Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Keir has a net approval lead over Boris – but where it matters least – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    kinabalu said:

    Yes, uncool cool. Like the programme really.
    The children’s version of it, with Harry Hill, Liam, Rav & Prue, is absolutely wonderful.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,459
    justin124 said:

    Even those inclined to vote tactically might be led astray by local factors in certain constituencies in 2019 which will almost certainly not be relevant next time. It will be very surprising if Labour does not regain its position as the main anti-Tory challenger in 2023 /2024 in seats such as Finchley & Golders Green and Cities of London & Westminster.It would make little sense to vote LD there on tactical grounds simply on the basis of the 2019 result there. Even in Wimbledon is the case for doing so entirely persuasive - given that Labour held the seat 1997 - 2005 and performed strongly there in 2017.

    The other problem is new boundaries. My vote next time will be in a constituency with a popular Lib Dem Council, shorn of its deep Blue hinterland. It could be a surprise LD gain.
  • Leon said:

    And the French can fuck right off, UK-wise

    They have spent the last 4 years OPENLY saying they wanted to make Brexit hurt as much as possible (even beyond the logical benefit to the EU), they have tried to wreak damage on the City of London, they have conspired to isolate the UK vis-a-vis the world, their idiots in the EUCO unilaterally imposed a new UK land border across Ireland, without telling the UK - or Ireland. And then their wanky little martinet of a president dissed the AZ vaccine as useless, with no scientific evidence, just because of spite against Brexit Britain - thus probably condemning 1000s of humans to death via vax hesitance.

    Quite frankly, they are lucky we are just humiliating them, rather than raining down nuclear warheads on Lyon and Narbonne

    They have a better case against America, but I doubt the Americans care
    +1
  • Well of course it would be great if you could be persuaded to vote Labour. But I suspect Labour's principles/policies might get in the way. For example, redistribution of wealth and power; reducing income inequality; making the rich pay a higher share of their income and wealth to benefit those less fortunate; using the power of the state to mitigate against the more divisive effects of untrammeled capitalism, including nationalisation of key industries where this is in the national interest; increasing foreign aid back to 0.7%; closer ties with the EU.... I could go on, but I hope you find these principles/policies attractive.
    I can sympathise with some of the ambitions (not all of them) but its the methods I disagree with. EG as I've often railed about our welfare state traps people in poverty, I wouldn't abolish welfare but I would lower the real tax rate people claiming it face so that they can raise themselves out of poverty via hard work. Ideally I'd have a UBI and a flat tax rate across all incomes rather than our current "Manhattan skyline" of tax rates where you get 75% (if claiming benefits), 31% (if not), then over 60% (withdrawal of tax allowance) and so on.

    Foreign aid to 0.7% is the wrong objective. The objective should be foreign aid that works effectively, if that happens to cost 0.7% then so be it. If it can be done for 0.6% then great. If it needs 0.8% and is affordable then so be it. Spending for the sake of spending to meet a target leads to really inefficient spending that doesn't aid your objective.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,824
    Much love to squareroot and Mum. Stay strong.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,970
    How Biden coldly, calculatingly and deliberately fucked up the French

    https://twitter.com/JonLemire/status/1440282048254513169?s=20

    I think he is now officially my Fave POTUS EVAH, surpassing even Reagan

    Go, Demented Joe!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    Carnyx said:

    SCUP voters are against independence referenda, democracy, etc.? Who knew?

    Incidentally that shows how it is futile to assume that all Labour voters are pro-union.
    64% of Labour voters still back the Union, only 21% independence in the poll, just they are more likely to back allowing an indyref2 than Tory voters
  • Tyvm
    Best wishes to your mother.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,970

    Visited the two new Northern Line stations today, maintaining my 100% record of visiting every train station in London!

    image

    image

    Opinions?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    edited September 2021
    Foxy said:

    The other problem is new boundaries. My vote next time will be in a constituency with a popular Lib Dem Council, shorn of its deep Blue hinterland. It could be a surprise LD gain.
    LD support at Local Elections though can often - albeit not always - flatter to deceive. Places such as Watford and Potsmouth South are now well out of reach for them despite success at local level over quite a few years.
    Any election held before autumn 2023 will not be on new boundaries.
  • Best wishes to your mother.
    tyvm
  • dixiedean said:

    Much love to squareroot and Mum. Stay strong.

    tyvm
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347

    If you mean by the first two similar levels overall but taxes would be equalised between earned and unearned income and the poverty trap is fixed then yes I'd vote for that. I said that before.

