Swinson: "Luciana didn't want to leave Labour she was driven"
I see what she wants to say here, but is it wise to say some of your candidates are only here for negative reasons.
Or you might be saying that you are offering a broad church party of the centre, which can accommodate both Conservative and Labour members who have been driven out by the lurch of their own parties away from the centre ground.
Indeed. So say that. Keep saying it. There are millions of voters without a home now the two main parties have gone totally nuts.
Indeed. Lib Dems are the only lot left that I can vote for even though it will be a pointless vote as they have no chance where I live. I am wondering whether to bother voting at all.
I'd always suggest voting.
I mean, this Leaver (me) is going to vote Liberal Democrat... in BOOTLE! I mean, if that isn't the definition of insanity, I don't know what is.
But I'm still going to do it.
I agree with that attitude.
I have no intention of inflating the numbers of either Tory or Labour votes, regardless of whether they are the supposed only contenders.
Your vote is not just for this election. A vote for a no-hoper this time edges them towards an outside chance next time; a vote for an outside chance this time edges them towards a challenger next time.
Of course. And for someone who favours PR, it also goes towards reinforcing the case.
1983 general election: 30% 2017, latest opinion poll: 39%
Not a great improvement considering the way London's changed since then.
That IHT proposal could knock 5% off the Labour London vote.
Tories need to find a clever name to frame this tax (like Dementia Tax)
I suggest GRIEF TAX or WIDOW TAX
Death tax is the usual formulation. £125k does seem an odd figure, especially as so many of JC's inner circle are London-based. Is it confirmed or just a recycling of old stories?
"A government plan to create 200,000 new homes in England for first-time buyers has resulted in no homes being built, the National Audit Office has found. Announced in 2014, "starter homes" were meant to be aimed at those under the age of 40 and sold at a 20% discount. But legislation to take the project forward was never passed. Labour called the policy a total failure, but the government said it had a "great track record" for house building. Former prime minister David Cameron committed to the scheme in the 2015 Conservative Party manifesto as a way of tackling the affordable housing crisis."
Perth and North Perthshire has surely got to be the biggest target for the Tories in Scotland. In 2017 they came within 21 votes of taking it.
Of course that may well prove to be a Ruth led peak and the Tories are not polling in Scotland what they were then but the SNP probably aren't either. With 5k Labour votes still to squeeze (by both parties in fairness) it may well be determined by whose vote drops the least.
Later this month the indictment will be served on Alex Salmond. There will of course be reporting restrictions pending the trial but it is difficult not to see the SNP taking a modest hit from this and that is all that is required.
SNP ramping up the IndyRef rhetoric may help them in Central Belt against SLAB but could backfire here.
Agreed. It will probably win them disillusioned ex Labour voters in the central belt who see a Tory majority coming down the UK track once again. In Blairgowrie, last time I was canvassing there, that was much less of an issue.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
Has this been confirmed ? Until it’s in the manifesto then I’d be dubious .
It was trailed in the summer. It was not a cut in IHT threshold at all but a completely different way of doing it, taxing the recipient on receipts of over £125k not the estate.
1983 general election: 30% 2017, latest opinion poll: 39%
Not a great improvement considering the way London's changed since then.
That IHT proposal could knock 5% off the Labour London vote.
Tories need to find a clever name to frame this tax (like Dementia Tax)
I suggest GRIEF TAX or WIDOW TAX
Death tax is the usual formulation. £125k does seem an odd figure, especially as so many of JC's inner circle are London-based. Is it confirmed or just a recycling of old stories?
So basically it’s from some suggestion he thought was interesting in July . He apparently said he’d look at it . If Labour really are that stupid then they get what they deserve . First rule of elections as May found out don’t touch peoples properties or their ability to help the kids out .
1983 general election: 30% 2017, latest opinion poll: 39%
Not a great improvement considering the way London's changed since then.
That IHT proposal could knock 5% off the Labour London vote.
Tories need to find a clever name to frame this tax (like Dementia Tax)
I suggest GRIEF TAX or WIDOW TAX
Death tax is the usual formulation. £125k does seem an odd figure, especially as so many of JC's inner circle are London-based. Is it confirmed or just a recycling of old stories?
It was a proposal in a report, edited by George Monbiot, on housing issues.
Not all the proposals will be accepted we were told at the time. I doubt it will feature in the manifesto, but voters should be aware it is something Labour are talking about.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
I want to be a billionaire. I dont mind voting for taxation on billionaires.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
I want to be a billionaire. I dont mind voting for taxation on billionaires.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
I don't really give a tinker's wank what you think, I'm just saying this is a terrible policy, in electoral terms, and I hope Labour adopt it for that reason
Watching Jo Swinson this morning, I was reminded a lot of Veruca Salt from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
She has a voice problem. It's a big issue and comes up time and time again. Not enough to put off Europhiles but perhaps enough for Lab/Lib and Con/Lib switchers with a mild interest in politics. Thatcher got elocution lessons, she should do the same IMO.
