtles the acknowledged money expert on Sky News. Shown the front of the Daily Mirror by Eamonn Holmes and asked to comment, she said she simply didn't believe what Labour is promising. Ed Balls then had a car crash interview when Martin Daubney, son of a Nottinghamshire miner told Balls that Labour has lost the trust of people like him.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Our employees are well rewarded for both the business they bring in and for the projects they manage/undertake. (We also use specialist contractors where required). All are employees are innovators and are highly motivated.
They decided that the company should look to relocate out of the UK and preferably outside western Europe and probably organise on a regional global basis.
Their reasons for this change are:
(i) As they work very hard they wish to be able to retain the vast majority of their earnings. (ii) They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. (iii) They want their families to have access to the best education and best health care. (iv) They want to live in a country where the aspiration for excellence is prized and where governments/local authorities are not happy to remain with average or less than average standards. (v) They are very unhappy at the political parties seeming intent to level down rather than level up.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Our employees are well rewarded for both the business they bring in and for the projects they manage/undertake. (We also use specialist contractors where required). All are employees are innovators and are highly motivated.
They decided that the company should look to relocate out of the UK and preferably outside western Europe and probably organise on a regional global basis.
Their reasons for this change are:
(i) As they work very hard they wish to be able to retain the vast majority of their earnings. (ii) They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. (iii) They want their families to have access to the best education and best health care. (iv) They want to live in a country where the aspiration for excellence is prized and where governments/local authorities are not happy to remain with average or less than average standards. (v) They are very unhappy at the political parties seeming intent to level down rather than level up.
They seem a bunch of self centred arseholes without any stake in society or community, and lacking any appreciation of the value of other people.
I suggest they go and form their perfect liberal fantasy republic somewhere.
Typical reply from a person who deplores success by people and wishes everyone to be equal regardless of the individual effort they put in. The socialist dogma of equality of outcome and not equality of opportunity.
So according to you we should all sit back on our sofas, watching daytime tv and eating and drinking - all at the governments expense.
Trouble is, we are developing a culture of demonising the sort of people who are (allegedly) the mainstay of the Jeremy Kyle show. And to be fair, it’s extremely easy to do that!
However from what I see in my own extended family the situation is much more complex than “on benefits” = “scrounger”. Wants to work but has become physically unable to do so. Check. Wants to work but but can’t for same reason and is dreadfully embarressed abour it, so, when can, does voluntary work. Check. In both cases they are parents, one at least of whose children has done very well in life (so far at least) either in work or educational achievement or both.
Trying to touch girls at a lap dancing club and being behind Islamic terrorism. Neither rang true but it struck me when I read your link to the Telegraph that believing these right wing rags with an agenda is dangerous.
I don't for example think Gilligan in the Telegraph is any more believable than the Mail hacks. Just another journalist with an agenda.
Incidentally if the letters under the Nawaz article are any reflection of public opinion his political career will be short lived
Poor Balls was struggling on Radio 4 earlier. Couldn't confirm when the books would actually be balanced because they're going to be borrowing billions for "investment", suggested the budget for Scotland will be cut (i'm sure the SNP are already running with this) and still didn't really have an answer on more funds for the NHS.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Our employees are well rewarded for both the business they bring in and for the projects they manage/undertake. (We also use specialist contractors where required). All are employees are innovators and are highly motivated.
They decided that the company should look to relocate out of the UK and preferably outside western Europe and probably organise on a regional global basis.
Their reasons for this change are:
(i) As they work very hard they wish to be able to retain the vast majority of their earnings. (ii) They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. (iii) They want their families to have access to the best education and best health care. (iv) They want to live in a country where the aspiration for excellence is prized and where governments/local authorities are not happy to remain with average or less than average standards. (v) They are very unhappy at the political parties seeming intent to level down rather than level up.
They seem a bunch of self centred arseholes without any stake in society or community, and lacking any appreciation of the value of other people.
I suggest they go and form their perfect liberal fantasy republic somewhere.
Typical reply from a person who deplores success by people and wishes everyone to be equal regardless of the individual effort they put in. The socialist dogma of equality of outcome and not equality of opportunity.
So according to you we should all sit back on our sofas, watching daytime tv and eating and drinking - all at the governments expense.
I actually own a small technology business and employ staff, I adore success, including my own.
However I recognise that I came from a community and my success brings me obligations towards it. I recognise that I became well off because I benefited from a public education system. I don't seek to pull the ladder up behind me.
i don't want to hide behind walls and run away from people.
Well done you - but time moves on - so are you an advocate of equality of outcome regardless of the effort put in today by each individual or equality of opportunity which appears to be the reason for your personal success.
Interesting fact: the Monster Raving Loony Party is fielding twice as many candidates as the BNP this time, 16 vs 8. In 2010 the BNP had 338 candidates.
As Labour launches its manifesto in Manchester today the big NHS related question for all parties will be whether the NHS £8bn funding gap for Bedford senior citizens and their hair restorative treatment can be met.
A nation awaits .....
I think I read at the weekend that pulling out hairs encourages hair growth.
Mind you - there have to be some left for this process to work
I write this as a slap head myself so hopefully ogh will not take too much offense. :-)
Poor Balls was struggling on Radio 4 earlier. Couldn't confirm when the books would actually be balanced because they're going to be borrowing billions for "investment", suggested the budget for Scotland will be cut (i'm sure the SNP are already running with this) and still didn't really have an answer on more funds for the NHS.
@PeteWishart: SLab campaign almost totally sunk as Ed Balls concedes there will be cuts in Scotland. Now got to spell out where.
I'm not sure crowing about businesses leaving makes much sense.
If they leave, precisely what percentage of tax will they be paying here? Absolutely zero.
And they'll be taking jobs with them too.
What's the upside?
F1: I need to be clearer with my tips. I tipped Vettel for top 3 in qualifying, but it seems at least two people mistook this for meaning a podium in the race. Sorry about that.