    On the final two it would really depend upon what is suggested. "Corporate" taxes are generally a very bad idea since corporate taxes like employers NI are really a tax on wages, and corporation tax leads to companies relocating profits abroad so don't raise revenues.

    As for wealth, it depends again on what you propose. Since most wealth taxes ever tried have been dismal failures that lead to wealth fleeing overseas then that's a terrible idea. You'd have to be very smart with any proposal, pretty much the only thing that could work is a tax on property that is levied on the owners. Almost any other wealth taxes are a terrible idea that lead to flight (property can't flee) but I'd listen to your proposals.
    What I mean is the overall tax burden about the same but under Labour more of it raised from wealth and less from income, and more from corporates and less from individuals. Does this have you taking a very close look and voting for it unless you find a catch?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,970
    DavidL said:

    We are seeing its effects already with the divisions inside the monolith that used to be the SNP. Those with a tentative contact with reality, such as Sturgeon, look at these figures and know Indyref 2 is unwinnable so why give up that power and salary on a prayer? Those with an even more feeble grip accuse her of Petainism and greedy self interest which is frustrating the inevitable and glorious victory.

    These tensions are threatening to tear the SNP apart. We already have Alba but not all the fundamentalists left which is why Sturgeon makes ever more desperate gestures. Given the stunningly ineffective nature of all the opposition parties this is pretty much the only viable way to a seriously overdue change of government.
    Plus ca change, plus c'est etc etc

    Until they really DO change

    My guess (and it is just a guess): at some point SLAB or SCONs will acquire a charismatic leader, who will deny the SNP their hegemony in Holyrood (and of course at some point Sturgeon will also retire, and that might be the moment)

    Then suddenly everything indeed changes. A Unionist govt in Holyrood. Perhaps then the UKG will seek a new permanent constitutional settlement with Holyrood. "Permanent" meaning - about 15-25 years
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,562
    Just popping in to wish @SquareRoot and his Mum the very best.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited September 2021
    kinabalu said:

    What I mean is the overall tax burden about the same but under Labour more of it raised from wealth and less from income, and more from corporates and less from individuals. Does this have you taking a very close look and voting for it unless you find a catch?
    As I said I am very suspicious about claimed taxes from wealth and corporates because most such taxes are very counterproductive. Any such tax that will just see immediate capital flight is an awful idea.

    Taxes that are low but consistently applied, so lower rates but evenly to everyone (so those not paying their share see rises, the rest of us cuts) that I'm happy with.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,957
    HYUFD said:

    Davey is positioning the LDs tactically to give confidence and supply to Starmer Labour that is why, they will not prop up Boris as they did Cameron so Orange Book liberalism will get pushed on the back burner for now in favour of social liberalism and diluting Brexit to make a deal with Labour easier
    It depends what you mean by "confidence and supply", young HY. There was an agreement between the Liberal MPs and the Labour Government in the late 70s. The agreement was that the government would consult the Liberals constantly to see if they could support their proposals. The result was that we had a Liberal filter on Labour proposals, and it seemed to me that this was a time of good government.

    Of course the extreme Socialists in the Labour Party misunderstood this, and thought that the Labour Government had been given support to push ahead with extreme Socialist policies. This was the beginning of a split in the Labour Party.

    The trouble with HY and other Tory PB commentators is that they have no idea how the Liberal Democrats work. Any kind of arrangement with another party over support for government would have to be ratified by a party conference. HY and others are very sure about what the outcome would be. I have no idea what might be proposed or how it might be received. Still, fools do rush in, and HY does like to build his castles in the air.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492

    And to be honest, there's probably not much of an option for a low tax party at a governmental level either. Pension spending is what it is and is going to be what it is going to be. Ditto health. Pretty much everything else has been squeezed fairly hard for a decade. The last couple of twigs of EU subscriptions and generous foreign aid have already gone on the bonfire.

    It's tax rises or big tax rises from here.
    you must be joking!!!!

    The sate is a bolted inefficient blob, with more fat on it than boan.

    We could and should cut massive amounts, but we will not. the public sector unions many be ineffective at providing good or even adequate services, but they are very good at making a lot of fuss, and creating bad headlines, and have made the political cost too high.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,941
    Carnyx said:

    Two fifths? Rather more than that. Edit: not counting dnvs, but then the three fifths figure doesn't count.
    40.3% in the regional vote that determines the number of MSPs.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,459
    justin124 said:

    LD support at Local Elections though can often - albeit not always - flatter to deceive. Places such as Watford and Potsmouth South are now well out of reach for them despite success at local level over quite a few years.
    Any election held before autumn 2023 will not be on new boundaries.
    Yes, but no way will Labour win the seat.
  • Leon said:

    Opinions?
    Not bad, overall. A bit like scaled down versions of some of the Jubilee Line Extension stations such as North Greenwich and Canary Wharf (1999). Plenty of space at platform level, unlike most Zone 1 stations. Yes, both are in Zone 1, despite Kennington now being in Zone 1 and 2.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347

    As I said I am very suspicious about claimed taxes from wealth and corporates because most such taxes are very counterproductive. Any such tax that will just see immediate capital flight is an awful idea.