She's having voice coaching. It showed in the HOC where she spoke slowly and with a lower timbre and got attention and respect. It shows less well in interviews where she is not delivering a prepared speech and is having to think more of the content of her response that how she delivers it. I'm sure she'll continue to receive coaching. I believe her voice coach also coached Rees-Mogg's sister Annunciata.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
I want to be a billionaire. I dont mind voting for taxation on billionaires.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
I don't really give a tinker's wank what you think, I'm just saying this is a terrible policy, in electoral terms, and I hope Labour adopt it for that reason
"This nature of this swing in private renters towards Labour was felt in English marginals.
Both the raw number and overall proportions of private renters are strongly correlated with falls in the Conservative vote. The number of private renters in an area correlates even more strongly than age to a fall in the Conservative vote."
If you look at Labour's wild and crazy spending plans, they are utterly unaffordable, and pragmatically impossible: as soon as anything like them was tried, creditors would flee the UK, the £ would crash to 30 cents, and Britain would default. We'd be Venezuela without the oil money.
But there is one way you *could* do it (if you're a boggle-eyed socialist Utopian): completely reorder society. Nationalise pensions. Nationalise big houses. Make all capital transfers taxable. Raid every purse and wallet in the country.
Then you'd have enormous sums to play with, and your plan becomes do-able.
Of course, in my mind, this would crash the country in a different way, and lead to plague and famine, but this may be what Labour are intent on doing, and we can see the shadows of it at work, now.
Perth and North Perthshire has surely got to be the biggest target for the Tories in Scotland. In 2017 they came within 21 votes of taking it.
Of course that may well prove to be a Ruth led peak and the Tories are not polling in Scotland what they were then but the SNP probably aren't either. With 5k Labour votes still to squeeze (by both parties in fairness) it may well be determined by whose vote drops the least.
Later this month the indictment will be served on Alex Salmond. There will of course be reporting restrictions pending the trial but it is difficult not to see the SNP taking a modest hit from this and that is all that is required.
SNP ramping up the IndyRef rhetoric may help them in Central Belt against SLAB but could backfire here.
Agreed. It will probably win them disillusioned ex Labour voters in the central belt who see a Tory majority coming down the UK track once again. In Blairgowrie, last time I was canvassing there, that was much less of an issue.
Suggests SNP are prioritising flattening SLAB as IndyRef drives a wedge into the traditional Labour vote while. at the same time, uniting Tories who might otherwise bleed votes due to Brexit. Straight choice really. I suspect it might have something to do with representations from SNP MPs who are much more vulnerable to SLAB recovery than from Tories. Most SNP MPs in Tory-facing seats lost last time - only survivor being Wishart in Perth and O'Hara in Argyll.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
I want to be a billionaire. I dont mind voting for taxation on billionaires.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
Its not about aspiration its about hitting perceived enemies.
It will of course mean less money to spend on things like oh, hospitals and schools but that seems secondary to Labour right now.
No one has said otherwise. We are saying most people own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes. And of those who own or want to own, probably 99.989% would then like to give that house to their kids, rather than to Jeremy Corbyn.
1983 general election: 30% 2017, latest opinion poll: 39%
Not a great improvement considering the way London's changed since then.
That IHT proposal could knock 5% off the Labour London vote.
Tories need to find a clever name to frame this tax (like Dementia Tax)
I suggest GRIEF TAX or WIDOW TAX
Death tax is the usual formulation. £125k does seem an odd figure, especially as so many of JC's inner circle are London-based. Is it confirmed or just a recycling of old stories?
So basically it’s from some suggestion he thought was interesting in July . He apparently said he’d look at it . If Labour really are that stupid then they get what they deserve . First rule of elections as May found out don’t touch peoples properties or their ability to help the kids out .
More worrying they keep it from the manifesto and then do it and other economically mad things anyway
Winchester and Sutton & Cheam look like the realistic LD Tory targets on these numbers. Guildford out of reach.
They are trying in Sutton and Cheam but they have a problem here in Sutton as it was the only borough in London where the lib dems went backwards at the locals last year.
On the Sutton and Cheam side of the borough there are now far more Tory councillors than Lib Dem and they have also parachuted in a candidadte from Merton which wont go down well . They still may do it of course but a more difficult task in an area that voted leave anyway.
1983 general election: 30% 2017, latest opinion poll: 39%
Not a great improvement considering the way London's changed since then.
That IHT proposal could knock 5% off the Labour London vote.
Tories need to find a clever name to frame this tax (like Dementia Tax)
I suggest GRIEF TAX or WIDOW TAX
Death tax is the usual formulation. £125k does seem an odd figure, especially as so many of JC's inner circle are London-based. Is it confirmed or just a recycling of old stories?
