politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB / Polling Matters podcast: Reshuffles, Oprah and exclus
Comments
-
It is not linear, though, as people change their financial behaviour.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
1p nets you 6 billion, but 5p nets you < 30 billion.0 -
So should we differentiate between bigotry and bigotry based on religious belief?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You should respect peoples own religious beliefs but he seems to have lied which is unacceptable. At least Jacob Rees Mogg is honestSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
Thank you - and that highlights the dishonesty in the debate. It seems to be the view a 1% rise will resolve the crises when it will not touch it. Also how much of the 33 billion is needed for wage increases.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
This needs an honest national debate out of the politics of it0 -
Bus gets you more than half the way.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Thank you - and that highlights the dishonesty in the debate. It seems to be the view a 1% rise will resolve the crises when it will not touch it. Also how much of the 33 billion is needed for wage increases.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
This needs an honest national debate out of the politics of it0 -
Theresa May in it for the long haul. She will be announcing her 25 year environmental plan. Nothing else she touches lasts more than 25 hours, but good luck to her!0
-
No - if you believe in the teaching of the Catholic Church you will adhere to them yourself but you should respect other views as well.SandyRentool said:
So should we differentiate between bigotry and bigotry based on religious belief?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You should respect peoples own religious beliefs but he seems to have lied which is unacceptable. At least Jacob Rees Mogg is honestSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
Another way of looking at it is that there's about 30m tax payers. So, to get £30bn you would need to get about £1,000 on average from each of them.YBarddCwsc said:
It is not linear, though, as people change their financial behaviour.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
1p nets you 6 billion, but 5p nets you < 30 billion.
There's only 4m or so higher rate tax payers, so to get the money from them only would be an additional £7,500 from them!!
As said, these are unaffordable numbers.0 -
Why should we 'respect' other peoples religious beliefs if, due to reading a text in a certain way, they show no similar 'respect' towards other perfectly honest, law-abiding people?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You should respect peoples own religious beliefs but he seems to have lied which is unacceptable. At least Jacob Rees Mogg is honestSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
I supported Farron for the leadership (and I still think he did a better job than the current incumbent, although that is a low bar). But this is way out of order for him, and the Lib Dem party should state that he is wrong.0 -
About 6% on income tax.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
It could be made a voluntary tax so that all those people who say they would like to pay more to fund the NHS could do so.0 -
Joking aside, the costs of Brexit are going to be an issue when set against tight funding for public services.Jonathan said:
Should have written it on a bus.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion0 -
So even the bus is only half way. There seems to be general agreement on here that a 5% increase in tax is needed for the NHS alone.Jonathan said:
Bus gets you more than half the way.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Thank you - and that highlights the dishonesty in the debate. It seems to be the view a 1% rise will resolve the crises when it will not touch it. Also how much of the 33 billion is needed for wage increases.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
This needs an honest national debate out of the politics of it
And there is the mega problem0 -
Pete Hoekstra must be regretting agreeing to become ambassador to the Netherlands.
https://twitter.com/RGjournalist/status/9511022063250022400 -
To be fair she is hitting on a very important issue and it will be popularFF43 said:Theresa May in it for the long haul. She will be announcing her 25 year environmental plan. Nothing else she touches lasts more than 25 hours, but good luck to her!