    Taxes that are low but consistently applied, so lower rates but evenly to everyone (so those not paying their share see rises, the rest of us cuts) that I'm happy with.
    Ok, I see. No, that will not be forthcoming from Labour. You can stop agonizing. Stay with the magnificent muscly one.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,970

    Not bad, overall. A bit like scaled down versions of some of the Jubilee Line Extension stations such as North Greenwich and Canary Wharf (1999). Plenty of space at platform level, unlike most Zone 1 stations. Yes, both are in Zone 1, despite Kennington now being in Zone 1 and 2.
    Those JLE stations are probably the best stations on the Underground. Immense and profound. Canary Wharf is mind boggling

    So if the new stations have an echo of them, that's good
  • kinabalu said:

    Ok, I see. No, that will not be forthcoming from Labour. You can stop agonizing. Stay with the magnificent muscly one.
    That's a shame.

    A Labour Party that was true to its name and became the party of working people, that equalised taxes between earned and unearned income would be a party that was worth voting for.

    It would also do more for raising the prospects of the 'working poor' etc than any amount of stupid capital flight inducing taxes ever could.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347

    That's a shame.

    A Labour Party that was true to its name and became the party of working people, that equalised taxes between earned and unearned income would be a party that was worth voting for.

    It would also do more for raising the prospects of the 'working poor' etc than any amount of stupid capital flight inducing taxes ever could.
    Ah no we can do that, equalizing CGT and income tax, earned v unearned. Fact, we WILL be doing that. Thought you were talking about that 'flat rate' income tax nonsense. Apols. So, ok, welcome comrade.
  • justin124 said:


    Max, I think you are a liberal, like me.

    The problem with Labour is that they cannot escape policy capture by public sector bureaucrats.

    The Liberal Democrats, for all their faults (and whatever Ed is supposed to have said, I think it’s highly overblown) are the most properly liberal party and it’s frustrating to see you dismiss them.

    The Lib Dems need more support - from actual liberals.

    One thing about the Lib Dems, they'll never come close to winning my seat (Bassetlaw) as long as I live I think. Labour probably won't win it for a long time either - but there is more of a base for them than the Lib Dems here (Being obviously a historic Labour seat).
    So whilst a vote for either won't unseat Clarke-Smith any time soon a Labour vote is probably a bit less wasted*.
    I'm not just talking about Con-Lab marginals the same calculation might be made for a natural Conservative in Edinburgh South that a Tory vote there is simply wasted.
    Do you vote for a party that can probably never win or go for one of the more realistic options ?

    * Even if it's incredibly unlikely

    Daveyboy1961 said:
    'I have that problem in South Pembrokeshire. Our MP is the airhead Simon Hart. His majority is about 18% over Labour. The libdem vote is 4%. There is absolutely no chance of making a difference here.'

    The seat was Labour- held until 2010 with the Preseli seat having fallen narrowly in 2005. Labour came surprisingly close to winning both seats in this year's Assembly elections..
    '

    That is true with the Assembly seats, but I would prefer a closer fight in the westminster elections.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,507
    Has anyone covered this?

    Boris Johnson confirms how many kids he has - with another on the way

    https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/boris-johnson-finally-confirms-six-21632892#ICID=Android_HuddersfieldExaminerNewsApp_AppShare

    I'm sure it'll be considered tittle-tattle, but it struck me as interesting because the way the question was put and the "yes" answer was such archetypal Boris.

    What do I mean? Anyone seen the Rory Stewart quote on Boris as the complete all round Messi grade liar. I can't exactly recall but it goes along is in the vein of "the misdirection, the half truth, the bullshit, the whopper asoasf, Boris is versed in and has mastered them all"

    Boris has been asked after all these years a question in the correct format. "Have you got £6" to a mate eliciting money might bring the answer "Yes". Does it mean you have only £6? Not necessarily.

