Howdy, Stranger!

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

The German election looks very tight – politicalbetting.com

12346

Comments

  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,765

    The headline figures are done on the list vote. I think the numbers you quote is the constituency vote.
    Thanks - yes - I see now.

    Not sure why there is such a big difference between the two votes?
  • HYUFD said:

    You are talking about most under 65s in London and the SE here, south of Watford the average paid worker can only buy a property or get a deposit to buy a property with parental assistance or inheritance now.

    Remove that and the Tories would face a 1997 style wipeout as their heartland vote collapsed.

    Estates over £1 million still pay IHT anyway
    To a large extent - particularly in London - this has been caused by the property market being inflated by people buying property on the back of family money.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    edited September 2021

    Who is talking of taking peoples homes..

    Inheritance tax is taken after death and there is £325,000 threshold which for most people outside London would exempt them

    You need to get real about this
    It is taking the family home.

    I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.

    The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.

    https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=5230&mod-area=E92000001&mod-group=AllRegions_England&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup

  • IFS calls NI a "tax". So I don't think @HYUFD is correct.
    It is a tax
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    Andy_JS said:

    Someone earlier was reporting they'd done badly in their "safe seats" in Berlin. Not sure if that's still the case.
    Well as Berlin seems to be counting slowly (the have lots of different elections on the same day) it is not easy to know, but on the TV earlier and in the German press, it seems that they are not worried. They might not get those safe seats, but the best guess at the moment is that they will. Also all the coalition possibilitiy graphics are assuming that die Linke will around 5% be in the Bundestag, not just 2 seats.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,608
    .
    HYUFD said:

    No it doesn't, you don't improve social mobility by taking peoples' family homes you just end up with even lower home ownership.

    Thatcher's council house sales was a measure that actually did improve social mobility, as did the expansion of white collar jobs in the 1950s and 1960s and as did many grammar schools
    How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.

    And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
  • The vast majority of people don't inherit much.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-8522389/Parents-secretly-plan-leave-bigger-inheritance-children-expect.html

    "...recent government statistics show the average inheritance is £11,000, but among those aged 55-64 it is £33,000 and among over-65s it is £20,000."
    IHT should be completely abolished, and any money received simply taxed as income. Which should include NI too as that should be merged with income tax.

    It is repugnant to say that an inheritance is less worthy of being taxed than money actually worked for.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,063
    edited September 2021
    Cyclefree said:

    As to why whistleblowers don't speak up, even though they know ought to know or suspect, well let me ask the men amongst you this. Every woman I know has suffered sexual harassment of some kind, some of it the most serious there is. Statistically, you must know men who have raped or sexually harassed women. How often have you blown the whistle about their conduct? And, if not, why not?
    That's an exceptionally stupidly put question if I may say so, which given your ability to be very clear is surprising. You've jumped straight from saying that statistically we must know someone who has raped or sexually harassed a woman to presuming we know about it happening.

    At the very least allow the possibility of us being blind enough to not realise we know a rapist or sexual assaulter and criticise that, than jump immediately to an implicit accusation we've decided not to report a rapist.

    As it stands your question doesn't make any point about whistleblowing, since a whistleblower knows something is up and you've apparently granted all men the power of omniscence.

    If you want to make the point that men should be far more alert to the signs someone is a rapist or sexual assaulter, perhaps say that rather than presume everyone knows but does nothing.

    You are right people do not like those who blow the whistle - it's why many whistleblowing policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, since the desire to punish remains. But your question to illustrate it doesn'trelate to that at all.
  • It is the correct thing to do and you may find Rishi does the right thing
    The thing is that you're both right.

    More tax has got to come from somewhere, and wealth rather than incomes is the clear way to do it.

    But it will also make the Conservative core vote very unhappy bunnies.

    So BoJo can either make himself unpopular quickly (with even more tax rises) or slowly (as the fiscal wheels fall off).

    Which is more likely?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,924
    edited September 2021
    edit
  • HYUFD said:

    It is taking the family home.

    I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.

    The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.

    https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=5230&mod-area=E92000001&mod-group=AllRegions_England&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup

    Rewarding hard work is supposed to be a core Tory principle.

    If you don't think it is, you can shove your core principles where the sun doesn't shine.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 3,492
    Chameleon said:

    Income tax thresholds are frozen, inflation is positive (~5%) = Tax rise

    IHT thresholds frozen, = Tax rise

    Cap gains frozen = Tax rise

    Studen loan threshold plummeting = Tax rise

    NI rising = Tax rise^2

    The Tories aren't content with just raising all the taxes, so they're inventing whole new ones!
    They are attempting to balance the books, and much As I hate tax, (all tax is theft) its still better than borrowing.

