Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
To a large extent - particularly in London - this has been caused by the property market being inflated by people buying property on the back of family money.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
Then why is your party raising all the taxes mate?
They aren't, NI is not a tax it is National Insurance, income tax and IHT are not going up
Yet
IFS calls NI a "tax". So I don't think @HYUFD is correct.
But die Linke wil probably get 3 Direktmandate so be allowed their national %ge of seats.
Someone earlier was reporting they'd done badly in their "safe seats" in Berlin. Not sure if that's still the case.
Well as Berlin seems to be counting slowly (the have lots of different elections on the same day) it is not easy to know, but on the TV earlier and in the German press, it seems that they are not worried. They might not get those safe seats, but the best guess at the moment is that they will. Also all the coalition possibilitiy graphics are assuming that die Linke will around 5% be in the Bundestag, not just 2 seats.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.
And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
"...recent government statistics show the average inheritance is £11,000, but among those aged 55-64 it is £33,000 and among over-65s it is £20,000."
IHT should be completely abolished, and any money received simply taxed as income. Which should include NI too as that should be merged with income tax.
It is repugnant to say that an inheritance is less worthy of being taxed than money actually worked for.
FPT Re Jimmy Saville. He groomed an entire nation's Establishment. Using him to have a pop at just the BBC is a bit reductive. Strangely. It was widely rumoured about amongst the younger generation. We knew not to go to his club in Manchester. Don't know anyone my age who thought him other than a total creep. But our elders and betters couldn't contain their gushing enthusiasm for the living saint amongst us. Any forensic dramatisation might expose the hypocrisy of an entire generation.
As to why whistleblowers don't speak up, even though they know ought to know or suspect, well let me ask the men amongst you this. Every woman I know has suffered sexual harassment of some kind, some of it the most serious there is. Statistically, you must know men who have raped or sexually harassed women. How often have you blown the whistle about their conduct? And, if not, why not?
That's an exceptionally stupidly put question if I may say so, which given your ability to be very clear is surprising. You've jumped straight from saying that statistically we must know someone who has raped or sexually harassed a woman to presuming we know about it happening.
At the very least allow the possibility of us being blind enough to not realise we know a rapist or sexual assaulter and criticise that, than jump immediately to an implicit accusation we've decided not to report a rapist.
As it stands your question doesn't make any point about whistleblowing, since a whistleblower knows something is up and you've apparently granted all men the power of omniscence.
If you want to make the point that men should be far more alert to the signs someone is a rapist or sexual assaulter, perhaps say that rather than presume everyone knows but does nothing.
You are right people do not like those who blow the whistle - it's why many whistleblowing policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, since the desire to punish remains. But your question to illustrate it doesn'trelate to that at all.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
And I think what polling on this we have the general population back on on this Big G.
However, where HY might be right, an important section of Tory support may be in the oppose column?
As long as it keeps them in their seats they will not complain but what @HYUFD is blinded on, is that the country have moved as a body left wanting more covid regulations and lockdowns if necessary and absolutely spending on the NHS and social care, and listening to him at the UN he is really pushing climate change for all its worth which is very much today's topic
For all his faults, Boris understands this and is moving onto that agenda and if some of his right wingers complain then he will just carry on anyway
59% of voters think inheritance tax is unfair, including 67% of Conservative voters, it is the most unpopular tax there is
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
Then why is your party raising all the taxes mate?
They aren't, NI is not a tax it is National Insurance, income tax and IHT are not going up
Income tax thresholds are frozen, inflation is positive (~5%) = Tax rise
IHT thresholds frozen, = Tax rise
Cap gains frozen = Tax rise
Studen loan threshold plummeting = Tax rise
NI rising = Tax rise^2
The Tories aren't content with just raising all the taxes, so they're inventing whole new ones!
They are attempting to balance the books, and much As I hate tax, (all tax is theft) its still better than borrowing.
We have borrowed so much money in the last year that the numbers are eye watering, all with the opposition and media encouragement. and its achieved virtually nothing, delayed some cases but ultimately very little.
It would be much better to cut spending but cancel HS2 maybe, stop subsidising pointless university courses, privatise a few bits, and deregulate the economy, but we won't.
Laschet might well not get a seat in the Bundestag. He is not standing in a constituency and the CDU are predicted not to get any "list candidates" elected in his state. But he might still be chosen to be chancellor.
But die Linke wil probably get 3 Direktmandate so be allowed their national %ge of seats.
Word on the street is they may only get two, which would reduce them to a couple bumps in the Bundestag.
The boffins on the VoteUK forum seem to be saying that they're going to get 3 but because 2 are in Berlin and 1 elsewhere they won't get any bonus seats. You need 3 in the same area.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
"...recent government statistics show the average inheritance is £11,000, but among those aged 55-64 it is £33,000 and among over-65s it is £20,000."