    Boris has and Boris knows he has revealed simply that he has AT LEAST six children. This in no way precludes that he has more.
  • Leon said:

    Those JLE stations are probably the best stations on the Underground. Immense and profound. Canary Wharf is mind boggling

    So if the new stations have an echo of them, that's good
    Just uploaded Battersea to Wikimedia:
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=Sunil060902+Battersea+Power+Station+tube&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image

    As you can see, I went a little click-crazy with my camera :lol:

    Nine Elms next...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,138
    So tonight government policy is to subsidise CO2 production, restart coal power production and hope for an increase in gas supply

    But by COP, the government message will be to reduce CO2, stop coal production and reduce gas consumption to save the world

    Any questions?


    https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1440363588900638721
  • kinabalu said:

    Ah no we can do that, equalizing CGT and income tax, earned v unearned. Fact, we WILL be doing that. Thought you were talking about that 'flat rate' income tax nonsense. Apols. So, ok, welcome comrade.
    So just for clarification you are going to apply full NI to all pensions as is @Philip_Thompson hopes
  • kinabalu said:

    Ah no we can do that, equalizing CGT and income tax, earned v unearned. Fact, we WILL be doing that. Thought you were talking about that 'flat rate' income tax nonsense. Apols. So, ok, welcome comrade.
    Why is flat rate income tax a nonsense?

    Currently the real tax rates are a mess but they are lower for the extremely rich than they are for the poorest on benefits. Then you get stupid shit like the £100k over 60% rate that just leads to people turning down work (as those lower down the ladder do) or doing salary sacrifice etc to legally avoid the tax.

    A UBI to replace benefits combined with a clean, simple, unitary and flat tax rate would be a massive improvement. Abolish CGT and treat it as income.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492

    I can sympathise with some of the ambitions (not all of them) but its the methods I disagree with. EG as I've often railed about our welfare state traps people in poverty, I wouldn't abolish welfare but I would lower the real tax rate people claiming it face so that they can raise themselves out of poverty via hard work. Ideally I'd have a UBI and a flat tax rate across all incomes rather than our current "Manhattan skyline" of tax rates where you get 75% (if claiming benefits), 31% (if not), then over 60% (withdrawal of tax allowance) and so on.

    Foreign aid to 0.7% is the wrong objective. The objective should be foreign aid that works effectively, if that happens to cost 0.7% then so be it. If it can be done for 0.6% then great. If it needs 0.8% and is affordable then so be it. Spending for the sake of spending to meet a target leads to really inefficient spending that doesn't aid your objective.
    Totaly agree:

    One simples UBI, if you are British and Breathing you get the Benefit.

    One absolutely flat tax on all income weather earned or unearned from your first pound to your last billion.

    I would also add a Land Value Tax to replace council tax, business rates. and a few other bits.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,067
    Scott_xP said:

    So tonight government policy is to subsidise CO2 production, restart coal power production and hope for an increase in gas supply

    But by COP, the government message will be to reduce CO2, stop coal production and reduce gas consumption to save the world

    Any questions?


    https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1440363588900638721

    No selfies?
  • So just for clarification you are going to apply full NI to all pensions as is @Philip_Thompson hopes
    Abolish NI is what I hope for. Have one income tax that yes is paid the same whether by pensioners or employees.
  • Abolish NI is what I hope for. Have one income tax that yes is paid the same whether by pensioners or employees.
    Reunification now! This island will be as one! :lol:
  • Scott_xP said:

    So tonight government policy is to subsidise CO2 production, restart coal power production and hope for an increase in gas supply

    But by COP, the government message will be to reduce CO2, stop coal production and reduce gas consumption to save the world

    Any questions?


    https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1440363588900638721

    That was posted earlier and widely panned

    You can do both

    Are you seriously suggesting HMG does not ensure CO2 supplies, or are you disappointed they are
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,010
    Camilla Tominey must be the only person alive who believes Prince Andrew has a reputation that is possibly salvageable.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/music/the-21-day-race-to-save-prince-andrews-reputation/ar-AAOFYyC?ocid=msedgntp#comments
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    dixiedean said:

    I have a sneaky feeling he'll want to beat his Dad. That is natural.
    As for leaders, folk continually underestimate Trudeau. He's a master. Won again on less than a third of the vote. That doesn't happen by accident.
    He sits where the median voter sits, and plays off both sides. Compared to any other Canadian politicians he is a giant.
    I still struggle to recognise him when he does white face.
  • Abolish NI is what I hope for. Have one income tax that yes is paid the same whether by pensioners or employees.
    I am sorry I misunderstood.

