Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the CON GE2015 manifesto had been specific about the tax
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If the CON GE2015 manifesto had been specific about the tax credit change it’s arguable that they would NOT have won
“.. the reason David Cameron chose not to include this policy in his manifesto – and the reason he promised before the election not to do it – is because he knows if he had done, he would not have been elected. Pushing working families into poverty even goes against the most right wing Tory rhetoric about those mythical “benefit scroungers”.
0
Comments
Your having a laugh ?
At the 2010 election the Lib Dems key policy was to abolish tuition fees and once in government tripled them !
Still hoping for an upturn in fortunes. Otrherwise it's back to my past; (Labour)
Did the Tories promise a big increase in the minimum wage in the election? Was the increase in free child care mentioned?
It seems that they have achieved that. Albeit with the truth.
As I recall, the Conservatives spoke airily of making cuts in welfare without being specific. Had they specifically targetted pensioner benefits, that would probably have been tantamount to political suicide as well. As it is, there's the unpleasant sense of deliberate obfuscation - the absence of clarity replacing defined policy objectives.
Edit: Apologies, I'm on a conference call and bored
The Tories got away with it because they had been in a Coalition Government, and far too many people thought that they were reformed characters. The electorate know better now.
And before anyone suggests UKIP, back to Fortress Britain is not attractive at all. At all!
Hardly. Parties will always make and presumably always have made vague and general statements about many things (they don't want to be pinned down if they can help it, and they know they will have to do some unpopular things if they get into power), and how much they get away with it will depend on the goodwill they have fostered elsewhere, strength of the opposition (and vague/generalness of their own statements) and simple chance, as there seems no rhyme or reason to what we the public will and will not get upset about, even if we are informed in advance or polls suggest we are generally in favour until it actually appears in reality.
The same was said in 2001, 2005 and 2010. – It matters not a jot about Manifesto promises, you simply break the promises you made and go to court to prove they’re worthless.
Now you can.
Iowa Democratic nomination.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-3195.html#polls
1. Is that largely correct
2. Does anyone have a brief summary of the basis that Norway's net payment is arrived at?
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/nicola-sturgeon-attends-unveiling-new-6721409
Heading back south now, enjoying the complimentary Speckled Hen in 1st Class.
@MrHarryCole: “It’s revenge for when they used to shout ‘Labour gain’ at us whenever a marginal MP popped up at PMQs” https://t.co/A8b7QVP8Nj
'Tories have always wanted a reputation for being economical.
It seems that they have achieved that. Albeit with the truth.'
Can't recall in the 97 or 01 Labour party manifestos any mention that they would drag the UK into every available war / conflict available.
What's new?
Voters who are gullible to believe promises before an election should pay the bill for it.
Does his agent not know when to stop digging?
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/28/army-blimp-goes-out-of-control-menacing-small-towns-and-thrilling-nation.html?
The price tag for that rogue military airship is 2 billion pounds each, talking about money going up in smoke.
Even it's acronym costs a ton of money: "Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System, J.L.E.N.S."
Your having a laugh ? At the 2010 election the Lib Dems key policy was to abolish tuition fees and once in government tripled them !>
'It was the Tories who tripled them, which was something they always wanted to do. Labour would have done exactly the same. The Lib Dems were stuck. End of story.'
That's complete bullshit, the Lib Dems could have easily made the the scrapping of tuition fees a red line in their coalition negotiations,they chose not to in spite of every Lib Dem MP making a personal pledge to scrap them.
My Dad, her son, has been in a care home since March with Alzheimers.
It was chaos in the hospital. Dreadful scenes. Patients suffering in corridors, nursing literally sprinting about, concerned looking patients and relatives everywhere. Doctors and nurses having an strategy-meeting in the corridor.
It's less bad where my Dad is, as it's a private home, but even there, the nurses are overwhelmed and have a two-year waiting list for patients.
Whatever side of the political divide you're on, it's obvious we have big problems with people getting older. Osborne's problems with cutting £4bn of welfare money demonstrates how bloody hard it is to be a politician. I think Osborne is wrong to cut money from lower earners, but where else does he cut it? Because anyone who walks into an A&E dept or a care home will see that cuts can't fall there; those places need huge long-term investment.
And investment with what? It's hard to invest when we're still £90bn in deficit. Heavily taxing the rich obviously doesn't work, logic will tell you if it did work every govt in the world would be doing it.
The country is teetering on a cliff-edge of problems. We have thousands of working twenty-somethings who need houses but can't afford them, we have an NHS which needs serious help, we have an ageing population who need care and - at present - there aren't enough people to look after them. It's scary.