That actually gives the average inheritance as £125,000. The AVERAGE voter in the South East and London will now get an inheritance above the IHT thereshold because of property prices there not just the rich. As the article says the number receiving a sizeable inheritance will rise significantly, especially in areas with high property prices
But die Linke wil probably get 3 Direktmandate so be allowed their national %ge of seats.
Word on the street is they may only get two, which would reduce them to a couple bumps in the Bundestag.
The boffins on the VoteUK forum seem to be saying that they're going to get 3 but because 2 are in Berlin and 1 elsewhere they won't get any bonus seats. You need 3 in the same area.
Are you cheating on us?
I've edited that post because I'm not sure it's correct. Always seems to be confusion on this issue, even amongst the experts.
FPT Re Jimmy Saville. He groomed an entire nation's Establishment. Using him to have a pop at just the BBC is a bit reductive. Strangely. It was widely rumoured about amongst the younger generation. We knew not to go to his club in Manchester. Don't know anyone my age who thought him other than a total creep. But our elders and betters couldn't contain their gushing enthusiasm for the living saint amongst us. Any forensic dramatisation might expose the hypocrisy of an entire generation.
As to why whistleblowers don't speak up, even though they know ought to know or suspect, well let me ask the men amongst you this. Every woman I know has suffered sexual harassment of some kind, some of it the most serious there is. Statistically, you must know men who have raped or sexually harassed women. How often have you blown the whistle about their conduct? And, if not, why not?
That's an exceptionally stupidly put question if I may say so, which given your ability to be very clear is surprising. You've jumped straight from saying that statistically we must know someone who has raped or sexually harassed a woman to presuming we know about it happening.
At the very least allow the possibility of us being blind enough to not realise we know a rapist or sexual assaulter and criticise that, than jump immediately to an implicit accusation we've decided not to report a rapist.
As it stands your question doesn't make any point about whistleblowing, since a whistleblower knows something is up and you've apparently granted all men the power of omniscence.
If you want to make the point that men should be far more alert to the signs someone is a rapist or sexual assaulter, perhaps say that rather than presume everyone knows but does nothing.
You are right people do not like those who blow the whistle - it's why many whistleblowing policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, since the desire to punish remains. But your question to illustrate it doesn'trelate to that at all.
Well said. A woman who has been abused may share her experience.
A man who abuses others almost certainly does not share their experience.
I don't know of anyone who has done anything to "blow the whistle" on. Not a single thing. Now if Cyclefree is saying that its happened but I wasn't aware of it . . . well how could I blow the whistle if I'm not aware of it?
But die Linke wil probably get 3 Direktmandate so be allowed their national %ge of seats.
Word on the street is they may only get two, which would reduce them to a couple bumps in the Bundestag.
The boffins on the VoteUK forum seem to be saying that they're going to get 3 but because 2 are in Berlin and 1 elsewhere they won't get any bonus seats. You need 3 in the same area.
But die Linke wil probably get 3 Direktmandate so be allowed their national %ge of seats.
Word on the street is they may only get two, which would reduce them to a couple bumps in the Bundestag.
The boffins on the VoteUK forum seem to be saying that they're going to get 3 but because 2 are in Berlin and 1 elsewhere they won't get any bonus seats. You need 3 in the same area.
Are you cheating on us?
I've edited that post because I'm not sure it's correct. Always seems to be confusion on this issue, even amongst the experts.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
Rewarding hard work is supposed to be a core Tory principle.
If you don't think it is, you can shove your core principles where the sun doesn't shine.
That is as much a liberal as a conservative principle. The Liberal Party was often the party of shifting tax from income to wealth in the 19th century and early 20th century, the Labour Party the party of increasing both income and inheritance tax.
Preserving estates and inheritance however has always been a conservative principle since the Tory party was founded in the late 17th century.
That is why I am a Tory and you are a classical Liberal
Holy cow: Berliners have voted for this law to seize at 'well below market rates' over 200k properties from corporate landlords. The ballot is non-binding and the law may well be unconstitutional, but a dramatic moment nonetheless.
Fake news, There has been no information about this referendum. Even as a lefty ( but not a Linke) I voted against this as it is not the right way to go about unfair high rents.
Holy cow: Berliners have voted for this law to seize at 'well below market rates' over 200k properties from corporate landlords. The ballot is non-binding and the law may well be unconstitutional, but a dramatic moment nonetheless.
Fake news, There has been no information about this referendum. Even as a lefty ( but not a Linke) I voted against this as it is not the right way to go about unfair high rents.
Well they would claim that, that is the group that brought the referendum. There is no official news yet.
I don't think they'd make up the numbers, do you? Most likely is that they are preliminary figures, but based on a fair chunk of the vote so reasonable to assume it's representative.
Laschet might well not get a seat in the Bundestag. He is not standing in a constituency and the CDU are predicted not to get any "list candidates" elected in his state. But he might still be chosen to be chancellor.
In that scenario wouldn't the chances of the CDU/CSU leading the coalition be very low?