    I thought you wanted NI applied to all earned income including pensions

    If you want a single tax to take its place what would your suggest basic and higher rates should be
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    ClippP said:

    It depends what you mean by "confidence and supply", young HY. There was an agreement between the Liberal MPs and the Labour Government in the late 70s. The agreement was that the government would consult the Liberals constantly to see if they could support their proposals. The result was that we had a Liberal filter on Labour proposals, and it seemed to me that this was a time of good government.

    Of course the extreme Socialists in the Labour Party misunderstood this, and thought that the Labour Government had been given support to push ahead with extreme Socialist policies. This was the beginning of a split in the Labour Party.

    The trouble with HY and other Tory PB commentators is that they have no idea how the Liberal Democrats work. Any kind of arrangement with another party over support for government would have to be ratified by a party conference. HY and others are very sure about what the outcome would be. I have no idea what might be proposed or how it might be received. Still, fools do rush in, and HY does like to build his castles in the air.
    You think that the late 1970s where a good time of government? the winter of discontent and the IMF Bailout have slipped your memory perhaps?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,850
    justin124 said:

    Even those inclined to vote tactically might be led astray by local factors in certain constituencies in 2019 which will almost certainly not be relevant next time. It will be very surprising if Labour does not regain its position as the main anti-Tory challenger in 2023 /2024 in seats such as Finchley & Golders Green and Cities of London & Westminster.It would make little sense to vote LD there on tactical grounds simply on the basis of the 2019 result there. Even in Wimbledon is the case for doing so is not entirely persuasive - given that Labour held the seat 1997 - 2005 and performed strongly there in 2017.

    There will be no Cities of London & Westminster in 2024 - it's being split between City of London & Islington South, and Westminster & Chelsea East.

    Likewise, Hampstead (a Labour seat) is gaining Golders Green, but losing Kilburn.

    Wimbledon is mostly unchanged, but I think we need to see what happens at the Merton Council elections next year to have a feel for 2024.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,970

    Just uploaded Battersea to Wikimedia:
    https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=Sunil060902+Battersea+Power+Station+tube&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image

    As you can see, I went a little click-crazy with my camera :lol:

    Nine Elms next...
    It looks good! Definite echoes of the JLE, which is no bad thing
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,927
    Éric Grenier's write up of the Canadian election results. He's probably the best election analyst in Canada.

    https://www.thewrit.ca/p/there-and-back-again-in-election
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    rcs1000 said:

    There will be no Cities of London & Westminster in 2024 - it's being split between City of London & Islington South, and Westminster & Chelsea East.

    Likewise, Hampstead (a Labour seat) is gaining Golders Green, but losing Kilburn.

    Wimbledon is mostly unchanged, but I think we need to see what happens at the Merton Council elections next year to have a feel for 2024.
    New boundaries will not apply in Spring or Summer 2023.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    rcs1000 said:

    Yes. Albeit not me.
    Can anybody suggest some get rich quick idea’s?
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492

    I am sorry I misunderstood.

    I thought you wanted NI applied to all earned income including pensions

    If you want a single tax to take its place what would your suggest basic and higher rates should be
    There should not be basic and higher rates or extra high rates, or 10% rates or anything just one simple rate applied to everything, (and a UBI so it is progressive)

    Amongst other benifits, that stops the arguments of we should 'pay for this thing that I benefit form by taxing people who are not me' insted every new 'good idea to spend money' would be felt by everybody.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 25,771
    gealbhan said:

    Can anybody suggest some get rich quick idea’s?
    Be a Sugar Baby....
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    gealbhan said:

    Can anybody suggest some get rich quick idea’s?
    Hard work,
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    BigRich said:

    You think that the late 1970s where a good time of government? the winter of discontent and the IMF Bailout have slipped your memory perhaps?
    The IMF intervention at the end of 1976 arose on the basis of Government Statistics re the PSBR which subsequently proved to be wildly inaccurate.The final corrected data would not have required the IMF at all.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,138
    Government has agreed to subsidise CO2 production by CF Fertilisers for just THREE WEEKS. What on earth happens after that? https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1440417969142579201/photo/1
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,927
    edited September 2021

    Visited the two new Northern Line stations today, maintaining my 100% record of visiting every train station in London!

    image

    image

    Nice photos. I decided to be a one-off train spotter and was on the first train yesterday morning at 5:28am along with the likes of Simon Calder and Geoff Marshall. Amazingly about 150 people turned up outside the station at about 5am before it had even been opened. I wasn't expecting more than about 20 or 30 people. Nearly everyone did the same thing, which was to go from Battersea to Kennington, back to Battersea, and then to Nine Elms to have a look at the station.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,459
    BREAK: Xi Jinping says China will stop building coal plants overseas. This almost completely ends the international finance of coal in a single sentence.

    https://twitter.com/KarlMathiesen/status/1440398670713610244?s=19

    Possibly the most significant news of the day.