So basically it’s from some suggestion he thought was interesting in July . He apparently said he’d look at it . If Labour really are that stupid then they get what they deserve . First rule of elections as May found out don’t touch peoples properties or their ability to help the kids out .
More worrying they keep it from the manifesto and then do it and other economically mad things anyway
See my post below.
This is my sense too. Labour are going to need vast sums of cash to fund their manifesto. Hundreds of billions. Half a trillion. Lunatic figures.
There is no way it can be done (and they surely know this) unless they take total control of the economy, and nationalise wealth, basically.
Perhaps we are getting the odd glimpse of their real intent, if they won.
Perth and North Perthshire has surely got to be the biggest target for the Tories in Scotland. In 2017 they came within 21 votes of taking it.
Of course that may well prove to be a Ruth led peak and the Tories are not polling in Scotland what they were then but the SNP probably aren't either. With 5k Labour votes still to squeeze (by both parties in fairness) it may well be determined by whose vote drops the least.
Later this month the indictment will be served on Alex Salmond. There will of course be reporting restrictions pending the trial but it is difficult not to see the SNP taking a modest hit from this and that is all that is required.
SNP ramping up the IndyRef rhetoric may help them in Central Belt against SLAB but could backfire here.
Agreed. It will probably win them disillusioned ex Labour voters in the central belt who see a Tory majority coming down the UK track once again. In Blairgowrie, last time I was canvassing there, that was much less of an issue.
Suggests SNP are prioritising flattening SLAB as IndyRef drives a wedge into the traditional Labour vote while. at the same time, uniting Tories who might otherwise bleed votes due to Brexit. Straight choice really. I suspect it might have something to do with representations from SNP MPs who are much more vulnerable to SLAB recovery than from Tories. Most SNP MPs in Tory-facing seats lost last time - only survivor being Wishart in Perth and O'Hara in Argyll.
The SNP under Nicola is more left wing, and certainly a lot more statist, than it was under Salmond. Strategically this proved the right move destroying the once mighty SLAB which was the backbone of the Union. But there is always a price to pay and Wishart might just pay it.
If you look at Labour's wild and crazy spending plans, they are utterly unaffordable, and pragmatically impossible: as soon as anything like them was tried, creditors would flee the UK, the £ would crash to 30 cents, and Britain would default. We'd be Venezuela without the oil money.
But there is one way you *could* do it (if you're a boggle-eyed socialist Utopian): completely reorder society. Nationalise pensions. Nationalise big houses. Make all capital transfers taxable. Raid every purse and wallet in the country.
Then you'd have enormous sums to play with, and your plan becomes do-able.
Of course, in my mind, this would crash the country in a different way, and lead to plague and famine, but this may be what Labour are intent on doing, and we can see the shadows of it at work, now.
Tories already delivered on Famine hence the anti famine banks
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
I want to be a billionaire. I dont mind voting for taxation on billionaires.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
Its not about aspiration its about hitting perceived enemies.
It will of course mean less money to spend on things like oh, hospitals and schools but that seems secondary to Labour right now.
We have to raise x billion of tax each year.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
I would have thought Labour wouldn’t be stupid enough to mess with inheritance tax , given what they saw happen with Mays disastrous social care policy .
This would go down very badly especially in areas of the country with high property prices , and they will be hammered in London .
This would be like the dementia tax but even worse , it would sink their campaign .
Many of those more middle class Labour voters might be okay paying a bit more tax on their income but interfering with what they might leave the kids would be a huge own goal .
No one has said otherwise. We are saying most people own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes. And of those who own or want to own, probably 99.989% would then like to give that house to their kids, rather than to Jeremy Corbyn.
Hence the reason I said I disagreed with the underlying premise. But nunu2 seemed to be doubting the underlying fact that house ownership in London is a minority position. That is not the case.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
I want to be a billionaire. I dont mind voting for taxation on billionaires.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
Its not about aspiration its about hitting perceived enemies.
It will of course mean less money to spend on things like oh, hospitals and schools but that seems secondary to Labour right now.
We have to raise x billion of tax each year.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
And then passing on the proceeds of that to your family
My kids are autistic and struggle with life
They are never going to earn what I do
But hey some marxist c*nt wants to stop me providing for them so they can piss it up the wall.
1983 general election: 30% 2017, latest opinion poll: 39%
Not a great improvement considering the way London's changed since then.
That IHT proposal could knock 5% off the Labour London vote.
Tories need to find a clever name to frame this tax (like Dementia Tax)
I suggest GRIEF TAX or WIDOW TAX
Death tax is the usual formulation. £125k does seem an odd figure, especially as so many of JC's inner circle are London-based. Is it confirmed or just a recycling of old stories?
So basically it’s from some suggestion he thought was interesting in July . He apparently said he’d look at it . If Labour really are that stupid then they get what they deserve . First rule of elections as May found out don’t touch peoples properties or their ability to help the kids out .