... although it is worth noting he did get a podium in the race. And my actual race tip [No Safety Car] didn't come off.
David L/Jack W A point of order. The Ashcroft constituency polls show a maximum of 39 Labour gains from the Tories and most of those "gains" were assessed last year.
They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. @Financier
I nearly bought into your fantasy conference, until you wrote that. I wonder how many other extreme fantasists we have on pbCOM parading as something or other. Makes me giggle.
This is being presented as Tsipras showing how strongly the Greek voters are behind him (he's at 40%) but it seems like the obvious solution to his current dilemma, which is that any compromise realistically available would be unacceptable to a big chunk of his coalition. So get a bigger majority, then he can survive losing a chunk of it.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Financier, you didn´t tell us about the nationality of these employees and their wives. I suspect that may be relevant.
Well done you - but time moves on - so are you an advocate of equality of outcome regardless of the effort put in today by each individual or equality of opportunity which appears to be the reason for your personal success.
Equality of opportunity of course, absolutely no one believes in equality of outcome, if you think the Labour party does I suggest you look at Mr Millibands kitchen(s).
However, it's the people who have succeeded who need to provide that opportunity to the next generation. The whole system falls apart if the winners flee to the airport. You either have a stake in society or you don't
Mr. Tokyo, an interesting approach by Tsipras. Could also be seen as getting a popular mandate for leaving the single currency if it's felt the Germans et al. aren't being nice enough.
Mr. Tyson, there's nothing wrong with fantasists, you know
David L/Jack W A point of order. The Ashcroft constituency polls show a maximum of 39 Labour gains from the Tories and most of those "gains" were assessed last year.
@BBCAllegra: Am told that fiscal charter / responsibility front page was added to the Labour manifesto last Friday. Late overhaul, acc to some sources
Probably the one which is hurriedly looking for a replacement for the laughable "balanced recovery" response as an answer for the spending splurge promised since last week.
"There will be plenty of strong voices in Labour after a GE in which the party just about stands still saying that the electorate has delivered its judgment and that it does not want a Labour government - pretty much what happened last time, in fact."
Oh, I am sure there will be a number of Labour types appearing in the Tory press opposing a Labour Government if they have fewer seats than the SNP. They will be in the House of Lords or retired types whose careers would be unaffected by staying out of Government.
Anyone believing that Ed Miliband will refuse to become PM if Labour + SNP is a majority does not live in the real world. Apart from UK wide issues, letting the Tories back in when they could be stopped would reduce SLAB to Tory-like bit players in Scotland.
As much as I take pleasure in the Tory's despondency at the poor polls- Casino is the funniest, today comrades I think is the day the ship turns in your favour with Admiral ICM steering the way.
I have been on this site for many years now, and JackW is the wise sage on all things related to elections. He might be slightly toppy on Tory seats, but there again he might not.
However, the big story of the day is Labour's purported pivot to the centre with its pledge to reduce the deficit each year in the next parliament and not to pass any budget measures that necessitate extra borrowing. It lacks any credibility, of course, but that is besides the point. The interesting aspect of this proposal is that it indicates Labour believes that it has secured its left flank, and that it is no longer vulnerable to a loss of support to the Greens or Lib Dems. Labour's leadership have calculated that the left (at least outside Scotland) will hold their nose and support Labour on the day, which frees Labour to pursue the centrist votes they need to win key marginals.
It's a big if. It lays the way open for Lab=>LD=>Lab voters to => LD once more.
LDs yet again sail further out left than the two parties and capture some more NOTA votes. These, together with harder-left Green switchers, will help Dave.
Or perhaps make another coalition more likely - long my position AAMOF as I don't believe the LDs, despite all the bluster against them, have done that bad a job and I think their supporters will realise this (saying this of course as all weekend polls have the LDs on 7%...).
On IHT, I'm curious - have we actually seen some detail of how this will work? Some news reports say that parents will be able to leave property to their children of up to £1m. Other reports talk about a new nil-band between £325K and £500K (or £1m if a couple involved) and make no mention of children.
These seem very different to me. What if I live alone in a £500K house and leave it to my aunty?
Peasants woken you up with early their wailing again Mr W? You have only yourself to blame. Stop feeding the dogs!
The only wailing to be heard is on PB as some of the wobble bottom Conservatives pull up their skirts and run around like maiden great aunts who have gone all unnecessary at the sight of an uncovered piano leg.
The fundamentals of this campaign have not changed and let me be utterly clear. From day one of his "leadership" Labour were doomed to defeat and on 8th May all of PB will know that, no ifs no buts :
Ed Miliband Will Never Be Prime Minister
Good morning Jack!
I agree, it's worse than Chicken Little, It is headless Chicken Little on here.
What happened to the steadfast Brit with a stiff upper lip?
There are a fair few PB Tory posters on here that you wouldn't want close to you in the trenches, that is for sure.
Conservatives are capable of thinking for themselves, and saying what they think. We aren't all blind tribal loyalists like the Labour Party.
I think we all recognise that Tories are *better* than Labourites. But some of them still seem to be in a blind panic for no real reason. It's no way to fight an election.
I say it how it is, perhaps you do too. The reason for the concern is Labour clocking regular leads barely 3 weeks out from the election, where the polls were tied or with small Tory leads up until a week ago.
The direction of travel is the opposite to what I expected. It does not bode well.
Just over a month ago I concluded that Labour would probably be in Govt or we get a Cameron/Osborne govt within a coalition. So I asked myself which would be worse for the UK long term and ordered them as (6 = worst, 1 = best). 1. A Cameron majority Govt. 2. A Cameron minority followed by another GE within a year (1974). 3. A Cameron led coalition (2010). 4. A Miliband led coalition (2010). 5. A Miliband minority followed by another GE within a year (1974). 6. A Miliband majority Govt. Now since option 3 and option 4 are almost equally as bad in the long term, what I really worry about is the 5th or 6th happening.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Our employees are well rewarded for both the business they bring in and for the projects they manage/undertake. (We also use specialist contractors where required). All are employees are innovators and are highly motivated.