  • Glen O'Hara
    @gsoh31
    ·
    12h
    Government: faces sea of troubles, could be looking at a winter of crises.
    Labour: we'll just have a fight amongst ourselves over here then. Face with rolling eyesGrimacing faceConfounded face
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    I still think Cameron - Clegg was a good government
    I will never understand this perspective (which is shared by so many people on here).

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2021/04/david-cameron-and-great-sell-out
  • I am sorry I misunderstood.

    I thought you wanted NI applied to all earned income including pensions

    If you want a single tax to take its place what would your suggest basic and higher rates should be
    Ideally we shouldn't have basic and higher rates, the rate should be flat rather than creating issues with thresholds that makes it change.

    Obviously need to work on numbers to make it work but something along the lines of a UBI of £8,000 per adult over 18, £4,000 per dependent under 18, with a single unitary flat tax rate of 40%

    For a 2 adult, 2 child household that would be a UBI of £24,000. If both parents had a £30k salary on average then that would be the breakeven point so there would be not a penny in benefits and not a penny in tax either. Take home pay would be £60k.

    Change the numbers to suit to make it work, but the tax rate should never as a matter of principle to me be over 50%.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,850
    justin124 said:

    LD support at Local Elections though can often - albeit not always - flatter to deceive. Places such as Watford and Potsmouth South are now well out of reach for them despite success at local level over quite a few years.
    Any election held before autumn 2023 will not be on new boundaries.
    Isn't an example of a necessary, but not sufficient, condition?

    The LDs are highly unlikely to perform unless they have a local government presence. But that, in itself, is not enough.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,067
    Foxy said:


    Possibly the most significant news of the day.

    Apparently you didn't see Sunil's Battersea Power Station update.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,459
    BigRich said:

    Hard work,
    If hard work were so good for you, the rich would have kept it for themselves.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527


    Glen O'Hara
    @gsoh31
    ·
    12h
    Government: faces sea of troubles, could be looking at a winter of crises.
    Labour: we'll just have a fight amongst ourselves over here then. Face with rolling eyesGrimacing faceConfounded face

    It rather confirms my fear that Starmer lacks a political brain.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347

    So just for clarification you are going to apply full NI to all pensions as is @Philip_Thompson hopes
    Whoa hold on. No, I don't think so. Pensions are earned.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,850
    justin124 said:

    New boundaries will not apply in Spring or Summer 2023.
    Which is why the Conservatives will wait until 2024.
  • Scott_xP said:

    Government has agreed to subsidise CO2 production by CF Fertilisers for just THREE WEEKS. What on earth happens after that? https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1440417969142579201/photo/1

    An idea suggested here on PB on Monday morning!! Maybe KK's aides read this blog.

    Not the three weeks bit though.

  • kinabalu said:

    Whoa hold on. No, I don't think so. Pensions are earned.
    If that's the case why aren't they taxed with NI?
  • kinabalu said:

    Whoa hold on. No, I don't think so. Pensions are earned.
    I am not sure @Philip_Thompson agrees with you but your answer is as I expected and I agree with
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    BigRich said:

    Hard work,
    This is the very worst possible way of getting rich

  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    That was posted earlier and widely panned

    You can do both

    Are you seriously suggesting HMG does not ensure CO2 supplies, or are you disappointed they are
    I think Coates, who has a long standing specialty in climate crisis, makes a good point actually.

    Don’t forget the PB maxim, a bad point can be a good point you don’t like the sound of.

    How to get messaging and behaviour right on a change message, in order to build the big tent response the climate crisis needs, whilst keeping enough voters on board by not badly impacting their lives.

    The response by PB was good as well, in the importance of CO2 in food preservation, but the response below from posters completely ignoring Coates actual point of the difficulty for politicians achieving change whilst remaining popular was total rubbish.

    PS there is some criticism of a party in power 11 years who have a CO2 crisis because so much depends on 2 factories, is there not?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,850
    kle4 said:

    Totally discriminatory for our many fine Ventilator Britons. Typical lung privilege.
    Damn it, I was going to make that gag.
  • That's a shame.

    A Labour Party that was true to its name and became the party of working people, that equalised taxes between earned and unearned income would be a party that was worth voting for.