More worrying they keep it from the manifesto and then do it and other economically mad things anyway
See my post below.
This is my sense too. Labour are going to need vast sums of cash to fund their manifesto. Hundreds of billions. Half a trillion. Lunatic figures.
There is no way it can be done (and they surely know this) unless they take total control of the economy, and nationalise wealth, basically.
Perhaps we are getting the odd glimpse of their real intent, if they won.
My fear is like any good marxist - they get in and they will take some shifting because they will not want to give it up.
No one has said otherwise. We are saying most people own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes. And of those who own or want to own, probably 99.989% would then like to give that house to their kids, rather than to Jeremy Corbyn.
Hence the reason I said I disagreed with the underlying premise. But nunu2 seemed to be doubting the underlying fact that house ownership in London is a minority position. That is not the case.
No I wasnt. I called him mad for suggesting it wasnt going to cost Labour a lot of votes. If he believes that he really is mad/deluded.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
Its not about aspiration its about hitting perceived enemies.
It will of course mean less money to spend on things like oh, hospitals and schools but that seems secondary to Labour right now.
We have to raise x billion of tax each year.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
And then passing on the proceeds of that to your family
My kids are autistic and struggle with life
They are never going to earn what I do
But hey some marxist c*nt wants to stop me providing for them so they can piss it up the wall.
Thanks but no thanks
Well that system held until we decided to inflate the value of assets through huge public subsidies at the expense of wage earners. If you exclude the majority from capital in a democratic capitalist system do not be surprised when you get Corbynism.
We are not there yet but I expect a repeat of the last decade would give a Corbynite policies a majority in ten years time.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
I want to be a billionaire. I dont mind voting for taxation on billionaires.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
Its not about aspiration its about hitting perceived enemies.
It will of course mean less money to spend on things like oh, hospitals and schools but that seems secondary to Labour right now.
We have to raise x billion of tax each year.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
And then passing on the proceeds of that to your family
My kids are autistic and struggle with life
They are never going to earn what I do
But hey some marxist c*nt wants to stop me providing for them so they can piss it up the wall.
Thanks but no thanks
Oh come on. They'll even spend some of it on the NHS. Honest! Have a think about it.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
Inheritance tax is a tax on income that has already been taxed. The person earning 40k through hard work saves a little all through his life then passes it on to his kids so they have a better life.
Labour's inheritance tax proposals could easily be 2019's dementia tax.
Nobody likes inheritance tax. It is anathema to our basic human nature, which is to provide for our offspring. Most people are happier to endure a tax on themselves (their income) than on their kids (their inheritance).
If the Tories know what's good for them they will exploit this to the full.
On topic, and on the subject of Southport (and reposted from late last night), I've heard from my own constituency of Bootle, that the Bootle and Sefton Central Lib Dems are basically abandoning campaigning in these two seats to throw everything they have at Southport.
All I've been told I'll get is the state paid for leaflet, and nowt else.
I assume that's all I'll get off any of the parties in my seat.
That’s telling.
Well, no one but Labour will ever win Bootle...
It’s not falling back to the Dunkirk perimeter but the LDs are already reining back their expectations.
I never expected them to form the next govt. I doubt that (privately) they expect it either
I received a glossy leaflet that says publically they think differently..... Are you saying "Prime Minister" Swinson is being less than truthful with the voters?
She is a politician. Nowadays, more than ever, they seem to lie without conscience. Boris is, IMO, a stunning example of the breed.
Boris has actually been sacked for it, three times I believe, so he's a trendsetter in this respect.
Any positive policies from the Tories yet or is this 2017 all over again
I don't think anybody is surprised that slashing of the IHT threshold or nationalization of private pensions is being discussed at high levels within the Labour party.
If Corbyn does become PM then, whilst the really crazy policies may not be in this manifesto, they will become hugely tempting as the economy unravels and tax take plummets.
You only need to look to Argentina and Hungary to see how governments move to confiscate private pensions.
Well that system held until we decided to inflate the value of assets through huge public subsidies at the expense of wage earners. If you exclude the majority from capital in a democratic capitalist system do not be surprised when you get Corbynism.
We are not there yet but I expect a repeat of the last decade would give a Corbynite policies a majority in ten years time.
And yet the majority even taking London into account do own their own houses and have seen a large increase in their value. So under your definition they are not excluded.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
Inheritance tax is a tax on income that has already been taxed. The person earning 40k through hard work saves a little all through his life then passes it on to his kids so they have a better life.
Labour's inheritance tax proposals could easily be 2019's dementia tax.
Nobody likes inheritance tax. It is anathema to our basic human nature, which is to provide for our offspring. Most people are happier to endure a tax on themselves (their income) than on their kids (their inheritance).
If the Tories know what's good for them they will exploit this to the full.