0 -
Nah. primarily a question of political will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
So even the bus is only half way. There seems to be general agreement on here that a 5% increase in tax is needed for the NHS alone.Jonathan said:
Bus gets you more than half the way.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Thank you - and that highlights the dishonesty in the debate. It seems to be the view a 1% rise will resolve the crises when it will not touch it. Also how much of the 33 billion is needed for wage increases.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
This needs an honest national debate out of the politics of it
And there is the mega problem0 -
And thats before all of the other costs which labour want. Housing, Police, Schools, universities etc etc etc.Big_G_NorthWales said:
So even the bus is only half way. There seems to be general agreement on here that a 5% increase in tax is needed for the NHS alone.Jonathan said:
Bus gets you more than half the way.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Thank you - and that highlights the dishonesty in the debate. It seems to be the view a 1% rise will resolve the crises when it will not touch it. Also how much of the 33 billion is needed for wage increases.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
This needs an honest national debate out of the politics of it
And there is the mega problem
We can't afford it. Labour would bankrupt the country.0 -
-
Political will doesn't trump economic reality.Jonathan said:
Nah. primarily a question of political will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
So even the bus is only half way. There seems to be general agreement on here that a 5% increase in tax is needed for the NHS alone.Jonathan said:
Bus gets you more than half the way.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Thank you - and that highlights the dishonesty in the debate. It seems to be the view a 1% rise will resolve the crises when it will not touch it. Also how much of the 33 billion is needed for wage increases.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
This needs an honest national debate out of the politics of it
And there is the mega problem0 -
I do not disagree with you but no one has a higher moral ground than anyone else. Tim Farron is out of order thoughJosiasJessop said:
Why should we 'respect' other peoples religious beliefs if, due to reading a text in a certain way, they show no similar 'respect' towards other perfectly honest, law-abiding people?Big_G_NorthWales said:
You should respect peoples own religious beliefs but he seems to have lied which is unacceptable. At least Jacob Rees Mogg is honestSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
I supported Farron for the leadership (and I still think he did a better job than the current incumbent, although that is a low bar). But this is way out of order for him, and the Lib Dem party should state that he is wrong.0 -
And 2017 finally saw some economic rebalancing in the UK.MaxPB said:
2017 growth will be in the region of 1.8-2.0% once all of the revisions are done. The "slowdown" the UK economy experienced will end up being as fictitious as the double dip recession was. I just want to see how the remainers will spin ~1.9% as poor and Germany's 2.2% as the boom of the ages.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Yesterday it was suggested we had grown by 0.6% last quarter, so that is equal to 2.4% annual increasewilliamglenn said:German economy posts strongest growth for 6 years at 2.2% in 2017.
For example it looks like the trade deficit as a percentage of GDP is going to be the lowest since 1998:
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/d28l/pnbp0 -
Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.0 -
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
So who is increasing tax by 5%Jonathan said:
Nah. primarily a question of political will.Big_G_NorthWales said:
So even the bus is only half way. There seems to be general agreement on here that a 5% increase in tax is needed for the NHS alone.Jonathan said:
Bus gets you more than half the way.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Thank you - and that highlights the dishonesty in the debate. It seems to be the view a 1% rise will resolve the crises when it will not touch it. Also how much of the 33 billion is needed for wage increases.Slackbladder said:
A quick google seems to imply a penny in the pound gets about £6bn. So it would be 5p in the pound or so. a staggering rise.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
This needs an honest national debate out of the politics of it
And there is the mega problem0 -
I doubt, people want hypothecated social insurance ringfenced for things like the NHS not more tax wastedanother_richard said:
Are the extra 11% all over 65 ?HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/9513733477823201290 -
Remainers talking to themselves againwilliamglenn said:0 -
Mysteriously, all the posters who claim that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable will absolutely insist that the defence budget is massively underfunded.0
-
Toby Young got the gig because he's in with the Johnson/Gove/Nelson cabal. You don't do due diligence on your friends. Equally he's only interesting because of that relationship. A random member of a quango with objectionable ideas on race and intelligence and barely adult young women wouldn't get nearly the same attention.Jonathan said:This Young stuff is striking. Either due diligence isn't a thing or there is tacit approval for his position on certain issues.