    It would also do more for raising the prospects of the 'working poor' etc than any amount of stupid capital flight inducing taxes ever could.
    Clause IV of the Labour Party originally stated that there should be common ownership of the means of production, and while Blair changed that, it still states that Labour is a democratic socialist party.
    Given Clause IV is pretty indicative of what the Labour Party is about, I don't think it has ever or ever will be a party you'd find to be attractive, Phil. I despise the hard left's obsession with finding traitors rather than converts, but I do think the Labour Party also needs to preserve at least some of the values it was founded on, even if that cuts us off from some parts of the electorate in doing so. After all, you yourself have left the Tories precisely because they departed from values you hold dear.
  • I am not sure @Philip_Thompson agrees with you but your answer is as I expected and I agree with
    I agree that pensions were earned.
    I also think that income is earned.

    I see no reason why one of those should be taxed higher than the other.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,609
    .

    Abolish NI is what I hope for. Have one income tax that yes is paid the same whether by pensioners or employees.
    OMG! I agree with @Philip_Thompson . I must have become a Johnsonian Conservative- without noticing.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347

    Abolish NI is what I hope for. Have one income tax that yes is paid the same whether by pensioners or employees.
    Yes that's the ticket. But with higher rate bands.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,355
    Scott_xP said:

    Government has agreed to subsidise CO2 production by CF Fertilisers for just THREE WEEKS. What on earth happens after that? https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1440417969142579201/photo/1

    See what happens and if needed go again. Honestly it’s not hard...
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    Pulpstar said:

    Camilla Tominey must be the only person alive who believes Prince Andrew has a reputation that is possibly salvageable.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainment/music/the-21-day-race-to-save-prince-andrews-reputation/ar-AAOFYyC?ocid=msedgntp#comments

    I am the Grand Old Duke of York, I have ten thousand men. It’s alleged I had some under age girls, but I don’t remember them.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 64,800
    edited September 2021
    justin124 said:

    It rather confirms my fear that Starmer lacks a political brain.
    More to the point where is he

    I have not seen or heard from him for quite some time

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1440343918718054404?s=19
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,067
    rcs1000 said:

    Damn it, I was going to make that gag.
    If only someone had the power to remove my post entirely as if it had never existed.
  • See what happens and if needed go again. Honestly it’s not hard...
    LMFAO!

    Peston and Scott combined couldn't figure that out.

    Oh. I see. 😂
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    rcs1000 said:

    Which is why the Conservatives will wait until 2024.
    Maybe - but a lot of commentators and Tory MPs appear to expect a 2023 election. There is also serious doubt that this time the boundaries will actually confer any benefit on the Tories - a perverse effect of their 2019 red wall success. If so , why wait? Particularly if the economic outlook looks darker further ahead.
  • See what happens and if needed go again. Honestly it’s not hard...
    Perfect pair together @Scott_P and Peston
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,459
    rcs1000 said:

    It's not significant.

    China doesn't build that many overseas coal fired power stations. That would... checks International Power Directory 2017... be the French and Alstom.
    They do seem to finance a lot though:

    https://twitter.com/KarlMathiesen/status/1440400260962996227?s=19
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,067
    justin124 said:

    Maybe - but a lot of commentators and Tory MPs appear to expect a 2023 election. There is also serious doubt that this time the boundaries will actually confer any benefit on the Tories - a perverse effect of their 2019 red wall success. If so , why wait? Particularly if the economic outlook looks darker further ahead.
    Maybe they'll have some sympathy with the workers at the Boundary Commission. Poor buggers deserve for their work to mean something for a change.
  • Bit "crisis, what crisis", from Johnson on that BBC News at 10 report.

    "No one will go short of food".

    They are already are.
  • gealbhan said:

    I think Coates, who has a long standing specialty in climate crisis, makes a good point actually.

    Don’t forget the PB maxim, a bad point can be a good point you don’t like the sound of.

    How to get messaging and behaviour right on a change message, in order to build the big tent response the climate crisis needs, whilst keeping enough voters on board by not badly impacting their lives.

    The response by PB was good as well, in the importance of CO2 in food preservation, but the response below from posters completely ignoring Coates actual point of the difficulty for politicians achieving change whilst remaining popular was total rubbish.

    PS there is some criticism of a party in power 11 years who have a CO2 crisis because so much depends on 2 factories, is there not?
    No - nobody has ever brought it up and it is a by product of covid and unique factors

    Can anyone on here honestly say they knew we depend on 2 fertiliser factories for our CO2 and how extensive its use is
  • Bit "crisis, what crisis", from Johnson on that BBC News at 10 report.

    "No one will go short of food".

    They are already are.

    Oh really? Who's going short of food already and why?