They decided that the company should look to relocate out of the UK and preferably outside western Europe and probably organise on a regional global basis.
Their reasons for this change are:
(i) As they work very hard they wish to be able to retain the vast majority of their earnings. (ii) They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. (iii) They want their families to have access to the best education and best health care. (iv) They want to live in a country where the aspiration for excellence is prized and where governments/local authorities are not happy to remain with average or less than average standards. (v) They are very unhappy at the political parties seeming intent to level down rather than level up.
As ugly a post as I've read on here. With a workforce like that no wonder no one wants to go in in the morning
I'm not sure crowing about businesses leaving makes much sense.
If they leave, precisely what percentage of tax will they be paying here? Absolutely zero.
And they'll be taking jobs with them too.
What's the upside?
F1: I need to be clearer with my tips. I tipped Vettel for top 3 in qualifying, but it seems at least two people mistook this for meaning a podium in the race. Sorry about that.
... although it is worth noting he did get a podium in the race. And my actual race tip [No Safety Car] didn't come off.
Totally agree about crowing about jobs leaving. Some (although far from all) in the public sector seem to totally misunderstand and disregard the private sector, just as some in the private sector do otherwise.
A strong private sector is required to pay for a strong public sector. And a strong public sector can help create a strong private sector. Not that Labour seems to understand this, though.
The F1 race was so boring on the radio that I didn't watch the highlights. Well done Lewis though; it seems he's totally demolished Rosberg's fight.
Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees
So you don't believe in training your workforce, instead expecting others to pay for it? Don't you think you have the decency to contribute to the society that paid to train them for you? You shound like the typical privileged, entitled, selfish right-winger.
Incidentally, your "decision" provides ample proof as to why free markets, free movement and globalisation mostly benefit the privileged at the expense of the poor. Such is the dogma of the capitalist, I guess.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Financier, you didn´t tell us about the nationality of these employees and their wives. I suspect that may be relevant.
Mr. PB, pointing and decrying people making rational business decisions as being selfish isn't going to persuade them to stay, and to keep their tax revenues here.
Instead, we should provide positive reasons to be here. Focusing on science, reducing the tax burden where possible, providing incentives. Then we'll attract rather than scare off businesses. We'll have more firms paying tax here and providing employment.
Mr. Jessop, interesting. Another chap I know online found the race dull but I really rather liked it. The top 6 were tedious but there were some great duels further down the field, particularly Verstappen's passes, Ricciardo and Ericsson, and Maldonado and Button.
Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees
So you don't believe in training your workforce, instead expecting others to pay for it? Don't you think you have the decency to contribute to the society that paid to train them for you? You shound like the typical privileged, entitled, selfish right-winger.
Incidentally, your "decision" provides ample proof as to why free markets, free movement and globalisation mostly benefit the privileged at the expense of the poor. Such is the dogma of the capitalist, I guess.
Should be pointed out that postgraduate degrees are unfunded with the exception of a few scholarships which are very hard to get. I had to pay £3,000 a year from my own pocket in tuition fees alone for both my Masters and my PhD (and believe me, that was bloody hard work to raise the money doing bar-tending, lecturing, some music, proof-reading, conducting and writing a 120,000 word thesis on the side while I was in Aberystwyth and most of my sources were in London...) I got a First at undergraduate level and a Distinction at MA, publishing my dissertation at MA. I still couldn't get funding.
On IHT, I'm curious - have we actually seen some detail of how this will work? Some news reports say that parents will be able to leave property to their children of up to £1m. Other reports talk about a new nil-band between £325K and £500K (or £1m if a couple involved) and make no mention of children.
These seem very different to me. What if I live alone in a £500K house and leave it to my aunty? No hard details and we have to wait for it.
Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees
So you don't believe in training your workforce, instead expecting others to pay for it? Don't you think you have the decency to contribute to the society that paid to train them for you? You shound like the typical privileged, entitled, selfish right-winger.
Incidentally, your "decision" provides ample proof as to why free markets, free movement and globalisation mostly benefit the privileged at the expense of the poor. Such is the dogma of the capitalist, I guess.
Given that it's clearly not true, I don't think it provides ample proof of anything
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Financier, you didn´t tell us about the nationality of these employees and their wives. I suspect that may be relevant.
That depends on what he decides to make up
I was disappointed they weren't all former Labour voters but they just couldn't bring themselves to live in the same country as Ed Miliband. Maybe next time.
Our four million pound turnover company that employs over 20 people and that has been built from scratch since 2003 will not be leaving no matter who wins next month. Good luck to Financier and others, though, in their never-ending quest to find the lowest taxes and least regulation.
As much as I take pleasure in the Tory's despondency at the poor polls- Casino is the funniest, today comrades I think is the day the ship turns in your favour with Admiral ICM steering the way.
I have been on this site for many years now, and JackW is the wise sage on all things related to elections. He might be slightly toppy on Tory seats, but there again he might not.
Worth pointing out that since the start of the official campaign period on 30th march we have had the sum total of one phone poll, which was ComRes giving the Tories a 1% lead.
The most recent polls from the other phone pollsters are: Ashcroft: 2% Tory lead ICM: 1% Tory lead Ipsos MORI : 1% Labour lead
Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees
So you don't believe in training your workforce, instead expecting others to pay for it? Don't you think you have the decency to contribute to the society that paid to train them for you? You shound like the typical privileged, entitled, selfish right-winger.
Incidentally, your "decision" provides ample proof as to why free markets, free movement and globalisation mostly benefit the privileged at the expense of the poor. Such is the dogma of the capitalist, I guess.