0 -
He's a Brexiteer.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Remainers talking to themselves againwilliamglenn said:0 -
And he lost his job as well and he appointed Toby Youngcalum said:0 -
Iain Martin is a Leaver.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Remainers talking to themselves againwilliamglenn said:0 -
The answer is an insurance based system.Slackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
Their kids.Slackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
Mr. Meeks, I'm one of those who want more Defence spending, but I've yet to hear anyone here claim it should double, which would be a comparable increase to the above mentioned rise in NHS spending.0
-
HYUFD said:
Show me the ballot paper where 52% voted to end free movement. You cannot infer that from the result I am afraid, however much it suits your argument. Indeed many Leave voters support FOM. You are like a broken record, endlessly presenting your own views as if they were facts.SouthamObserver said:
Staying in the customs union would actually give more respect to the Leave vote than staying in the single market which requires free movement and ECJ jurisdiction and Labour is making some moves towards staying in the customs union if possible even if we still leave the single market. That would be similar to the position Turkey is moving towardsHYUFD said:
No, I mean the single market. Leaving the customs union is just the icing on the cake.SouthamObserver said:
The customs union you mean, Norway is in the single market but outside the customs union in EFTASandpit said:
What free trade do you envisage that will be freer than what omes to shove we will be leaving in name only.williamglenn said:
We need to do everything we can to foster free trade, and not give those who want to tie us to an ever-diminishing part of the world that we voted to leave, the opportunity to get us back in any time soon.Sandpit said:
It's amazing that people on the right who would normally not hesitate to say that central planning is terrible, think that government manipulation of trade flows for ideological convenience is what we 'need'.SouthamObserver said:
My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.Sandpit said:
Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.rkrkrk said:
SNIPCarlottaVance said:Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:
May -6
Corbyn -6
Blair -42
Clegg -24 (the next worst)
Carney +10 - the only positive.
Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?0 -
Iain Martin voted Leave. Though I'm not sure what his referendum choice has to do with the point at hand.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Remainers talking to themselves againwilliamglenn said:0 -
Well it is, but again where's the money coming from.AlastairMeeks said:Mysteriously, all the posters who claim that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable will absolutely insist that the defence budget is massively underfunded.
0 -
Yes, but he's also sensible and can see the malign effect Timothy and Hill are having on the government and country. I'm still yet to be convinced they aren't Labour plants.TheScreamingEagles said:
Iain Martin is a Leaver.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Remainers talking to themselves againwilliamglenn said:0 -
They are her Damian McBride.williamglenn said:
She condones such behaviour speaks volumes about Mrs May’s character.0 -
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
Mr. Max, that may well be true, but suggest changing the beloved NHS ('our NHS' as some call it) and there shall be rending of garments, wailing and gnashing of teeth.0
-
Priorities, Mr Dancer. Let's deal with the current dying and ill rather than fund for creating a new batch.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Meeks, I'm one of those who want more Defence spending, but I've yet to hear anyone here claim it should double, which would be a comparable increase to the above mentioned rise in NHS spending.
0 -
Or we could just not pour infinite money into the NHS.Slackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
Next PB meet I’ll tell you about all the horror stories I’ve heard about those two.MaxPB said:
Yes, but he's also sensible and can see the malign effect Timothy and Hill are having on the government and country. I'm still yet to be convinced they aren't Labour plants.TheScreamingEagles said:
Iain Martin is a Leaver.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Remainers talking to themselves againwilliamglenn said:0 -
Actually, most people looking at the figures are simply curious as to how the tax receipts could be raised.AlastairMeeks said:Mysteriously, all the posters who claim that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable will absolutely insist that the defence budget is massively underfunded.
0 -
This seems a straightforward smear.Anazina said:
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
I've heard the one about Gove already and a few others. They both seem like utter tits to me. I don't understand what the PM sees in them both, neither have any amount of political nous and they just seem unlikeable.TheScreamingEagles said:
Next PB meet I’ll tell you about all the horror stories I’ve heard about those two.MaxPB said:
Yes, but he's also sensible and can see the malign effect Timothy and Hill are having on the government and country. I'm still yet to be convinced they aren't Labour plants.TheScreamingEagles said:
Iain Martin is a Leaver.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Remainers talking to themselves againwilliamglenn said:0 -
Timothy's assertions about Greening subverting investigations into universities seem implausible to me, and probably a slur. She seems pretty motivated by improving social mobility.calum said:0 -
Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.0 -
Big_G_NorthWales said:
You should respect peoples own religious beliefs but he seems to have lied which is unacceptable. At least Jacob Rees Mogg is honestSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Er, no. Respect is something that is earned, not granted unconditionally. I have no more respect for religionism than I do for those who believe that small bottles of pure water are medicines or that the world is flat or that the moon is made of cheese. I defend their right to hold such views, but that is a very different thing. Respect them? No.0 -
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax there is and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
We could, works well for Zimbabwe and the Weimar republic....CopperSulphate said:
Or we could just not pour infinite money into the NHS.Slackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
Do you consider gay sex to be a sin?HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
Switzerland spend nearly twice per capita on healthcare.MaxPB said:On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.0 -
It is their kids who would most vote against higher IHT as it is their inheritance, what an absurd pointPong said:
Their kids.Slackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
That's because most voters don't understand that increasing NI rather than IT hits the poorer and younger harder. Once that is explained to them...HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
The Swiss health system is good. It's also costly. The Swiss spend 12.1% of their GDP on health against 9.9% of a much lower per capita GDP in the UK.MaxPB said:On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.