I lived a pretty charmed life and problems only started setting in with my family over the past few years as my grandparents got older (my Dad's illness was freakish). Drawing back the curtain on the world of old age, dementia and crippled old people who survive purely on NHS pills and medicines revealed a world I'd never been aware of before. It sounds dramatic but it does change your outlook.
I voted Tory at the last GE, but even I'm starting to realise that middle-earners like me will need to start paying more a lot more taxes. I can't see how we are going to afford it all.
I hope you guys here all live long and charmed lives, but if you do, you may well end up either in a care home or dying in an A&E cubicle like my Nan did this morning. I know there's no nice way to go, but I like to think we can follow the good work the hospice people are doing and make the journey towards death as dignified as possible for as many as possible.
Sorry for your news. A loss, even when expected after a good long innings, is tough.
You raise some important issues in a very poignant post.
It's simply FPTP has made the SNP the de-facto party of the left, leftwing voters are not so dissapointed by the SNP that they will vote for Labour, so the SNP won't lose votes there.
On the other hand since Labour doesn't have any but 1 seat in scotland, they will lose all those tactical anti-SNP votes, that they borrowed from the right, to the Conservatives.
In wales Labour is still the principal party of the left and that has been reinforced with Corbyn, so it's PC that will lose votes to Labour, so Labour will do better in terms of votes. However UKIP will enter the welsh assembly, thus depriving probably Labour from a majority.
It will all come down to London, and how identity politics is played due to Khan's religion and nationality.
You have my sympathies over your loss. It is never easy to lose a loved one, even when it is a merciful release.
I think that you are right. Politicians have too long pretended that we can have first class public services, but always imply that the taxes will fall on others. The honest thing to balance the budgeet would be 5p or so on the lower rate of tax and the same on thd higher rate, but they want to pretend that we can live on the never-never.
Tories would be irritated to lose London Mayor, but loss will be factored in. We had a good run with Boris, the stakes are far higher for Labour. There is an expectation of success. If Corbyn, cant win London, where can he win?
You raise excellent points about priorities, unfortunately your family's plight has been pushed down the list because they aren't headline grabbing and you aren't all wailing on television.
The publicly paid officials responsible for this utter chaos hide behind a cloak of anonymity due to a deep sense of self preservation and of course rank cowardice but this should not stop us from giving due recognition to their remarkable achievements. No doubt they look forward to the day when everyone recognises that trying to run a business in Edinburgh or coming to the town for work is simply impossible so the unemployed remaining burghers can walk the streets in peace. Tonight was a notable step towards that objective.
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/13902134.Durham_to_hold_devolution_vote/
I'll be voting NO.
My condolences on your loss, Mr Fenster.
The problem isnt we dont tax enough, its that we spend too much. Tax revenue over the last fifteen years has oscillated between 35% and 38% of GDP. There has been a few one offs when it has peaked. Income tax now raises more or less the same percent of gdp as it did ten years ago, fifteen years ago, twenty years ago.
It is a myth.
The UK healthcare system is not fit for purpose, is noticeably worse than many of our European counterparts and will not be able to perform effectively no matter how much money you spend on it.
Until we rid ourselves of the idea that the NHS should be regarded as some sort of national religion and that any word said against it is tantamount to heresy, we will never be able to have meaningful reform to make it fit for purpose.
He's going to miss the 4.7 million votes cast from a bedsit above a pizza shop in Shoreditch now that the voter registration is tightened up. It will take a couple of elections before it is worked out how to cheat it.
We had no sense of entitlement and naturally accepted that the lion's share of the responsibility for our circumstances rested with us and that we had a responsibility to do our bit for those less able to care for themselves, but not to indulge them. We did not start our family until we could afford to care for them. When we did it was a push and we had to watch the pennies. My political motivation now concerns the kind of world our children and grandchildren will have to live in. I don't doubt that it will be a tougher world than we live in now and we oldies have no business making it any tougher than it needs to be.
The change is not consequence free. The art of taxing is to take as much as you can while minimising the impact.
Of course, spending reductions are not consequence free either...
http://m.westbriton.co.uk/GPs-Cornwall-s-hours-service/story-26610802-detail/story.html
The problem is that most expensive health care costs relate to chronic diseases of the elderly, and poor. This is a state that any of us can arrive at, or our families can arrive at. There are other ways of arranging healthcare other than the NHS but they are very rarely cheap or simple. Nearly every country in the developed world struggles with the same issues. The salami can be sliced differently but it is the same salami. Like the tax credits situation the losers are more vocal than the winners.
Add in Assange's minders...
The police are being hit very hard by the cuts but perhaps it will focus a bit of mind shifting onto worthwhile/non infinite resource sucking activities
And it's right that I should and will.