Also, knowing that if you work hard, you can then buy a nice house, which you can then give to your kids, is a huge incentive - to make you work hard. It's a simple and basic good thing. A driver. A motivator.
What's the effing point in slaving away all your life, to get a house, if Jeremy Corbyn can then pop by on your deathbed and say Nah, sorry mate, I'm taking your house and giving it to some people in Bootle who have never worked a day. Your kids will have to start again, you capitalist scum, hahahahahaha
It does not make for a great relationship between the citizen and the state. And it means people just won't bother working so hard. Brilliant.
Winchester and Sutton & Cheam look like the realistic LD Tory targets on these numbers. Guildford out of reach.
They are trying in Sutton and Cheam but they have a problem here in Sutton as it was the only borough in London where the lib dems went backwards at the locals last year.
On the Sutton and Cheam side of the borough there are now far more Tory councillors than Lib Dem and they have also parachuted in a candidadte from Merton which wont go down well . They still may do it of course but a more difficult task in an area that voted leave anyway.
Whatever happened to the poster on here who was Tory candidate for that seat. exRAF I think- Rick Willis ?
I would have thought Labour wouldn’t be stupid enough to mess with inheritance tax , given what they saw happen with Mays disastrous social care policy .
This would go down very badly especially in areas of the country with high property prices , and they will be hammered in London .
This would be like the dementia tax but even worse , it would sink their campaign .
Many of those more middle class Labour voters might be okay paying a bit more tax on their income but interfering with what they might leave the kids would be a huge own goal .
The proposal if it sees the light of day is to abolish IHT. Instead recipients of inheritance would be taxed. It would be an input into their income tax comp. It makes perfect sense on every level but I would be surprised to see it in the manifesto because it lends itself to misrepresentation of the "dementia tax" sort that could agitate "ordinary people".
Any positive policies from the Tories yet or is this 2017 all over again
I don't think anybody is surprised that slashing of the IHT threshold or nationalization of private pensions is being discussed at high levels within the Labour party.
If Corbyn does become PM then, whilst the really crazy policies may not be in this manifesto, they will become hugely tempting as the economy unravels and tax take plummets.
You only need to look to Argentina and Hungry to see how governments move to confiscate private pensions.
Not just Argentina. It happened much closer to home in Greece. The government confiscated wealth.
I've been reading Varoufakis's Adults in the Room. It's very good, if a bit long winded and detailed. There are two big takeaways: how far governments will go in a desperate situation, and how malignant the EU really is: oozing contempt for democracy.
The proposal if it sees the light of day is to abolish IHT. Instead recipients of inheritance would be taxed. It would be an input into their income tax comp. It makes perfect sense on every level but I would be surprised to see it in the manifesto because it lends itself to misrepresentation of the "dementia tax" sort that could agitate "ordinary people".
I look forward to seeing Corbyn dance on the head of that particularly tiny pin.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
I want to be a billionaire. I dont mind voting for taxation on billionaires.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
Its not about aspiration its about hitting perceived enemies.
It will of course mean less money to spend on things like oh, hospitals and schools but that seems secondary to Labour right now.
We have to raise x billion of tax each year.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
And yet in less than 3 years that person earning £40K a year will earned more than the value of that one off inheritance - which anyway may well have been split between more than one beneficiary.
And why should I work hard and save to try and get a better life for my kids if the Government is just going to steal most of it from me anyway?
I would have thought Labour wouldn’t be stupid enough to mess with inheritance tax , given what they saw happen with Mays disastrous social care policy .
This would go down very badly especially in areas of the country with high property prices , and they will be hammered in London .
This would be like the dementia tax but even worse , it would sink their campaign .
Many of those more middle class Labour voters might be okay paying a bit more tax on their income but interfering with what they might leave the kids would be a huge own goal .
The proposal if it sees the light of day is to abolish IHT. Instead recipients of inheritance would be taxed. It would be an input into their income tax comp. It makes perfect sense on every level but I would be surprised to see it in the manifesto because it lends itself to misrepresentation of the "dementia tax" sort that could agitate "ordinary people".
Hearing suggestions that the Unite To Remain pact is now going to be announced later this week.
Farage should think very carefully about what this means. Maybe he does want to remain, after all.
Course he does. In the last few weeks, Farage has been Remains biggest asset of all.
Bit like Corbyn is Leaves greatest friend.
There was someone on here back in 2014 who said (re: Scottish referendum) that the morning after the vote, if YES had won, you'd probably have Salmond quietly say to himself, "What have I done?"
Farage is the same. He's long ago realised that he doesn't really want Brexit at all. He loses everything if we leave the EU. His job, his influence, his power.
I mean, who the hell wants to hear what Farage has to say if we leave the EU? He won't even get a gig on the speaking circuit. "And now ladies and gentlemen, I introduce Nigel Farage... who is here to talk about.... well, I don't know what."