https://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/Health-Policy-in-Switzerland-July-2017.pdf0 -
We should got for a set-spending target per area of government spending. We already do it for defence (sort of) at 2%, and DFID at 0.7%.
Do the same for all the other departments: say 10% health, education 6% etc. The budgets for the next year get set according to the previous year's figures (or aggregate multiple yeaars). Then the discussion shifts onto the much more helpful grounds of what those percentages should be.
A party can also choose to have a contingency figure as well (in fact, that would seem very sensible).0 -
No, too much has been expected of Defence. The one possible positive of Brexit is that it will finally dawn on the Colonel Blimps that a third of the world is no longer painted pink.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.0 -
She is just politically astute enough not to say so in publicAnazina said:
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
Maybe they think that actually being able to defend the country is worth the money, but infinite spending on an unreformed NHS isn't.AlastairMeeks said:Mysteriously, all the posters who claim that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable will absolutely insist that the defence budget is massively underfunded.
NHS spending is three times defence spending by the way.0 -
Simple answer is to eliminate the NI taper as your income increases. Keep it at a flat 12%.HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax there is and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.
Boom, done.0 -
They will feel exactly the same way. Voters are nowhere near as dumb as you like to claim.JonathanD said:
That's because most voters don't understand that increasing NI rather than IT hits the poorer and younger harder. Once that is explained to them...HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
Anazina said:
80% voted for parties promising to end free movement in JuneHYUFD said:
Show me the ballot paper where 52% voted to end free movement. You cannot infer that from the result I am afraid, however much it suits your argument. Indeed many Leave voters support FOM. You are like a broken record, endlessly presenting your own views as if they were facts.SouthamObserver said:
Staying in the customs union would actually give more respect to the Leave vote than staying in the single market which requires free movement and ECJ jurisdiction and Labour is making some moves towards staying in the customs union if possible even if we still leave the single market. That would be similar to the position Turkey is moving towardsHYUFD said:
No, I mean the single market. Leaving the customs union is just the icing on the cake.SouthamObserver said:
The customs union you mean, Norway is in the single market but outside the customs union in EFTASandpit said:
What free trade do you envisage that will be freer than what omes to shove we will be leaving in name only.williamglenn said:
We need to do everything we can to foster free trade, and not give those who want to tie us to an ever-diminishing part of the world that we voted to leave, the opportunity to get us back in any time soon.Sandpit said:
It's amazing that people on the right who would normally not hesitate to say that central planning is terrible, think that government manipulation of trade flows for ideological convenience is what we 'need'.SouthamObserver said:
My point was that we need trade deals that serve as barriers to entry back to the EU. For example a deal with Aus and NZ that majors heavily on UK imports of minerals and agricultural produce, and on exports of cars and financial services.Sandpit said:
Any trade deals we get will be dictated from the other side of the table. But, as per my post below, I suspect that we'll end up signing off separately on trade deals the EU has negotiated.rkrkrk said:
SNIPCarlottaVance said:Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:
May -6
Corbyn -6
Blair -42
Clegg -24 (the next worst)
Carney +10 - the only positive.
Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?0 -
And introduce a 57% top tax rate? Goodbye wealthy people.Alistair said:
Simple answer is to eliminate the NI taper as your income increases. Keep it at a flat 12%.HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax there is and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.
Boom, done.0 -
So you'd prefer to be able to invade Syria should the opportunity arise than to save lives in the here and now? That figures.CopperSulphate said:
Maybe they think that actually being able to defend the country is worth the money, but infinite spending on an unreformed NHS isn't.AlastairMeeks said:Mysteriously, all the posters who claim that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable will absolutely insist that the defence budget is massively underfunded.