Should be pointed out that postgraduate degrees are unfunded with the exception of a few scholarships which are very hard to get. I had to pay £3,000 a year from my own pocket in tuition fees alone for both my Masters and my PhD (and believe me, that was bloody hard work to raise the money doing bar-tending, lecturing, some music, proof-reading, conducting and writing a 120,000 word thesis on the side while I was in Aberystwyth and most of my sources were in London...) I got a First at undergraduate level and a Distinction at MA, publishing my dissertation at MA. I still couldn't get funding.
They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. @Financier
I nearly bought into your fantasy conference, until you wrote that. I wonder how many other extreme fantasists we have on pbCOM parading as something or other. Makes me giggle.
I don't think anyone who claims to have made a living off the roulette tables could be described as a fantasist.
They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. @Financier
I nearly bought into your fantasy conference, until you wrote that. I wonder how many other extreme fantasists we have on pbCOM parading as something or other. Makes me giggle.
I don't think anyone who claims to have made a living off the roulette tables could be described as a fantasist.
Our four million pound turnover company that employs over 20 people and that has been built from scratch since 2003 will not be leaving no matter who wins next month. Good luck to Financier and others, though, in their never-ending quest to find the lowest taxes and least regulation.
I'm sorry to say that I don't believe that Financier's anecdote is true. It just doesn't jibe with human nature.
I'm 54. I've lived through the three day week, galloping inflation, high marginal tax rates, the ERM disaster, the dot-com boom and bust, four recessions and so on - just like many of us on here. Things are never as bad as people predict; I don't see Ed Milliband as the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse.
I do think we are badly served by both politicians and media. Debt servicing is going to be the next administration's fourth largest line item. That's appalling, whatever your personal political views. I want us to run a balanced budget, and reduce the size of our national debt. My generation owes that to our children and grandchildren.
I wrote last night that Labour's pledge was very smart; I still don't trust them on the economy, but I can no longer take the Conservatives seriously either; whether that's ring-fencing the aid budget or promising real terms increases in public spending - it's just incoherent.
Well done you - but time moves on - so are you an advocate of equality of outcome regardless of the effort put in today by each individual or equality of opportunity which appears to be the reason for your personal success.
Equality of opportunity of course, absolutely no one believes in equality of outcome, if you think the Labour party does I suggest you look at Mr Millibands kitchen(s).
However, it's the people who have succeeded who need to provide that opportunity to the next generation. The whole system falls apart if the winners flee to the airport. You either have a stake in society or you don't
Hear, hear. Financier's offer is one in which a fortunate few prosper, pay as little tax as humanly possible and flee elsewhere if they have to pay more. But a low wage, low protection, low welfare society is not a sustainable one. If people feel they have no stake they will vote for fundamental change. That's probaly why even the Asian tigers are now spending more on welfare and improving working conditions.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Financier, you didn´t tell us about the nationality of these employees and their wives. I suspect that may be relevant.
That depends on what he decides to make up
Please don't call other posters liars without a shred of evidence.
You yourself claimed the other day that you were "close to" the treatment given to David Cameron's son by the NHS, putting yourself in a bit of a quandary: because either it isn't true and you are a liar, or it is true and you are a loudmouthed braggart who deserves to be identified and sacked for breach of professional confidence. Which is it, or am I missing a third possibility?
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Financier, you didn´t tell us about the nationality of these employees and their wives. I suspect that may be relevant.
That depends on what he decides to make up
I was disappointed they weren't all former Labour voters but they just couldn't bring themselves to live in the same country as Ed Miliband. Maybe next time.
They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. @Financier
I nearly bought into your fantasy conference, until you wrote that. I wonder how many other extreme fantasists we have on pbCOM parading as something or other. Makes me giggle.
I don't think anyone who claims to have made a living off the roulette tables could be described as a fantasist.
Your humour is nearly as dry as SeanF's, the king of irony.
If any journalist wants a good question for Ed Miliband today, how about asking him whether he supports the Guardian's "Keep it in the ground" campaign to get charities to disinvest from fossil fuel firms?
Looking at the election from thousands of miles away, it seems as if the tide has decisively turned and that Cameron and Osborne have diminished in stature. The Mail seems to have lost all sense of responsibility and Crosby's campaign has gone down the pan.If nothing changes then when I return there will be a weeks of busy campaigning before we get a new government.
If any journalist wants a good question for Ed Miliband today, how about asking him whether he supports the Guardian's "Keep it in the ground" campaign to get charities to disinvest from fossil fuel firms?
What I would rather see is a commitment to uphold and promote the value of democracy and the rule of law. I'm happy to go with that because it's (a) simple to understand and (b) allows for some flexibility as the law changes.
It's an interesting discussion and i tend to agree - as soon as we get outside the area of what is legally required we are on shifting sands, since there will always be people (including parents) who disagree, and not unreasonably say that their views are not illegal so why are we teaching their kids that they're wrong?
But I'd add that kids should be exposed to a variety of current views - that applies especially to faith schools, which may otherwise default to the faith, but also to secular schools. I don't actually mind kids hearing views that I disagree with, so long as they hear lots of others too: the teacher's job should be to encourage a spirit of mildly sceptical inquiry. I think that guest speakers do the job better than study of historical thinkers - what Tom Paine or Voltaire or Marx thought in a very different context seems a bit irrelevant even to me, and I'm at least as interested as the keenest teenager.
Our four million pound turnover company that employs over 20 people and that has been built from scratch since 2003 will not be leaving no matter who wins next month. Good luck to Financier and others, though, in their never-ending quest to find the lowest taxes and least regulation.
I'm sorry to say that I don't believe that Financier's anecdote is true. It just doesn't jibe with human nature.
I'm 54. I've lived through the three day week, galloping inflation, high marginal tax rates, the ERM disaster, the dot-com boom and bust, four recessions and so on - just like many of us on here. Things are never as bad as people predict; I don't see Ed Milliband as the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse.