He can tell his war stories to his Grandkids, no one else will want to know.
Winchester and Sutton & Cheam look like the realistic LD Tory targets on these numbers. Guildford out of reach.
Guildford has 'local issues' which may bring it into reach. (Other PBers should be able to help us here; it's a while since I lived there.)
Gossip is that Anne Milton is planning to stand as an independent. That may well put the Lib Dems right into play.
I believe she is but will that not hurt the Lib Dems more? Plenty of remainy Tories might stick with her rather than switch directly.
I doubt it but I'm not local so others might have a more nuanced view. Everyone who votes LD or Anne Milton still doesn't vote Tory so every vote she can peel off will help.
Hearing suggestions that the Unite To Remain pact is now going to be announced later this week.
Farage should think very carefully about what this means. Maybe he does want to remain, after all.
Course he does. In the last few weeks, Farage has been Remains biggest asset of all.
Bit like Corbyn is Leaves greatest friend.
There was someone on here back in 2014 who said (re: Scottish referendum) that the morning after the vote, if YES had won, you'd probably have Salmond quietly say to himself, "What have I done?"
Farage is the same. He's long ago realised that he doesn't really want Brexit at all. He loses everything if we leave the EU. His job, his influence, his power.
I mean, who the hell wants to hear what Farage has to say if we leave the EU? He won't even get a gig on the speaking circuit. "And now ladies and gentlemen, I introduce Nigel Farage... who is here to talk about.... well, I don't know what."
He can tell his war stories to his Grandkids, no one else will want to know.
Very notable how many BXP supporters on Twitter are critical of Farage, and sometimes furious.
Labour's going to........ change the IHT threshold to ~ £125k apparently o_O !
The Tories should be all over that. Massive vote loser if weaponised properly. Half the country lives in houses potentially worth more than £125k
How many of those vote Labour and live in seats Labour can win. Not many.
Well, just about all of London, and a fair chunk of Manchester, I'd say.
Most Londoners do not own their own homes. Those that do tend to already vote Tory or LD.
90% of Londoners either own their own homes or WANT to own their own homes, partly so they will have something to hand on to their kids.
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
Its not about aspiration its about hitting perceived enemies.
It will of course mean less money to spend on things like oh, hospitals and schools but that seems secondary to Labour right now.
We have to raise x billion of tax each year.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
And yet in less than 3 years that person earning £40K a year will earned more than the value of that one off inheritance - which anyway may well have been split between more than one beneficiary.
And why should I work hard and save to try and get a better life for my kids if the Government is just going to steal most of it from me anyway?
No-one is going to steal most of it. Less than half of it would be recycled into the economy to everyones benefit.
If there is more than one recipitent they would each get a £125k allowance under the proposed system from the summer.
Hearing suggestions that the Unite To Remain pact is now going to be announced later this week.
Farage should think very carefully about what this means. Maybe he does want to remain, after all.
Course he does. In the last few weeks, Farage has been Remains biggest asset of all.
Bit like Corbyn is Leaves greatest friend.
There was someone on here back in 2014 who said (re: Scottish referendum) that the morning after the vote, if YES had won, you'd probably have Salmond quietly say to himself, "What have I done?"
Farage is the same. He's long ago realised that he doesn't really want Brexit at all. He loses everything if we leave the EU. His job, his influence, his power.
I mean, who the hell wants to hear what Farage has to say if we leave the EU? He won't even get a gig on the speaking circuit. "And now ladies and gentlemen, I introduce Nigel Farage... who is here to talk about.... well, I don't know what."
He can tell his war stories to his Grandkids, no one else will want to know.
Very notable how many BXP supporters on Twitter are critical of Farage, and sometimes furious.
Ranting on BBC news about not being included in ITV "Head to Head" with BJ & JC is NOT a good look. It's a GE - social & fiscal policies will be explored. You don't appear to have any Given that your record in Coalition is indicative - we'll take them as read.
Ranting on BBC news about not being included in ITV "Head to Head" with BJ & JC is NOT a good look. It's a GE - social & fiscal policies will be explored. You don't appear to have any Given that your record in Coalition is indicative - we'll take them as read.
Thanks
BJO
If that's addressed to her, why are you bothering the rest of us with it?
Swinson: "Luciana didn't want to leave Labour she was driven"
I see what she wants to say here, but is it wise to say some of your candidates are only here for negative reasons.
Or you might be saying that you are offering a broad church party of the centre, which can accommodate both Conservative and Labour members who have been driven out by the lurch of their own parties away from the centre ground.
Indeed. So say that. Keep saying it. There are millions of voters without a home now the two main parties have gone totally nuts.
Indeed. Lib Dems are the only lot left that I can vote for even though it will be a pointless vote as they have no chance where I live. I am wondering whether to bother voting at all.
I'd always suggest voting.