NHS spending is three times defence spending by the way.
0 -
Either you think voters are psycopaths or you haven't followed the discussion.Richard_Tyndall said:
They will feel exactly the same way. Voters are nowhere near as dumb as you like to claim.JonathanD said:
That's because most voters don't understand that increasing NI rather than IT hits the poorer and younger harder. Once that is explained to them...HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
Nope, that is because most voters support social insurance for healthcare like most developed countries and do not just want to see their taxes raised to be spent by wasteful socialists like your party leader. Given NI is only paid by those in employment and earning a wage your point is of course absurd anywayJonathanD said:
That's because most voters don't understand that increasing NI rather than IT hits the poorer and younger harder. Once that is explained to them...HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.0 -
also wouldn't raise enough. There's only 4m higher rate tax payers (which includes wealthy pensioners which don't pay NI), so even if you get an extra £1,000pa from all of them it gives you only £4b or so.MaxPB said:
And introduce a 57% top tax rate? Goodbye wealthy people.Alistair said:
Simple answer is to eliminate the NI taper as your income increases. Keep it at a flat 12%.HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax there is and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.
Boom, done.0 -
How is that possible? The dogma of the Catholic Church is that the rejection of catholicae veritas is the mortal sin of heresy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
No - if you believe in the teaching of the Catholic Church you will adhere to them yourself but you should respect other views as well.0 -
Mr. Meeks, striking terrorists in Syria prevents them attacking us here. Saving lives.0
-
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.0 -
It really is open season on any Christian these days. Yeah a lot probably don't like it, but they feel terrible about feeling that way and are never going to do anything about it.Anazina said:
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Compare with the attitude of Muslims...100% of which surveyed think that homosexuality is wrong:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality
And then look at what happens to gay people in Islamic countries. But yeah let's all spend our time condemning wet lettuce Christians like Tim Farron as that is where the real danger lies.
0 -
I enjoy being the Devil's Advocate. I believe Farron regrets the lying, hence his statement. I don't agree with his views on gay sex at all, but I think he has every right to them, as long as he doesn't impose them on the rest of us. As he is a representative of his constituency and party, he also shouldn't allow those views to influence his representation.SandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
Two wrongs make a right?CopperSulphate said:
It really is open season on any Christian these days. Yeah a lot probably don't like it, but they feel terrible about feeling that way and are never going to do anything about it.Anazina said:
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Compare with the attitude of Muslims...100% of which surveyed think that homosexuality is wrong:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality
And then look at what happens to gay people in Islamic countries. But yeah let's all spend our time condemning wet lettuce Christians like Tim Farron as that is where the real danger lies.0 -
Based on Christian teaching I would consider any sex before marriage, any sex by divorcees a sin too but I am also a sinner as much as the next personAnazina said:
Do you consider gay sex to be a sin?HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?0 -
Well that clearly hasn't worked.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Meeks, striking terrorists in Syria prevents them attacking us here. Saving lives.
0 -
Everything costs more in Switzerland, they have double the GDP per capita as well. Their healthcare costs as a % of GDP are similar and they have much better healthcareJonathan said:
Switzerland spend nearly twice per capita on healthcare.MaxPB said:On the NHS, the more I interact with the Swiss insurance system the more I'm on board with it. Everyone needs to have it, those on low or no incomes get it subsidised and you can choose you annual deductible portion, your level of cover, and insurance companies aren't allowed to deny you cover based on pre existing conditions.
The three times I've needed to visit a doctor I got an appointment for the following day and I got referred to a specialist within two days.
I've never needed emergency care bit I'm told it's extremely efficient with very low waiting times.