Holy cow: Berliners have voted for this law to seize at 'well below market rates' over 200k properties from corporate landlords. The ballot is non-binding and the law may well be unconstitutional, but a dramatic moment nonetheless.
Fake news, There has been no information about this referendum. Even as a lefty ( but not a Linke) I voted against this as it is not the right way to go about unfair high rents.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
FPT Re Jimmy Saville. He groomed an entire nation's Establishment. Using him to have a pop at just the BBC is a bit reductive. Strangely. It was widely rumoured about amongst the younger generation. We knew not to go to his club in Manchester. Don't know anyone my age who thought him other than a total creep. But our elders and betters couldn't contain their gushing enthusiasm for the living saint amongst us. Any forensic dramatisation might expose the hypocrisy of an entire generation.
As to why whistleblowers don't speak up, even though they know ought to know or suspect, well let me ask the men amongst you this. Every woman I know has suffered sexual harassment of some kind, some of it the most serious there is. Statistically, you must know men who have raped or sexually harassed women. How often have you blown the whistle about their conduct? And, if not, why not?
That's an exceptionally stupidly put question if I may say so, which given your ability to be very clear is surprising. You've jumped straight from saying that statistically we must know someone who has raped or sexually harassed a woman to presuming we know about it happening.
At the very least allow the possibility of us being blind enough to not realise we know a rapist or sexual assaulter and criticise that, than jump immediately to an implicit accusation we've decided not to report a rapist.
As it stands your question doesn't make any point about whistleblowing, since a whistleblower knows something is up and you've apparently granted all men the power of omniscence.
If you want to make the point that men should be far more alert to the signs someone is a rapist or sexual assaulter, perhaps say that rather than presume everyone knows but does nothing.
You are right people do not like those who blow the whistle - it's why many whistleblowing policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, since the desire to punish remains. But your question to illustrate it doesn'trelate to that at all.
Well said. A woman who has been abused may share her experience.
A man who abuses others almost certainly does not share their experience.
I don't know of anyone who has done anything to "blow the whistle" on. Not a single thing. Now if Cyclefree is saying that its happened but I wasn't aware of it . . . well how could I blow the whistle if I'm not aware of it?
I can accept, particularly in the case of harrassment, that I have not seen something that should have been obvious, that I have not reported language that I should have perhaps, and that too many people, probably otherwise decent people, have seen actions that they should have reported but did nothing for one reason or another. And that I, and many men, have much to learn about what is or was thought acceptable.
What I won't accept is the absurd proposition that all men know a rapist and harrasser, and know that person is a racist and harrasser, and did nothing, without the acknowledgement that the second part of that proposition is simply not true, and thus the premise that either something was done or it was covered up must be true. Those are not the only options.
If the argument is too many do know someone committed such offences and still did nothing? I can accept that too. But that was not the argument put. And, clearly, from such an erudite person, deliberately not put.
The headline figures are done on the list vote. I think the numbers you quote is the constituency vote.
Thanks - yes - I see now.
Not sure why there is such a big difference between the two votes?
It's quite common to split the vote in Germany. Check the scottish parliament election as well. Virtually all the green votes were split votes as only a couple stood in their constituencies.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
And I think what polling on this we have the general population back on on this Big G.
However, where HY might be right, an important section of Tory support may be in the oppose column?
As long as it keeps them in their seats they will not complain but what @HYUFD is blinded on, is that the country have moved as a body left wanting more covid regulations and lockdowns if necessary and absolutely spending on the NHS and social care, and listening to him at the UN he is really pushing climate change for all its worth which is very much today's topic
For all his faults, Boris understands this and is moving onto that agenda and if some of his right wingers complain then he will just carry on anyway
59% of voters think inheritance tax is unfair, including 67% of Conservative voters, it is the most unpopular tax there is
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.
And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
Becoming a home owner rather than a renter is an example of social mobility, of course.
More of our top professions like law and medicine had state educated practitioners when we had more grammar schools than now when they are mainly dominated by private schools. Grammars had and have a good record of Oxbridge entry, certainly better than most comprehensives. We also had plenty of grammar school PMs, we have yet to have a PM fully educated at a comprehensive
Laschet might well not get a seat in the Bundestag. He is not standing in a constituency and the CDU are predicted not to get any "list candidates" elected in his state. But he might still be chosen to be chancellor.
In that scenario wouldn't the chances of the CDU/CSU leading the coalition be very low?
In practice no, because the overall numbers are the same, but I think that it should make huge diffrence, "no seat, no place round the table".
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.