I mean, this Leaver (me) is going to vote Liberal Democrat... in BOOTLE! I mean, if that isn't the definition of insanity, I don't know what is.
But I'm still going to do it.
Why would a Leaver in Bootle vote Lib Dem?
If you had come across the former Political Education Officer for the Bootle Labour Party (and did not want to vote Conservative) you would know the answer.
I would have thought Labour wouldn’t be stupid enough to mess with inheritance tax , given what they saw happen with Mays disastrous social care policy .
This would go down very badly especially in areas of the country with high property prices , and they will be hammered in London .
This would be like the dementia tax but even worse , it would sink their campaign .
Many of those more middle class Labour voters might be okay paying a bit more tax on their income but interfering with what they might leave the kids would be a huge own goal .
The proposal if it sees the light of day is to abolish IHT. Instead recipients of inheritance would be taxed. It would be an input into their income tax comp. It makes perfect sense on every level but I would be surprised to see it in the manifesto because it lends itself to misrepresentation of the "dementia tax" sort that could agitate "ordinary people".
Ah glad you dropped by. I was listening to the Great Laura on PL today. Her view wrt Lab's ludicrous position on Brexit, was that the country was divided and hence it was only sensible for the Labour Party to reflect that division by letting the public decide whether they wanted to leave the EU or not and that Labour should, rightly, not take a position on the matter.
Given the many paragraphs you eloquently set down yesterday telling us it was a political party's role to lead, not follow, no matter how unpopular the cause or policy was, how exactly do you square away La Pidcock's pronouncements?
Well that system held until we decided to inflate the value of assets through huge public subsidies at the expense of wage earners. If you exclude the majority from capital in a democratic capitalist system do not be surprised when you get Corbynism.
We are not there yet but I expect a repeat of the last decade would give a Corbynite policies a majority in ten years time.
And yet the majority even taking London into account do own their own houses and have seen a large increase in their value. So under your definition they are not excluded.
I said we are not yet at the stage of a majority excluded but if we repeat the levels of QE, HTB, Housing Benefit and state subsided mortgage banks that we have done for the last decade over the next decade we may well reach that stage.
Winchester and Sutton & Cheam look like the realistic LD Tory targets on these numbers. Guildford out of reach.
They are trying in Sutton and Cheam but they have a problem here in Sutton as it was the only borough in London where the lib dems went backwards at the locals last year.
On the Sutton and Cheam side of the borough there are now far more Tory councillors than Lib Dem and they have also parachuted in a candidadte from Merton which wont go down well . They still may do it of course but a more difficult task in an area that voted leave anyway.
Whatever happened to the poster on here who was Tory candidate for that seat. exRAF I think- Rick Willis ?
If you don’t know google Richard Willis former reading borough councillor
I've always thought the most equitable solution to IHT would be to allow it as a one off pension pot payment. It then gets taxed in the normal way on drawdown etc.
Comments
And for someone who favours PR, it also goes towards reinforcing the case.
It does appear to be an unusually generous bequest to the Tories, so we need reliable confirmation.
Seems like a McDonnell "unconfirmed" plan
https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1147328/Labour-latest-news-John-McDonnell-Jeremy-Corbyn-inheritance-tax-lifetime-gifts-Tory
Lets await the manifesto.
Popular though it might be to blame them for anything awkward.
See how that goes down
Labour don't get this. They see it as selfish. They have never understood aspiration, and of those few that do understand it, they despise it.
Apart from the Milibands, of course, whose Marxist father made special arrangements to avoid IHT, so he could hand on his house to his kids.
Big swing to the libdems in the tory shires
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/hmrc-policy/lifetime-gift-tax-labour-plans-to-scrap-iht
CON: 42% (-11)
LDM: 31% (+12)
LAB: 16% (-12)
BXP: 8% (+8)
Others: 4% (+4)
Changes on GE17
Looking at their share in London and places like this, you have to wonder why they are bothering. I think some of their supporters will feel the same.
https://citywire.co.uk/funds-insider/news/nationalise-pensions-says-labour-economist/a1157896
Not all the proposals will be accepted we were told at the time. I doubt it will feature in the manifesto, but voters should be aware it is something Labour are talking about.
I wont take lectures on aspiration from a Tory party, establishment or government who have reduced equality of opportunity, and given huge subsidies to rich elderly homeowners over the last decade at the expense of the working population.
Aspiration works if you have a fair game, if you rig the system eventually those you exclude will look for new solutions such as this one.
Play nicely
"This nature of this swing in private renters towards Labour was felt in English marginals.
Both the raw number and overall proportions of private renters are strongly correlated with falls in the Conservative vote. The number of private renters in an area correlates even more strongly than age to a fall in the Conservative vote."
But there is one way you *could* do it (if you're a boggle-eyed socialist Utopian): completely reorder society. Nationalise pensions. Nationalise big houses. Make all capital transfers taxable. Raid every purse and wallet in the country.