The government could do a lot worse than just import the Swiss healthcare system.0 -
Like another old queen, I have no desire to make windows into men's souls. I'm far more interested in how they act.0
-
I'm proposing an extra 10% on the taxes of higher rate payers. Someone on £100,000 would be paying an extra 5 grand or so.Slackbladder said:
also wouldn't raise enough. There's only 4m higher rate tax payers (which includes wealthy pensioners which don't pay NI), so even if you get an extra £1,000pa from all of them it gives you only £4b or so.MaxPB said:
And introduce a 57% top tax rate? Goodbye wealthy people.Alistair said:
Simple answer is to eliminate the NI taper as your income increases. Keep it at a flat 12%.HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax there is and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.
Boom, done.0 -
How is that clear? There's been remarkably few attacks on the scale of 7/7 here let alone the scale of 9/11.Dura_Ace said:
Well that clearly hasn't worked.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Meeks, striking terrorists in Syria prevents them attacking us here. Saving lives.
0 -
Or they'll be paying tens of grand less as they won't be in the country anymore.Alistair said:
I'm proposing an extra 10% on the taxes of higher rate payers. Someone on £100,000 would be paying an extra 5 grand or so.Slackbladder said:
also wouldn't raise enough. There's only 4m higher rate tax payers (which includes wealthy pensioners which don't pay NI), so even if you get an extra £1,000pa from all of them it gives you only £4b or so.MaxPB said:
And introduce a 57% top tax rate? Goodbye wealthy people.Alistair said:
Simple answer is to eliminate the NI taper as your income increases. Keep it at a flat 12%.HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax there is and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.
Boom, done.0 -
Mr. Eagles, pathetic indeed.
Mr. Ace, it's documented that we've successfully hit terrorists in Syria who were planning atrocities here.0 -
Nick "crap election" Timothy writing in the Telegraph is a disgrace.TheScreamingEagles said:
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
George "pasty tax, beaten by a bus in a referendum" Osborne editing the Evening Standard is refreshing or something.
I see.
0 -
How about a tax of £100 per pizza that has pineapple on it
And a tax of £100 per person who watches Die Hard at Christmas.
NHS funding problems sorted overnight.0 -
Or they'll move their income into tax avoidance schemes. I've seen it happen first hand.Philip_Thompson said:
Or they'll be paying tens of grand less as they won't be in the country anymore.Alistair said:
I'm proposing an extra 10% on the taxes of higher rate payers. Someone on £100,000 would be paying an extra 5 grand or so.Slackbladder said:
also wouldn't raise enough. There's only 4m higher rate tax payers (which includes wealthy pensioners which don't pay NI), so even if you get an extra £1,000pa from all of them it gives you only £4b or so.MaxPB said:
And introduce a 57% top tax rate? Goodbye wealthy people.Alistair said:
Simple answer is to eliminate the NI taper as your income increases. Keep it at a flat 12%.HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax there is and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.
Boom, done.0 -
HYUFD said:
Nope, that is because most voters support social insurance for healthcare like most developed countries and do not just want to see their taxes raised to be spent by wasteful socialists like your party leader. Given NI is only paid by those in employment and earning a wage your point is of course absurd anywayJonathanD said:
That's because most voters don't understand that increasing NI rather than IT hits the poorer and younger harder. Once that is explained to them...HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.
I think you are confusing me with the wrong Jonathan.
An increase in NI is more regressive than an increase in Income Tax as the threshold for NI is lower than that for Income Tax, meaning the poor pay more for an increase in NI than they would after an increase in IT.
Also NI not being paid by the retired means the cost of an increase is more borne by the young.
0 -
NHS Providers' letter to Jeremy Hunt today:
http://nhsproviders.org/media/4192/nhs-providers-to-rt-hon-jeremy-hunt-mp-january-2018-v6.pdf0 -
Plus those that have chocolate sprinkles on a cappuccino!TheScreamingEagles said:How about a tax of £100 per pizza that has pineapple on it
And a tax of £100 per person who watches Die Hard at Christmas.