I do think we are badly served by both politicians and media. Debt servicing is going to be the next administration's fourth largest line item. That's appalling, whatever your personal political views. I want us to run a balanced budget, and reduce the size of our national debt. My generation owes that to our children and grandchildren.
I wrote last night that Labour's pledge was very smart; I still don't trust them on the economy, but I can no longer take the Conservatives seriously either; whether that's ring-fencing the aid budget or promising real terms increases in public spending - it's just incoherent.
I believe Financier. But I don't think countries can build sustainable economies that deliver for as many people as possible on the back of companies such as his. He wants the lowest taxes and the least regulation. We, as a country, should do better than that. And we can.
They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. @Financier
I nearly bought into your fantasy conference, until you wrote that. I wonder how many other extreme fantasists we have on pbCOM parading as something or other. Makes me giggle.
I don't think anyone who claims to have made a living off the roulette tables could be described as a fantasist.
Thanks Plato. Public sector folk struggle to understand the private sector which provides all their funding. Except the part that adds to the government debt.
If the Tories were serious about winning they'd be announcing policies that benefit swing voters on incomes in the £25-£40k range, not cutting tax on already very substantial inheritances. The problem is that Cameron and Osborne genuinely seem to think that inheriting a £1m house and earning an income of £150k is normal.
There will be quite a lot of people in the SE who are on that kind of income but have assets worth around the £1 million mark due to house price inflation. It would also affect my own family for that reason, although I have the highest income in my family and I certainly do not earn over £40,000 pa.
This is what I think isn't widely understood. Inheritance tax doesn't affect millionaires or at least, not as much as it was designed to, because they simply hand over large chunks of assets to their heirs and therefore avoid it (legally) entirely. It affects those people who have their wealth locked up in one principle asset, usually a house, and can't afford to give away enough other material (cash/pensions) to get below the threshold.
This has led to the slightly ridiculous situation where it is levied on 5% of all estates (the number of estates that should be affected is theoretically around 30%) and not generally on the wealthiest estates. Toynbee and Hodge, both of whom are multi-millionaires and both of whom manage their wealth through trusts in the names of their families, are classic examples of how to get round it.
Now on to the next question - if a tax is avoided by around 85% of the people it should be levied on, is it a good tax or not? Should it be kept for social engineering reasons? If so, let's have a 100% tax on all estates and an end to inherited wealth other than personal possessions, strictly defined. That would mean everyone would have to survive on their own wits (imagine how that would change the face of the House of Commons)! Or, if it should be kept only to raise money, let's raise the threshold, clear up the rules and have a simple and direct tax that hits the wealthiest in a way they can't avoid.
Of course, the flaw in my argument is that it is unlikely that the Conservative proposals will do the latter...
I'm glad to see someone on PB who knows more than I do about these things spotted the obvious let-out in the Tory proposal - that it's meaningless if people with more than most are supposed to pay more IHT to compensate, because they won't be doing it anyway.
I'm coming to feel that it would make more sense to have CGT on the value added to all houses, whether primary residences or not, at the time of sale. And to abolish IHT. It's increasingly a tax to catch out middling folk who haven't had the money or the confidence to indulge in tax evasion. For this reason, it's important that deeds of variation are retained - if only to avoid perverse consequences.
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Our employees are well rewarded for both the business they bring in and for the projects they manage/undertake. (We also use specialist contractors where required). All are employees are innovators and are highly motivated.
They decided that the company should look to relocate out of the UK and preferably outside western Europe and probably organise on a regional global basis.
Their reasons for this change are:
(i) As they work very hard they wish to be able to retain the vast majority of their earnings. (ii) They do not wish to subsidise the lazy, the feckless and those who expect to have as many children as they wish at the state's expense. (iii) They want their families to have access to the best education and best health care. (iv) They want to live in a country where the aspiration for excellence is prized and where governments/local authorities are not happy to remain with average or less than average standards. (v) They are very unhappy at the political parties seeming intent to level down rather than level up.
Bye then
Unbridled individualism may not be the most attractive of qualities. But when 28% of the tax take is paid by 1% of taxpayers you have to recognise that the public good does depend on wealth creation and wealth creators. You don't have to like them, associate with them or approve of them - but you absolutely need them. In that context 'bye then' seems a rather inadeqaute response to serious issue.
Our four million pound turnover company that employs over 20 people and that has been built from scratch since 2003 will not be leaving no matter who wins next month. Good luck to Financier and others, though, in their never-ending quest to find the lowest taxes and least regulation.
Of interest a few general questions to help us understand your views. 1. What type of business would you describe it? (service, finance, legal, manufacturing etc) 2. Approximately what % of your revenue comes from UK, other EC and rest of world?
At the request of employees we held a company conference this weekend. Being a small, hi-tech company and leading globally in our technology, all our people have post graduate degrees. Our clients are multinational and only 10% of our business comes from the UK and about 20% if western Europe is included. At the conference wives and partners had the right to express their opinions and wishes.
Financier, you didn´t tell us about the nationality of these employees and their wives. I suspect that may be relevant.
That depends on what he decides to make up
Please don't call other posters liars without a shred of evidence.
You yourself claimed the other day that you were "close to" the treatment given to David Cameron's son by the NHS, putting yourself in a bit of a quandary: because either it isn't true and you are a liar, or it is true and you are a loudmouthed braggart who deserves to be identified and sacked for breach of professional confidence. Which is it, or am I missing a third possibility?
I don't think it is a state secret that Cameron's son was treated in Oxford, and he had excellent treatment. All the managers know the unit well. I can't quite see how it is a sacking offence to commend your own services that are on public record for the care given to a specific child.
And I didn't say liar. I said fantasist. Politicians are habitual liars, fantasists are rather quite endearing.