Then you'd have enormous sums to play with, and your plan becomes do-able.
Of course, in my mind, this would crash the country in a different way, and lead to plague and famine, but this may be what Labour are intent on doing, and we can see the shadows of it at work, now.
I suspect it might have something to do with representations from SNP MPs who are much more vulnerable to SLAB recovery than from Tories. Most SNP MPs in Tory-facing seats lost last time - only survivor being Wishart in Perth and O'Hara in Argyll.
On the most recent numbers from the Government Housing Survey in 2017, home ownership in London was 48% of all households.
https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/housing/owning-and-renting/home-ownership/latest#by-ethnicity-and-area
It will of course mean less money to spend on things like oh, hospitals and schools but that seems secondary to Labour right now.
On the Sutton and Cheam side of the borough there are now far more Tory councillors than Lib Dem and they have also parachuted in a candidadte from Merton which wont go down well .
They still may do it of course but a more difficult task in an area that voted leave anyway.
This is my sense too. Labour are going to need vast sums of cash to fund their manifesto. Hundreds of billions. Half a trillion. Lunatic figures.
There is no way it can be done (and they surely know this) unless they take total control of the economy, and nationalise wealth, basically.
Perhaps we are getting the odd glimpse of their real intent, if they won.
One person receives £100k inheritance for doing nothing
Another person works 50 hours a week to earn £40k
Our system thinks we should tax the person earning £40k through hard work rather than the one getting £100k because their parents died.
Aspiration to me is about making a success of your career, rewarding those who take education and hard work seriously. It is not about waiting until your 50s and 60s and receiving an inheritance.
This would go down very badly especially in areas of the country with high property prices , and they will be hammered in London .
This would be like the dementia tax but even worse , it would sink their campaign .
Many of those more middle class Labour voters might be okay paying a bit more tax on their income but interfering with what they might leave the kids would be a huge own goal .
My kids are autistic and struggle with life
They are never going to earn what I do
But hey some marxist c*nt wants to stop me providing for them so they can piss it up the wall.
Thanks but no thanks
We are not there yet but I expect a repeat of the last decade would give a Corbynite policies a majority in ten years time.
Any positive policies from the Tories yet or is this 2017 all over again
Labour's inheritance tax proposals could easily be 2019's dementia tax.
Nobody likes inheritance tax. It is anathema to our basic human nature, which is to provide for our offspring. Most people are happier to endure a tax on themselves (their income) than on their kids (their inheritance).
If the Tories know what's good for them they will exploit this to the full.
There are no votes in removing the ability of parents to think they might help future generations of the family .
If Corbyn does become PM then, whilst the really crazy policies may not be in this manifesto, they will become hugely tempting as the economy unravels and tax take plummets.
You only need to look to Argentina and Hungary to see how governments move to confiscate private pensions.
What's the effing point in slaving away all your life, to get a house, if Jeremy Corbyn can then pop by on your deathbed and say Nah, sorry mate, I'm taking your house and giving it to some people in Bootle who have never worked a day. Your kids will have to start again, you capitalist scum, hahahahahaha
It does not make for a great relationship between the citizen and the state. And it means people just won't bother working so hard. Brilliant.
Worth noting that the LDs did rather less well in the local elections in SE Cambs than in neighbouring South Cambridgeshire.
I've been reading Varoufakis's Adults in the Room. It's very good, if a bit long winded and detailed. There are two big takeaways: how far governments will go in a desperate situation, and how malignant the EU really is: oozing contempt for democracy.
And why should I work hard and save to try and get a better life for my kids if the Government is just going to steal most of it from me anyway?
Bit like Corbyn is Leaves greatest friend.
There was someone on here back in 2014 who said (re: Scottish referendum) that the morning after the vote, if YES had won, you'd probably have Salmond quietly say to himself, "What have I done?"
Farage is the same. He's long ago realised that he doesn't really want Brexit at all. He loses everything if we leave the EU. His job, his influence, his power.
I mean, who the hell wants to hear what Farage has to say if we leave the EU? He won't even get a gig on the speaking circuit.
"And now ladies and gentlemen, I introduce Nigel Farage... who is here to talk about.... well, I don't know what."
He can tell his war stories to his Grandkids, no one else will want to know.
If there is more than one recipitent they would each get a £125k allowance under the proposed system from the summer.
Ranting on BBC news about not being included in ITV
"Head to Head" with BJ & JC is NOT a good look.
It's a GE - social & fiscal policies will be explored.
You don't appear to have any
Given that your record in Coalition is indicative - we'll take them as read.
Thanks
BJO
Given the many paragraphs you eloquently set down yesterday telling us it was a political party's role to lead, not follow, no matter how unpopular the cause or policy was, how exactly do you square away La Pidcock's pronouncements?
Work all your life to make a better life for your kids and the Government will steal it from them when you die.