NHS funding problems sorted overnight.0 -
You are clearly a leftwinger as tax rises come first. The lowest earners only don't pay income tax because the Coalition took them out of it but they will likely benefit from state pensions, healthcare, social care, unemployment benefits etc NI should be hypothecated to pay for. Pensioners will have paid NI throughout their working life though the biggest NI rises could be focused on over 50s who will have often paid off the mortgage and had children left home.JonathanD said:HYUFD said:
Nope, that is because most voters support social insurance for healthcare like most developed countries and do not just want to see their taxes raised to be spent by wasteful socialists like your party leader. Given NI is only paid by those in employment and earning a wage your point is of course absurd anywayJonathanD said:
That's because most voters don't understand that increasing NI rather than IT hits the poorer and younger harder. Once that is explained to them...HYUFD said:
Nobody as polling shows, IHT is the most unpopular tax and as this morning's yougov poll shows most voters will not pay a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS only higher National InsuranceSlackbladder said:
The only real way now to pay for it will be brutal wealth/IHT taxes, and who's going to vote for that?CopperSulphate said:Boomers demanding more spending on the NHS just after they've stopped working and paying tax.
Anyone see a problem here?
The NHS is a black hole, the more you spend the more it costs. Especially since it seems to be open for the whole world to use for free.
I think you are confusing me with the wrong Jonathan.
An increase in NI is more regressive than an increase in Income Tax as the threshold for NI is lower than that for Income Tax, meaning the poor pay more for an increase in NI than they would after an increase in IT.
Also NI not being paid by the retired means the cost of an increase is more borne by the young.
Social insurance pays for most healthcare in most developed countries as it should here too with private health insurance taken out by those who can afford it0 -
Mr. Eagles, your perverse and heretical views on Die Hard ought not be inflicted upon society any more than Alesha Dixon's puritanical carnophobia.0
-
I think we all tend to concentrate too much on the campaign itself. Wobbles and angst aside, I'd decided we would probably be BOO after the Lisbon debacle. PB was also very helpful. The campaigns (on both sides) were terrible, and I took little notice of either (other than fulminating on here about the punishment budget/Turks are going to eat our babies etc).TOPPING said:
And yet he knocked it out of the park.John_M said:
God no.TOPPING said:
Would you have chosen Nige as the face of Leave?Sandpit said:
Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.rkrkrk said:
Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.CarlottaVance said:Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:
May -6
Corbyn -6
Blair -42
Clegg -24 (the next worst)
Carney +10 - the only positive.
Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?
Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.0 -
Yeah, that's what they tell you when they drop a £900k Storm Shadow on four raggy lads in a HiLux.Morris_Dancer said:
Mr. Ace, it's documented that we've successfully hit terrorists in Syria who were planning atrocities here.0 -
Nope. I was quite happy for the likes of Michael Gove and Kate Hoey to be fronting the official campaign, although I don’t doubt that Farage played a part in getting certain demographics to the ballot box for the first time in decades.TOPPING said:
Would you have chosen Nige as the face of Leave?Sandpit said:
Watching Blair, Clegg and Osborne fronting a rejoin campaign would be the biggest gift possible to the stay out campaign.rkrkrk said:
Carney is presumably positive because enough Leavers haven’t heard of him.CarlottaVance said:Interesting podcast - the net trust in BREXIT are quite striking:
May -6
Corbyn -6
Blair -42
Clegg -24 (the next worst)
Carney +10 - the only positive.
Blair - the great white hope of Remainia?
Blair would probably be one of the worst people to front a rejoin campaign.0 -
So you compare saying you think something is morally wrong but allowing people to get on with their lives and jailing (as occurs in over 70 nations where being gay is illegal), persecuting (as occurs in many more) and executing them in public squares (11 nations have the death penalty - one of which is hosting the football World Cup in 2022!). Tim Farron is really no threat to the rights of gay men in the world - he may not approve morally but he doesn't want to restrict their rights in any way.Philip_Thompson said:
Two wrongs make a right?CopperSulphate said:
It really is open season on any Christian these days. Yeah a lot probably don't like it, but they feel terrible about feeling that way and are never going to do anything about it.Anazina said:
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Compare with the attitude of Muslims...100% of which surveyed think that homosexuality is wrong:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality
And then look at what happens to gay people in Islamic countries. But yeah let's all spend our time condemning wet lettuce Christians like Tim Farron as that is where the real danger lies.
If he wasn't a Christian but of a certain other religion the media wouldn't go there.