And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
Yes, they bettered themselves to become Conservatives. This is what he means. And he does mean it too. Total sincerity there.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
I never said he was near Corbyn or Rayner, but he is left of centre no matter what you may claim
He isn't. if he was he would be increasing immigration, increasing welfare spending, increasing income tax and IHT and very woke
Visa quotas increasing immigration, pension and benefits rises in Apri, of approximately 3.4%, NI increases and rumours of inheritance tax changes rather contradicts your view
A points system to replace EU free movement, triple lock ended and pensions frozen, NI raised to avoid income tax and IHT rises and most nations fund healthcare through insurance anyway
Pensions are not frozen, they rise by cpi in April if above 2.5% and current forecast is 3.4%
NI rise is not connected to the rumoured rise in IHT and is nowhere near enough for social care
And I have no idea what you are talking about most fund health care through insurance, a privileged few maybe
I cannot believe you write such nonsense
Most US and continental healthcare is funded via insurance
Irrelevant as that is not the case in the UK
The NI rise is mainly to fund health and social care.
Lloyd George set up NI to fund healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits
Employee NI is not hypothecated though; it's just a tax on (earned) income. If you cannot see that NI is just another income tax you're even denser than I thought.
You cannot claim the state pension without NI payments or credits, nor can you claim JSA without sufficient NI contributions
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.
Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
Laschet might well not get a seat in the Bundestag. He is not standing in a constituency and the CDU are predicted not to get any "list candidates" elected in his state. But he might still be chosen to be chancellor.
In that scenario wouldn't the chances of the CDU/CSU leading the coalition be very low?
In practice no, because the overall numbers are the same, but I think that it should make huge diffrence, "no seat, no place round the table".
Yes, that's what I meant - the impact in terms of loss of political credibility and the corresponding effect on what the FDP and Greens will do.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
The owner is deceased and the estate pays IHT over £325,000 which by your own admission is not far below the SE
The residue is payable to the beneficiaries
The family estate pays IHT over the threshold ie that means most estates in London and the South East and part of the value of the family home therefore taken by the state
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
I never said he was near Corbyn or Rayner, but he is left of centre no matter what you may claim
He isn't. if he was he would be increasing immigration, increasing welfare spending, increasing income tax and IHT and very woke
Visa quotas increasing immigration, pension and benefits rises in Apri, of approximately 3.4%, NI increases and rumours of inheritance tax changes rather contradicts your view
A points system to replace EU free movement, triple lock ended and pensions frozen, NI raised to avoid income tax and IHT rises and most nations fund healthcare through insurance anyway
Pensions are not frozen, they rise by cpi in April if above 2.5% and current forecast is 3.4%
NI rise is not connected to the rumoured rise in IHT and is nowhere near enough for social care
And I have no idea what you are talking about most fund health care through insurance, a privileged few maybe
I cannot believe you write such nonsense
Most US and continental healthcare is funded via insurance
Irrelevant as that is not the case in the UK
The NI rise is mainly to fund health and social care.
Lloyd George set up NI to fund healthcare, the state pension and unemployment benefits
Employee NI is not hypothecated though; it's just a tax on (earned) income. If you cannot see that NI is just another income tax you're even denser than I thought.
You cannot claim the state pension without NI payments or credits, nor can you claim JSA without sufficient NI contributions
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.
And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
You don't think people owning their own home makes aids social mobility?
Its not simply that they became Conservatives, many didn't, but by owning their own home it gave them security. And owning your own home dramatically improves your own welfare as once you've paid off the mortgage you are able to live rent-free for the rest of your life.
If two people are on the same income, but half of what one person takes home goes on rent - and the other never has a penny of rent to pay - don't you think the latter has improved their social mobility?
Ridiculously now we tax the ones who have to pay their rent through their wages much higher than those on the same income with unearned wealth and no rent to pay.
Laschet might well not get a seat in the Bundestag. He is not standing in a constituency and the CDU are predicted not to get any "list candidates" elected in his state. But he might still be chosen to be chancellor.
In that scenario wouldn't the chances of the CDU/CSU leading the coalition be very low?
In practice no, because the overall numbers are the same, but I think that it should make huge diffrence, "no seat, no place round the table".
Yes, that's what I meant - the impact in terms of loss of political credibility and the corresponding effect on what the FDP and Greens will do.
But it seems that the Germans don't consider it in that way. If he is the chancellor candidate and has a chance to negotiate then he has a right to be around the table. I think that the FDP and Greens can say to him "you don't have a mandate, Next"
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.
Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
Stoiber was the candidate in 2002 because of sexism in the CDU as well as a pragmatic decision by Merkel that Schröder would win so it was better to let another male rival carry the can.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
The owner is deceased and the estate pays IHT over £325,000 which by your own admission is not far below the SE
The residue is payable to the beneficiaries
The family estate pays IHT over the threshold ie that means most estates in London and the South East and part of the value of the family home therefore taken by the state
Quite right too but the home is not taken, tax is taken
Laschet might well not get a seat in the Bundestag. He is not standing in a constituency and the CDU are predicted not to get any "list candidates" elected in his state. But he might still be chosen to be chancellor.
In that scenario wouldn't the chances of the CDU/CSU leading the coalition be very low?
In practice no, because the overall numbers are the same, but I think that it should make huge diffrence, "no seat, no place round the table".