I'm coming to feel that it would make more sense to have CGT on the value added to all houses, whether primary residences or not, at the time of sale. And to abolish IHT. It's increasingly a tax to catch out middling folk who haven't had the money or the confidence to indulge in tax evasion.
I do like this proposal. Might get me back in the Conservative camp... Dunno though. I'll be voting with about the same enthusiasm as clearing up cat vomit.
Mr. PB, pointing and decrying people making rational business decisions as being selfish isn't going to persuade them to stay, and to keep their tax revenues here.
Instead, we should provide positive reasons to be here. Focusing on science, reducing the tax burden where possible, providing incentives. Then we'll attract rather than scare off businesses. We'll have more firms paying tax here and providing employment.
You'll no doubt be happy to know that my thoughts are inconsequential and that I'm well aware of my inability to enact any change!
But it does come back to my fundamental belief that the world is screwed, thanks to the entrenched system of "free markets", globalisation, free movement and free movement of capital that enable, if not encourage, the privileged to do selfish acts at the expense of others. Decisions like Financier's are both completely rational but ultimately disasterous for the ordinary person in the long-term.
The race to the bottom is impossible to stop. "Incentives" and "reducing the tax burden" are a short-term sticking plaster over fundamental issues and arguably just speeds the whole process up.
In theory, there's probably ways to stop it (e.g. minimum tax rates enforced with trade barriers), but it couldn't be done unilaterally and no-one would dare as the capitalist dogma is too entrenched. All that's realistically possible is to point and decry and hope that's sufficient.
I agree that one small step would be to provide better education and better training. But that's incredibly tough. And adult education has just been gutted, university tuition fees have gone up vertically and post-graduate education is generally a mess (e.g. the country is /still/ not producing enough doctors), so we're not going in right direction there.
And creating a better educated workforce would require solving complex problems that governments seem unwilling to tackle. Cycle of poverty, cycles of abuse, broken families, bad parenting, lack of communities etc. Of course, try to do something about that and it's the "nanny state". Ultimately, those are the reasons private schools succeed - because of the intake (and, well, connections). This government would rather just make subjects tougher (with a weird emphasis on rote learning) and then use the stick on things like welfare, which is a way simpler than actually trying to solve the issues.
I'm coming to feel that it would make more sense to have CGT on the value added to all houses, whether primary residences or not, at the time of sale. And to abolish IHT. It's increasingly a tax to catch out middling folk who haven't had the money or the confidence to indulge in tax evasion.
I do like this proposal. Might get me back in the Conservative camp... Dunno though. I'll be voting with about the same enthusiasm as clearing up cat vomit.
Chuffing Nora. All our bases are belong to Nicola.
59 out of 59 on that?
You have to take your hats off to the Scots. They are being presented with an opportunity to empower themselves at this election and they are going to seize it.
I'm coming to feel that it would make more sense to have CGT on the value added to all houses, whether primary residences or not, at the time of sale. And to abolish IHT. It's increasingly a tax to catch out middling folk who haven't had the money or the confidence to indulge in tax evasion.
I do like this proposal. Might get me back in the Conservative camp... Dunno though. I'll be voting with about the same enthusiasm as clearing up cat vomit.
My proposal or Mr Osborne's? (Just checking ...)
IHT - It is avoided completely by the really rich and is makework for lawyers and tax accountants.
On topic, anyone paying close attention to Stafford, and the NHS in Wales, would not give Labour such a high rating on the NHS. The thought of Burnham back in charge is not a pleasant one.
This is just a historical thing - Tories seen less favourably on the NHS than Labour, as they have been for well, decades, fairly or not.
A few bn here or there is not going to change this in a few weeks
Chat at my work - Do people still get £500 for popping out a sprog these days ?
The Child Trust Fund was one of the things axed early on by the Coalition as part of their package of £6bn emergency cuts.
This year is the first year of the Marriage Allowance, which is I think worth £200 a year to married couples where one of the couple does not use all their personal allowance, and is able to transfer £1000 of it to their other half.
You can get 7/2 with Coral for the SNP in Glasgow North East. Quite apart from the fact that you can hedge that bet for a profit elsewhere, it's good value in and of itself.
Our four million pound turnover company that employs over 20 people and that has been built from scratch since 2003 will not be leaving no matter who wins next month. Good luck to Financier and others, though, in their never-ending quest to find the lowest taxes and least regulation.
Of interest a few general questions to help us understand your views. 1. What type of business would you describe it? (service, finance, legal, manufacturing etc) 2. Approximately what % of your revenue comes from UK, other EC and rest of world?
We provide legal services 100% in UK.
We are essentially a publishing, conference and research business whose revenues are almost entirely non-UK. We are currently going through a restructuring that will see us merge into, and become a standalone division of, the business of our single biggest shareholder. That will make us part of a £10m turnover company with over 100 employees. Its revenue profile is - I guess - about 15% UK, 25% Europe, 40% North America, 15% Asia, 5% RoW. That is a guess though.
Our four million pound turnover company that employs over 20 people and that has been built from scratch since 2003 will not be leaving no matter who wins next month. Good luck to Financier and others, though, in their never-ending quest to find the lowest taxes and least regulation.
Given your previous words on how you would not vote Labour if Balls was involved (as a result of your disgust at the McBride scandal), how do you explain your increasingly shrill support for Labour?
And are you really sure that Ed Miliband and Ed Balls understands enough about business to create an environment under which your business will continue to prosper?
Comments
As for Enlightenment values - I teach the French Revolution and Soviet Russia. They are both based on those values and they are both damning indictments of the logical results of them. As a result the idea of teaching 'values' leaves me fairly uneasy.
What I would rather see is a commitment to uphold and promote the value of democracy and the rule of law. I'm happy to go with that because it's (a) simple to understand and (b) allows for some flexibility as the law changes.
The direction of travel is the opposite to what I expected. It does not bode well.