    Full shelves today at my Aldi. If people's preferred supermarket can't manage its stock properly, maybe try one that can.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,927
    "Wuhan scientists planned to release coronaviruses into cave bats 18 months before outbreak
    Leaked documents reveal researchers applied for $14m to fund controversial project in 2018"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/09/21/wuhan-scientists-planned-releaseskin-penetrating-nanoparticles/
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    More to the point where is he

    I have not seen or heard from him for quite some time

    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1440343918718054404?s=19
    What Starmer is doing repealing Miilbands failed madness is absolutely right - though hardly a Clause 4 moment.

    Tough on Corbyn, tough on the causes of Corbyn. You say you don’t support that? What are you, Toby Young?

    Then again the clause 4 moment wasn’t a clause 4 moment either, completely manufactured and bigged up piece of substance lacking trash.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,850
    edited September 2021
    kinabalu said:

    Whoa hold on. No, I don't think so. Pensions are earned.
    So...

    If I save for my retirement in a pension scheme, I should receive those payments tax free?
    But if I save for my retirement by buying shares in Microsoft, I should be taxed on those payments?

    What's the difference?

    (Especially given that the pension scheme will have bought shares in Microsoft to pay the pensions with.)
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362
    Farooq said:

    You're totally wrong. If you have a lot of people doing hard work for you, it works.
    You can’t have “start rich” that answer, though true, is not the substance of the question.
  • No - nobody has ever brought it up and it is a by product of covid and unique factors

    Can anyone on here honestly say they knew we depend on 2 fertiliser factories for our CO2 and how extensive its use is
    I can honestly say I knew how extensive its use is and remembered the CO2 shortage of 2018 during the World Cup. Some pubs switched to selling bottled beers during the World Cup because they were unable to get CO2 supplies delivered but most of the industry coped.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/20/co2-shortage-could-hit-uk-beer-and-chicken-supplies-during-world-cup
  • Farooq said:

    Because you've been spending 23.5 hours a day locked in the bathroom with What Sub? magazine.
    It is not me on that tweet and your answer about me is just silly and does not help find Starmer
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    Foxy said:

    BREAK: Xi Jinping says China will stop building coal plants overseas. This almost completely ends the international finance of coal in a single sentence.

    https://twitter.com/KarlMathiesen/status/1440398670713610244?s=19

    Possibly the most significant news of the day.

    That statement excludes new coal power stations in China itself, which is where most chines built power station are, so not that big.
  • Philippines throws support squarely behind Aukus, welcoming Aust's decision to establish security partnership w US, UK and pointing out ASEAN states "singly and collectively, do not possess military wherewithal to maintain peace and security in SE Asia"

    https://twitter.com/hodgeamanda/status/1440149781590917126
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,290

    I get the strong impression that some of our frequent Conservative posters who are totally disillusioned with the current government would indeed be willing to vote either Labour or Lib Dem.

    But only if Labour and Lib Dems change all their policies and adopt policies that are associated with the Conservatives (such as anti-wokeness, low tax, anti-EU, pro-rampant capitalism etc. etc.).

    I see a problem with that.

    The present difficulty for those of us who usually vote Tory is finding any party to vote for with broadly conservative policies.
  • Bit "crisis, what crisis", from Johnson on that BBC News at 10 report.

    "No one will go short of food".

    They are already are.

    I have not experienced any food shortages either on our weekly delivery or at Asda here
  • gealbhan said:

    What Starmer is doing repealing Miilbands failed madness is absolutely right - though hardly a Clause 4 moment.

    Tough on Corbyn, tough on the causes of Corbyn. You say you don’t support that? What are you, Toby Young?

    Then again the clause 4 moment wasn’t a clause 4 moment either, completely manufactured and bigged up piece of substance lacking trash.
    Strikes me Labour might be better with the Tory system of MPs picking two leader candidates to go through to the membership vote.

    Pulling the unions back into the leadership race takes them back to exactly the f*ck up that elected the wrong brother.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited September 2021
    justin124 said:

    It rather confirms my fear that Starmer lacks a political brain.
    Isn’t he moving the narrative away from the transgender debate onto something less off putting for potential political transitioners?
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    No - nobody has ever brought it up and it is a by product of covid and unique factors

    Can anyone on here honestly say they knew we depend on 2 fertiliser factories for our CO2 and how extensive its use is
    What’s the point of electing governments to de risk and plan ahead for us then BIG GEE?

    You got to remember the people posting here it’s not a government problem wouldn’t be posting this after the last 11 years of Labour government. We are not daft or open to being patronised in that regard thanks.
This discussion has been closed.