Yes, that's what I meant - the impact in terms of loss of political credibility and the corresponding effect on what the FDP and Greens will do.
But it seems that the Germans don't consider it in that way. If he is the chancellor candidate and has a chance to negotiate then he has a right to be around the table. I think that the FDP and Greens can say to him "you don't have a mandate, Next"
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
Yes. Given the strong preference for Scholz as Chancellor in the polls, the SPD have done relatively badly. You'd have to think that with no preference for either candidate for Chancellor that the CDU would have a clear lead.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
Some tweaking around the edges of IHT is not going to cause a wipe out. Ridiculous.
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.
Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
Stoiber was the candidate in 2002 because of sexism in the CDU as well as a pragmatic decision by Merkel that Schröder would win so it was better to let another male rival carry the can.
Stoiber was just 3 seats behind Schroder in that election and tied on votes
Looks like a yes, especially given how many have counted.
Thanks, yes, that looks like a "yes" not only in terms of over 50% but there is also an absolute number of "yesses" votes and that has also been achieved.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.
And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
Yes, they bettered themselves to become Conservatives. This is what he means. And he does mean it too. Total sincerity there.
Thatchers right to buy made hundreds of thousands of former tenants and Labour voters into Tories. That has persisted to this day.
Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?
20% threshold of MPs nominations.
Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39
All else being equal, getting 36 nominees from 232 is considerably easier than 39 nominees from 199. Some of the lost seats would include those who would have been on that side (eg Pidcock).
Worth remembering in 2015 that Corbyn only got to the 36 because Margaret Beckett chose to sign the nomination paper "to widen the debate" and came to deeply regret it. The same mistake should not happen again next time, but people do tend to forget to learn from history.
Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?
20% threshold of MPs nominations.
Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39
Presumably they are banking both on there being fewer of the awkward left than in 2015 as a proportion of the total MPs, and that next time MPs won't be so silly as to ignore their own concerns and the spirit of the rules in order to let through an unacceptable candidate.
FPT Re Jimmy Saville. He groomed an entire nation's Establishment. Using him to have a pop at just the BBC is a bit reductive. Strangely. It was widely rumoured about amongst the younger generation. We knew not to go to his club in Manchester. Don't know anyone my age who thought him other than a total creep. But our elders and betters couldn't contain their gushing enthusiasm for the living saint amongst us. Any forensic dramatisation might expose the hypocrisy of an entire generation.
As to why whistleblowers don't speak up, even though they know ought to know or suspect, well let me ask the men amongst you this. Every woman I know has suffered sexual harassment of some kind, some of it the most serious there is. Statistically, you must know men who have raped or sexually harassed women. How often have you blown the whistle about their conduct? And, if not, why not?
That's an exceptionally stupidly put question if I may say so, which given your ability to be very clear is surprising. You've jumped straight from saying that statistically we must know someone who has raped or sexually harassed a woman to presuming we know about it happening.
At the very least allow the possibility of us being blind enough to not realise we know a rapist or sexual assaulter and criticise that, than jump immediately to an implicit accusation we've decided not to report a rapist.
As it stands your question doesn't make any point about whistleblowing, since a whistleblower knows something is up and you've apparently granted all men the power of omniscence.
If you want to make the point that men should be far more alert to the signs someone is a rapist or sexual assaulter, perhaps say that rather than presume everyone knows but does nothing.
You are right people do not like those who blow the whistle - it's why many whistleblowing policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, since the desire to punish remains. But your question to illustrate it doesn'trelate to that at all.
You're being overly sensitive imo. I think it's a fair enough question. Eg I have known men who've harassed women and have not always called it out. Bet this applies to other posters on here too. Can't be just me. So, why didn't I? Why didn't they? This is not a stupid question. It's quite an interesting and important question.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
Remember I am not a true believer and can clear off along with other fellow conservative posters
I have heard it said IHT is on Rishi list and he needs more revenue and IHT and CGT are sensible targets
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
Some tweaking around the edges of IHT is not going to cause a wipe out. Ridiculous.
It would, trust me. Tory voters across the home counties would see their inheritances vanish and would stay home or vote RefUK, what is the point of voting Tory if only to raise taxes across the board.
The LDs would thus sweep Home Counties marginals by default and in London the same would apply handing Starmer Tory marginals in the capital by default.
The Blue Wall would be broken as much as the Red Wall was in 2019
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.
Hence Boris would not do it
If the Tories raise IHT then "the only Tory in the village" will be on here singing about why its such a good idea.
Heinz Brandenburg @HzBrandenburg The terrible news for the size of the Bundestag is that the CSU only lost one seat in Munich, winning 45 of 46 (2 outstanding, but unlikely to go elsewhere). But only 31.8% of the list vote.
That could increase Bavaria's share of seats to 130 and the Bundestag to at least 840.
Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?
20% threshold of MPs nominations.
Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39
All else being equal, getting 36 nominees from 232 is considerably easier than 39 nominees from 199. Some of the lost seats would include those who would have been on that side (eg Pidcock).
Worth remembering in 2015 that Corbyn only got to the 36 because Margaret Beckett chose to sign the nomination paper "to widen the debate" and came to deeply regret it. The same mistake should not happen again next time, but people do tend to forget to learn from history.
Minor point but wouldn't it require 40 MPs to achieve a 20% threshold of 199?
Edit: And isn't 35 sufficient to achieve 15% of 232?. Thus it's 35 versus 40.
Heinz Brandenburg @HzBrandenburg The terrible news for the size of the Bundestag is that the CSU only lost one seat in Munich, winning 45 of 46 (2 outstanding, but unlikely to go elsewhere). But only 31.8% of the list vote.
That could increase Bavaria's share of seats to 130 and the Bundestag to at least 840.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
Some tweaking around the edges of IHT is not going to cause a wipe out. Ridiculous.
It would, trust me. Tory voters across the home counties would see their inheritances vanish and would stay home or vote RefUK, what is the point of voting Tory if only to raise taxes across the board.
The LDs would thus sweep Home Counties marginals by default and in London the same would apply handing Starmer Tory marginals in the capital by default
IHT generates peanuts, (well £5.1bn).
It needs to be a land value or similar tax if you want real additional tax revenue.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.
Hence Boris would not do it
I really do not think you staying at home will be on either Boris or Rishi mind to be honest
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
"...recent government statistics show the average inheritance is £11,000, but among those aged 55-64 it is £33,000 and among over-65s it is £20,000."
IHT should be completely abolished, and any money received simply taxed as income. Which should include NI too as that should be merged with income tax.
It is repugnant to say that an inheritance is less worthy of being taxed than money actually worked for.
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.
Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
Stoiber was the candidate in 2002 because of sexism in the CDU as well as a pragmatic decision by Merkel that Schröder would win so it was better to let another male rival carry the can.
Stoiber was just 3 seats behind Schroder in that election and tied on votes
Yes it was close, but the point is that Merkel was still consolidating her power in the party at that time. She did a deal to become the combined Union leader in parliament in return for letting Stoiber be chancellor candidate, so she came out of it the winner.
If she had insisted on being the candidate and then lost, there would have been pressure to replace her.
Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?
20% threshold of MPs nominations.
Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39
All else being equal, getting 36 nominees from 232 is considerably easier than 39 nominees from 199. Some of the lost seats would include those who would have been on that side (eg Pidcock).
Worth remembering in 2015 that Corbyn only got to the 36 because Margaret Beckett chose to sign the nomination paper "to widen the debate" and came to deeply regret it. The same mistake should not happen again next time, but people do tend to forget to learn from history.
Minor point but wouldn't it require 40 MPs to achieve a 20% threshold of 199?
Edit: And isn't 35 sufficient to achieve 15% of 232?. Thus it's 35 versus 40.
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.
Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
Stoiber was the candidate in 2002 because of sexism in the CDU as well as a pragmatic decision by Merkel that Schröder would win so it was better to let another male rival carry the can.
Stoiber was just 3 seats behind Schroder in that election and tied on votes
Well Stoiber only got 4,3 million votes, but Schröder got 18,5 million votes.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.
Hence Boris would not do it
If the Tories raise IHT then "the only Tory in the village" will be on here singing about why its such a good idea.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.
Hence Boris would not do it
I really do not think you staying at home will be on either Boris or Rishi mind to be honest
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.
Hence Boris would not do it
I really do not think you staying at home will be on either Boris or Rishi mind to be honest
If Boris makes HYUFD stay at home, I just might have to rejoin the Tories! 😂
Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?
20% threshold of MPs nominations.
Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39
Presumably they are banking both on there being fewer of the awkward left than in 2015 as a proportion of the total MPs, and that next time MPs won't be so silly as to ignore their own concerns and the spirit of the rules in order to let through an unacceptable candidate.
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.
Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
Stoiber was the candidate in 2002 because of sexism in the CDU as well as a pragmatic decision by Merkel that Schröder would win so it was better to let another male rival carry the can.
Stoiber was just 3 seats behind Schroder in that election and tied on votes
Well Stoiber only got 4,3 million votes, but Schröder got 18,5 million votes.
The Union which Stoiber led got 18.482 million votes, Schroder got 18.488 million votes
Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?
20% threshold of MPs nominations.
Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39
All else being equal, getting 36 nominees from 232 is considerably easier than 39 nominees from 199. Some of the lost seats would include those who would have been on that side (eg Pidcock).
Worth remembering in 2015 that Corbyn only got to the 36 because Margaret Beckett chose to sign the nomination paper "to widen the debate" and came to deeply regret it. The same mistake should not happen again next time, but people do tend to forget to learn from history.
Minor point but wouldn't it require 40 MPs to achieve a 20% threshold of 199?
Edit: And isn't 35 sufficient to achieve 15% of 232?. Thus it's 35 versus 40.