Yet a recent survey in the UK found 52 per cent of British Muslims thought being gay should be illegal and result in a jail sentence and only 18 per cent explicitly Thought it should be legal - the other 40 per cent wouldn't answer. That compares to only around 5 per cent of the general UK population who believed being gay should lead to you being jailed.
.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/apr/11/british-muslims-strong-sense-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law
Those are attitudes which should really concern gay men and need addressing and challenging and countering - not Farron's moral quandaries.
0 -
And Toby 'progressive eugenics' Young writing for the Speccie is..?TGOHF said:
Nick "crap election" Timothy writing in the Telegraph is a disgrace.TheScreamingEagles said:
Nick Timothy clashed with a civil servant over a minor thing.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Eagles, they're more incompetent than McBride but less malicious (or less 'absolutely bloody brilliant', if you prefer).
Mr. Meeks, pish. Defence has been chronically underfunded and cut by all parties for far too long.
A few weeks later Nick Timothy put in a complaint about that civil servant saying he had broken the civil service guidelines on impartiality hoping to get the civil servant sacked.
That civil servant’s crime?
Posting a tweet wishing Ed Balls good luck on Strictly Come Dancing.
Pathetic doesn’t do Nick Timothy justice.
George "pasty tax, beaten by a bus in a referendum" Osborne editing the Evening Standard is refreshing or something.
I see.0 -
At the margin yes. Raising it 10p wouldn’t raise £45bn though.rottenborough said:
Morning all,Big_G_NorthWales said:
It was a serious question - do you have any idea how much tax rates need to rise for tge 33 billion annual increaseJonathan said:
Should have written it on a bus.Big_G_NorthWales said:
This morning the NHS providers said that they need to increase spending from 120 billion to 153 billion by 2020 and that the Government should increase taxes and said it was not necessary to involve a cross party committee or Royal Commission, just provide the money.HYUFD said:53% back paying more National Insurance to fund the NHS yougov finds but only 42% back paying more income tax to pay for the NHS
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
That is an increase of 33 billion per year for the NHS and no government is going to be able to increase taxes by that much. As a matter of interest does anyone know how much the Ni or tax rates needs to rise to achieve the 33 billion
A 1p raise in income tax raises about £4.5 billion.0 -
Though of course in much of the Middle East sex outside of heterosexual marriage is illegal toobrendan16 said:
So you compare saying you think something is morally wrong t want to restrict their rights in any way.Philip_Thompson said:
Two wrongs make a right?CopperSulphate said:
It really is open season on any Christian these days. Yeah a lot probably don't like it, but they feel terrible about feeling that way and are never going to do anything about it.Anazina said:
May is another bible botherer. Perhaps she also thinks gay sex is a sin, secretly.HYUFD said:
Technically any sex outside heterosexual first marriage is a sin as is lying too but the Church teaches we are all sinners compared to ChristSandyRentool said:So Tim Farron has come out (pun intended) and confessed that he didn't really mean it when he said that he didn't think that gay sex is a sin. Now it may be a while since I last went to mass, but I seem to recall that saying things that aren't true is regarded as a sin. It is also considered rather bad form in the secular side of life.
Farron might be able to say a few Hail Marys to be absolved of his sin (not sure how it works in his particular strand of god-bothering), but the notion that you can't believe a word the LibDems say during an election campaign is reinforced.
Why are some religionists so obsessed with gender and sexuality?
Compare with the attitude of Muslims...100% of which surveyed think that homosexuality is wrong:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/may/07/muslims-britain-france-germany-homosexuality
And then look at what happens to gay people in Islamic countries. But yeah let's all spend our time condemning wet lettuce Christians like Tim Farron as that is where the real danger lies.
If he wasn't a Christian but of a certain other religion he almost certainly wouldn't have been asked and the media wouldn't go there.
Yet a recent survey in the UK found 52 per cent of British Muslims thought being gay should be illegal and result in a jail sentence and only 13 per cent explicitly said they thought it should be legal - the other 35 per cent wouldn't answer. That compares to only around 5 per cent of the general population - mostly Christians or atheists - who believed being gay should lead to you being jailed,
Those are attitudes which should really concern gay men and need addressing and challenging and countering - not Farron's moral quandaries.0