I'm in two minds on this one but I think ultimately religious nut-jobs should have the right to keep their kids out of normal schools and teach them all kinds of crazy shit instead, assuming they're prepared to pay for it themselves. Tricky one, though.
I would expect Labour supporters who really loved and wanted the best for patients to be disgusted with this. But their (mostly) silence on it shows that too many are more interested in the NHS as a nebulous concept that can be used to attack 'uncaring Tories' than the health of patients.
However I recognise that I came from a community and my success brings me obligations towards it. I recognise that I became well off because I benefited from a public education system. I don't seek to pull the ladder up behind me.
i don't want to hide behind walls and run away from people.
The company I own is also UK and international . For pretty much the same reasons we have now been developing outside the UK since late last year as we came to very similar conclusions . We are now actively looking to buy / lease construction yards certainly outside the UK and probably outside Europe. I really would much prefer to remain operating from the UK but just cannot with the uncertainties and definite threats that a Labour government will bring to the business. We now have a massive project with years of business development ahead so cannot just risk being here. Amongst others in similar business we seem to be not alone. People saw what Labour did last time and just will not risk it again.
It's sad but there it is.
For me the reaction of the day thus far came from Jasmine Birtles the acknowledged money expert on Sky News. Shown the front of the Daily Mirror by Eamonn Holmes and asked to comment, she said she simply didn't believe what Labour is promising. Ed Balls then had a car crash interview when Martin Daubney, son of a Nottinghamshire miner told Balls that Labour has lost the trust of people like him.
And to be fair, it’s extremely easy to do that!
However from what I see in my own extended family the situation is much more complex than “on benefits” = “scrounger”.
Wants to work but has become physically unable to do so. Check.
Wants to work but but can’t for same reason and is dreadfully embarressed abour it, so, when can, does voluntary work. Check.
In both cases they are parents, one at least of whose children has done very well in life (so far at least) either in work or educational achievement or both.
"What did they say, as a matter of interest?"
Trying to touch girls at a lap dancing club and being behind Islamic terrorism. Neither rang true but it struck me when I read your link to the Telegraph that believing these right wing rags with an agenda is dangerous.
I don't for example think Gilligan in the Telegraph is any more believable than the Mail hacks. Just another journalist with an agenda.
Incidentally if the letters under the Nawaz article are any reflection of public opinion his political career will be short lived
@BBCAllegra: Am told that fiscal charter / responsibility front page was added to the Labour manifesto last Friday. Late overhaul, acc to some sources
Mind you - there have to be some left for this process to work
I write this as a slap head myself so hopefully ogh will not take too much offense. :-)
If they leave, precisely what percentage of tax will they be paying here? Absolutely zero.
And they'll be taking jobs with them too.
What's the upside?
F1: I need to be clearer with my tips. I tipped Vettel for top 3 in qualifying, but it seems at least two people mistook this for meaning a podium in the race. Sorry about that.
... although it is worth noting he did get a podium in the race. And my actual race tip [No Safety Car] didn't come off.
A point of order. The Ashcroft constituency polls show a maximum of 39 Labour gains from the Tories and most of those "gains" were assessed last year.
@Financier
I nearly bought into your fantasy conference, until you wrote that. I wonder how many other extreme fantasists we have on pbCOM parading as something or other. Makes me giggle.
http://www.bild.de/politik/ausland/griechenland/griechische-regierung-prueft-neuwahlen-40517036.bild.html
This is being presented as Tsipras showing how strongly the Greek voters are behind him (he's at 40%) but it seems like the obvious solution to his current dilemma, which is that any compromise realistically available would be unacceptable to a big chunk of his coalition. So get a bigger majority, then he can survive losing a chunk of it.
It's about one every ten-twelve days now.
It usually sets Yougov up for a Tory lead within the following 48hrs.
"Dave's NHS/IHT/manifesto winner" coming to the front of the Sun fairly soon.
However, it's the people who have succeeded who need to provide that opportunity to the next generation. The whole system falls apart if the winners flee to the airport. You either have a stake in society or you don't
Mr. Tyson, there's nothing wrong with fantasists, you know
"There will be plenty of strong voices in Labour after a GE in which the party just about stands still saying that the electorate has delivered its judgment and that it does not want a Labour government - pretty much what happened last time, in fact."
Oh, I am sure there will be a number of Labour types appearing in the Tory press opposing a Labour Government if they have fewer seats than the SNP. They will be in the House of Lords or retired types whose careers would be unaffected by staying out of Government.
Anyone believing that Ed Miliband will refuse to become PM if Labour + SNP is a majority does not live in the real world. Apart from UK wide issues, letting the Tories back in when they could be stopped would reduce SLAB to Tory-like bit players in Scotland.
I have been on this site for many years now, and JackW is the wise sage on all things related to elections. He might be slightly toppy on Tory seats, but there again he might not.
LDs yet again sail further out left than the two parties and capture some more NOTA votes. These, together with harder-left Green switchers, will help Dave.
Or perhaps make another coalition more likely - long my position AAMOF as I don't believe the LDs, despite all the bluster against them, have done that bad a job and I think their supporters will realise this (saying this of course as all weekend polls have the LDs on 7%...).
These seem very different to me. What if I live alone in a £500K house and leave it to my aunty?
1. A Cameron majority Govt.
2. A Cameron minority followed by another GE within a year (1974).
3. A Cameron led coalition (2010).
4. A Miliband led coalition (2010).
5. A Miliband minority followed by another GE within a year (1974).
6. A Miliband majority Govt.
Now since option 3 and option 4 are almost equally as bad in the long term, what I really worry about is the 5th or 6th happening.
A strong private sector is required to pay for a strong public sector. And a strong public sector can help create a strong private sector. Not that Labour seems to understand this, though.
The F1 race was so boring on the radio that I didn't watch the highlights. Well done Lewis though; it seems he's totally demolished Rosberg's fight.