Do they round up or down?
Not relevant. It's 20% (was 15%) or over. No rounding required.
Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?
20% threshold of MPs nominations.
Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39
All else being equal, getting 36 nominees from 232 is considerably easier than 39 nominees from 199. Some of the lost seats would include those who would have been on that side (eg Pidcock).
Worth remembering in 2015 that Corbyn only got to the 36 because Margaret Beckett chose to sign the nomination paper "to widen the debate" and came to deeply regret it. The same mistake should not happen again next time, but people do tend to forget to learn from history.
Minor point but wouldn't it require 40 MPs to achieve a 20% threshold of 199?
Edit: And isn't 35 sufficient to achieve 15% of 232?. Thus it's 35 versus 40.
It depends if you round up or down. If the rule is "rounding down" then 20% of 199 is 39.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
We are not talking about 'taking people's homes'. Those fortunate enough to have these inheritances which they have got worked for ie unearned wealth need to pay a fair share in tax.
Also applies to those getting large capital transfers from mummy and daddy eg to buy properties etc.
We need to sort out the state of the nation's finances and proper tax on unearned wealth needs to be a key part of that.
You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.
Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.
Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.
Hence Boris would not do it
I really do not think you staying at home will be on either Boris or Rishi mind to be honest
The prospect of millions of Tory voters in London and the South like me doing the same however or going LD or RefUK might, it would collapse the Blue Wall as badly as the Red Wall went in 2019.
Hence it will not be done. Certainly not for properties under £1 million which are largely exempt from IHT now
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
Per betfair SPD have won. Thanks to @NickPalmer for the tip when it was 1.3.
If true then Boris will indeed be the only conservative leader left in the G7 apart from Japan (if you count the LDP as conservative which is debatable given their name).
The last time there was only 1 conservative in the G7 was Chirac from 1998-2000, again an equally charismatic figure like Boris able to defy the western tide to the centre left
I am not sure if you have noticed, but Boris has moved noticeably to the left so there is only Japan left then
He is still the leader of the main Conservative Party in the UK and his cut to UC and ending of free movement from the EU for example are hardly centre left actions.
Though yes he has positioned himself generally in the relative centre ground
Time for for Rishi to ameliorate the UC cut but he is left of centre and some distance from the right of the party
He is not left of centre, he is centrist on economics, populist on culture and social issues, he is miles away from Rayner and Corbyn.
He is not a pure Thatcherite but then most Tory PMs aren't
Social issues not even etched on the yardstick. Kate Hoey went hunting, but was rightly in the Labour Party for how she voted on economic questions.
Social issues are the yardstick which makes you a conservative as well as support for inheritance, being economically Thatcherite could make you a classical liberal as much as a conservative
I hope the rumours that Rishi is looking at inheritance tax are true
If they are he can kiss goodbye to any chance of any hope of being Tory leader and PM, there would be a revolution amongst Tory MPs and grassroots and we would lose our poll lead.
As May discovered in 2017 threatening to take peoples' inheritance is electoral suicide.
As Osborne discovered in 2007 however IHT cut proposals are extremely popular
Another nonsense post to be rowed back on when it happens
A rise in inheritance tax is a red line, the Tory Party has always been the party that has supported inherited wealth no matter what.
There would be a huge revolt from members and MPs in the home counties and posh parts of London and rightly so, Boris would probably have to sack him. Hence he will not do it
Can I ask you a hypothetical question.
If it was proveable that a rise in inheritance tax resulted in better social mobility and economic growth, would you still oppose it?
Yes because it is not conservative and anti family and anti preservation of wealth within the family.
Not that it would anyway, you improve social mobility by improving education standards and choice and getting more middle class jobs available not by taking peoples houses. You get economic growth by cutting taxes across the board not raising them
People relying on inheritance or family handouts does not 'improve social mobility'. It makes it harder for those from poorer backgrounds to get on!
😠
No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.
Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
Who is talking of taking peoples homes..
Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them
You need to get real about this
It is taking the family home.
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.
Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
Stoiber was the candidate in 2002 because of sexism in the CDU as well as a pragmatic decision by Merkel that Schröder would win so it was better to let another male rival carry the can.
Stoiber was just 3 seats behind Schroder in that election and tied on votes
Well Stoiber only got 4,3 million votes, but Schröder got 18,5 million votes.
The Union which Stoiber led got 18.482 million votes, Schroder got 18.488 million votes
No. You said that Stoiber got as many votes ar Schröder, but it is on record that his party only got 4.3 million votes.
If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
They might have got a few more %-points, but "walked it" is certainly an over exaggeration,
A few more points was all they needed to stay in power
Stay in power is what May did in 2017, walked it was what Johnson did in 2019. Do you not see a difference?
Both won most seats and stayed in power, Soder would have done the same, probably by a margin bigger than May's over the main centre left party albeit smaller than Boris'.