Incidentally, your "decision" provides ample proof as to why free markets, free movement and globalisation mostly benefit the privileged at the expense of the poor. Such is the dogma of the capitalist, I guess.
Run the Economy well enough to provide for the NHS
Con +1
Lab - 61
Instead, we should provide positive reasons to be here. Focusing on science, reducing the tax burden where possible, providing incentives. Then we'll attract rather than scare off businesses. We'll have more firms paying tax here and providing employment.
Mr. Jessop, interesting. Another chap I know online found the race dull but I really rather liked it. The top 6 were tedious but there were some great duels further down the field, particularly Verstappen's passes, Ricciardo and Ericsson, and Maldonado and Button.
I'll cry if they take Truro
The most recent polls from the other phone pollsters are:
Ashcroft: 2% Tory lead
ICM: 1% Tory lead
Ipsos MORI : 1% Labour lead
Having seen the West Aberdeen polling mind I do wonder what questions the yellow peril asked.
I'm 54. I've lived through the three day week, galloping inflation, high marginal tax rates, the ERM disaster, the dot-com boom and bust, four recessions and so on - just like many of us on here. Things are never as bad as people predict; I don't see Ed Milliband as the Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse.
I do think we are badly served by both politicians and media. Debt servicing is going to be the next administration's fourth largest line item. That's appalling, whatever your personal political views. I want us to run a balanced budget, and reduce the size of our national debt. My generation owes that to our children and grandchildren.
I wrote last night that Labour's pledge was very smart; I still don't trust them on the economy, but I can no longer take the Conservatives seriously either; whether that's ring-fencing the aid budget or promising real terms increases in public spending - it's just incoherent.
You yourself claimed the other day that you were "close to" the treatment given to David Cameron's son by the NHS, putting yourself in a bit of a quandary: because either it isn't true and you are a liar, or it is true and you are a loudmouthed braggart who deserves to be identified and sacked for breach of professional confidence. Which is it, or am I missing a third possibility?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/13/keep-it-in-the-ground-why-this-is-a-matter-of-basic-ethics
But I'd add that kids should be exposed to a variety of current views - that applies especially to faith schools, which may otherwise default to the faith, but also to secular schools. I don't actually mind kids hearing views that I disagree with, so long as they hear lots of others too: the teacher's job should be to encourage a spirit of mildly sceptical inquiry. I think that guest speakers do the job better than study of historical thinkers - what Tom Paine or Voltaire or Marx thought in a very different context seems a bit irrelevant even to me, and I'm at least as interested as the keenest teenager.
I'm coming to feel that it would make more sense to have CGT on the value added to all houses, whether primary residences or not, at the time of sale. And to abolish IHT. It's increasingly a tax to catch out middling folk who haven't had the money or the confidence to indulge in tax evasion. For this reason, it's important that deeds of variation are retained - if only to avoid perverse consequences.
@faisalislam
Conservatives hire 7 trucks showing miliband in salmons and sturgeons pocket in hotel car park... At the same time?
http://tinyurl.com/mvk6snc
1. What type of business would you describe it? (service, finance, legal, manufacturing etc)
2. Approximately what % of your revenue comes from UK, other EC and rest of world?
We provide legal services 100% in UK.
SNP 52% (+6), Lab 24% (-6), Con 13% (-1), LD 6% (+3), Green 3% (-1).
http://www.tnsglobal.com/uk/press-release/snp-increases-its-lead-in-latest-tns-poll
Fieldwork Mar 18th to April 8th
And I didn't say liar. I said fantasist. Politicians are habitual liars, fantasists are rather quite endearing.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/587381169324498944
But it does come back to my fundamental belief that the world is screwed, thanks to the entrenched system of "free markets", globalisation, free movement and free movement of capital that enable, if not encourage, the privileged to do selfish acts at the expense of others. Decisions like Financier's are both completely rational but ultimately disasterous for the ordinary person in the long-term.
The race to the bottom is impossible to stop. "Incentives" and "reducing the tax burden" are a short-term sticking plaster over fundamental issues and arguably just speeds the whole process up.
In theory, there's probably ways to stop it (e.g. minimum tax rates enforced with trade barriers), but it couldn't be done unilaterally and no-one would dare as the capitalist dogma is too entrenched. All that's realistically possible is to point and decry and hope that's sufficient.
I agree that one small step would be to provide better education and better training. But that's incredibly tough. And adult education has just been gutted, university tuition fees have gone up vertically and post-graduate education is generally a mess (e.g. the country is /still/ not producing enough doctors), so we're not going in right direction there.
And creating a better educated workforce would require solving complex problems that governments seem unwilling to tackle. Cycle of poverty, cycles of abuse, broken families, bad parenting, lack of communities etc. Of course, try to do something about that and it's the "nanny state". Ultimately, those are the reasons private schools succeed - because of the intake (and, well, connections). This government would rather just make subjects tougher (with a weird emphasis on rote learning) and then use the stick on things like welfare, which is a way simpler than actually trying to solve the issues.
SNP Seatspotting StakeBetValue
Show grouped bets
£2.00Buy @ 40-£8.00
This is just a historical thing - Tories seen less favourably on the NHS than Labour, as they have been for well, decades, fairly or not.
A few bn here or there is not going to change this in a few weeks
Orkney (It is NOT safe)...
Ross Skye
Berwickshire Roxburgh
Caithness
Gordon
This year is the first year of the Marriage Allowance, which is I think worth £200 a year to married couples where one of the couple does not use all their personal allowance, and is able to transfer £1000 of it to their other half.
He's on course to make sure that in Scotland the Tories have only four fewer MPs than Labour.
Who could have predicted that when he became party leader in 2005, when Scottish Labour had 40 more MPs than the Tories?
And are you really sure that Ed Miliband and Ed Balls understands enough about business to create an environment under which your business will continue to prosper?
(And 'OK' is not an answer).
You are about to become a PB legend!!!