Laschet it seems will not even stay in power and come second on seats
Comments
Not sure why there is such a big difference between the two votes?
I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.
The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.
https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=5230&mod-area=E92000001&mod-group=AllRegions_England&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup
And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
It is repugnant to say that an inheritance is less worthy of being taxed than money actually worked for.
At the very least allow the possibility of us being blind enough to not realise we know a rapist or sexual assaulter and criticise that, than jump immediately to an implicit accusation we've decided not to report a rapist.
As it stands your question doesn't make any point about whistleblowing, since a whistleblower knows something is up and you've apparently granted all men the power of omniscence.
If you want to make the point that men should be far more alert to the signs someone is a rapist or sexual assaulter, perhaps say that rather than presume everyone knows but does nothing.
You are right people do not like those who blow the whistle - it's why many whistleblowing policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, since the desire to punish remains. But your question to illustrate it doesn'trelate to that at all.
More tax has got to come from somewhere, and wealth rather than incomes is the clear way to do it.
But it will also make the Conservative core vote very unhappy bunnies.
So BoJo can either make himself unpopular quickly (with even more tax rises) or slowly (as the fiscal wheels fall off).
Which is more likely?
If you don't think it is, you can shove your core principles where the sun doesn't shine.
We have borrowed so much money in the last year that the numbers are eye watering, all with the opposition and media encouragement. and its achieved virtually nothing, delayed some cases but ultimately very little.
It would be much better to cut spending but cancel HS2 maybe, stop subsidising pointless university courses, privatise a few bits, and deregulate the economy, but we won't.
So they live or die based on Berlin results.
A man who abuses others almost certainly does not share their experience.
I don't know of anyone who has done anything to "blow the whistle" on. Not a single thing. Now if Cyclefree is saying that its happened but I wasn't aware of it . . . well how could I blow the whistle if I'm not aware of it?
Preserving estates and inheritance however has always been a conservative principle since the Tory party was founded in the late 17th century.
That is why I am a Tory and you are a classical Liberal
You are so frustrating
The owner is deceased and the estate pays IHT over £325,000 which by your own admission is not far below the SE
The residue is payable to the beneficiaries
Looks like a yes, especially given how many have counted.
What I won't accept is the absurd proposition that all men know a rapist and harrasser, and know that person is a racist and harrasser, and did nothing, without the acknowledgement that the second part of that proposition is simply not true, and thus the premise that either something was done or it was covered up must be true. Those are not the only options.
If the argument is too many do know someone committed such offences and still did nothing? I can accept that too. But that was not the argument put. And, clearly, from such an erudite person, deliberately not put.
More of our top professions like law and medicine had state educated practitioners when we had more grammar schools than now when they are mainly dominated by private schools. Grammars had and have a good record of Oxbridge entry, certainly better than most comprehensives. We also had plenty of grammar school PMs, we have yet to have a PM fully educated at a comprehensive
Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT
HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.
Drinks all round!
Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
Its not simply that they became Conservatives, many didn't, but by owning their own home it gave them security. And owning your own home dramatically improves your own welfare as once you've paid off the mortgage you are able to live rent-free for the rest of your life.
If two people are on the same income, but half of what one person takes home goes on rent - and the other never has a penny of rent to pay - don't you think the latter has improved their social mobility?
Ridiculously now we tax the ones who have to pay their rent through their wages much higher than those on the same income with unearned wealth and no rent to pay.
20% threshold of MPs nominations.
Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39
Hence Boris would not do it
Worth remembering in 2015 that Corbyn only got to the 36 because Margaret Beckett chose to sign the nomination paper "to widen the debate" and came to deeply regret it. The same mistake should not happen again next time, but people do tend to forget to learn from history.
Neither seems certain to me.
I have heard it said IHT is on Rishi list and he needs more revenue and IHT and CGT are sensible targets
The LDs would thus sweep Home Counties marginals by default and in London the same would apply handing Starmer Tory marginals in the capital by default.
The Blue Wall would be broken as much as the Red Wall was in 2019
The terrible news for the size of the Bundestag is that the CSU only lost one seat in Munich, winning 45 of 46 (2 outstanding, but unlikely to go elsewhere).
But only 31.8% of the list vote.
That could increase Bavaria's share of seats to 130 and the Bundestag to at least 840.
https://twitter.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1442250849976127489
Edit: And isn't 35 sufficient to achieve 15% of 232?. Thus it's 35 versus 40.
It needs to be a land value or similar tax if you want real additional tax revenue.
https://www.bundeswahlleiter.de/en/bundestagswahlen/2021/ergebnisse/bund-99/land-5/wahlkreis-96.html
If she had insisted on being the candidate and then lost, there would have been pressure to replace her.
Basically.
Hence it will not be done. Certainly not for properties under £1 million which are largely exempt from IHT now
No. You said that Stoiber got as many votes ar Schröder, but it is on record that his party only got 4.3 million votes.
Laschet it seems will not even stay in power and come second on seats