    We have borrowed so much money in the last year that the numbers are eye watering, all with the opposition and media encouragement. and its achieved virtually nothing, delayed some cases but ultimately very little.

    It would be much better to cut spending but cancel HS2 maybe, stop subsidising pointless university courses, privatise a few bits, and deregulate the economy, but we won't.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    Laschet might well not get a seat in the Bundestag. He is not standing in a constituency and the CDU are predicted not to get any "list candidates" elected in his state. But he might still be chosen to be chancellor.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,286
    Andy_JS said:

    The boffins on the VoteUK forum seem to be saying that they're going to get 3 but because 2 are in Berlin and 1 elsewhere they won't get any bonus seats. You need 3 in the same area.
    Are you cheating on us? ;)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    edited September 2021

    The vast majority of people don't inherit much.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/pensions/article-8522389/Parents-secretly-plan-leave-bigger-inheritance-children-expect.html

    "...recent government statistics show the average inheritance is £11,000, but among those aged 55-64 it is £33,000 and among over-65s it is £20,000."
    That actually gives the average inheritance as £125,000. The AVERAGE voter in the South East and London will now get an inheritance above the IHT thereshold because of property prices there not just the rich. As the article says the number receiving a sizeable inheritance will rise significantly, especially in areas with high property prices
  • If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?
  • With 189 of 299 constituencies counted, but zilch from Berlin, die Linke is a 4.3% in national 2nd vote share.

    So they live or die based on Berlin results.
  • Andy_JS said:

    edit

    Not necessary for them to be in the same area.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,924
    RobD said:

    Are you cheating on us? ;)
    I've edited that post because I'm not sure it's correct. Always seems to be confusion on this issue, even amongst the experts.
  • kle4 said:

    That's an exceptionally stupidly put question if I may say so, which given your ability to be very clear is surprising. You've jumped straight from saying that statistically we must know someone who has raped or sexually harassed a woman to presuming we know about it happening.

    At the very least allow the possibility of us being blind enough to not realise we know a rapist or sexual assaulter and criticise that, than jump immediately to an implicit accusation we've decided not to report a rapist.

    As it stands your question doesn't make any point about whistleblowing, since a whistleblower knows something is up and you've apparently granted all men the power of omniscence.

    If you want to make the point that men should be far more alert to the signs someone is a rapist or sexual assaulter, perhaps say that rather than presume everyone knows but does nothing.

    You are right people do not like those who blow the whistle - it's why many whistleblowing policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, since the desire to punish remains. But your question to illustrate it doesn'trelate to that at all.
    Well said. A woman who has been abused may share her experience.

    A man who abuses others almost certainly does not share their experience.

    I don't know of anyone who has done anything to "blow the whistle" on. Not a single thing. Now if Cyclefree is saying that its happened but I wasn't aware of it . . . well how could I blow the whistle if I'm not aware of it?
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    RobD said:

    Are you cheating on us? ;)
    Yes he was. He has already deleted it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,286
    Andy_JS said:

    I've edited that post because I'm not sure it's correct. Always seems to be confusion on this issue, even amongst the experts.
    Yes, it is quite a complicated voting system.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    UK cases by specimen date

    image
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    edited September 2021

    Rewarding hard work is supposed to be a core Tory principle.

    If you don't think it is, you can shove your core principles where the sun doesn't shine.
    That is as much a liberal as a conservative principle. The Liberal Party was often the party of shifting tax from income to wealth in the 19th century and early 20th century, the Labour Party the party of increasing both income and inheritance tax.

    Preserving estates and inheritance however has always been a conservative principle since the Tory party was founded in the late 17th century.

    That is why I am a Tory and you are a classical Liberal
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    RobD said:

    Looks like it passed:

    https://twitter.com/dwenteignen/status/1442220844521070592
    Well they would claim that, that is the group that brought the referendum. There is no official news yet.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    UK cases by specimen date and scaled to 100K

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    UK R

    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    edited September 2021
    UK case summary

    image
    image
    image
    image
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,286
    eristdoof said:

    Well they would claim that, that is the group that brought the referendum. There is no official news yet.
    I don't think they'd make up the numbers, do you? Most likely is that they are preliminary figures, but based on a fair chunk of the vote so reasonable to assume it's representative.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    UK hospitals

    image
    image
    image
  • eristdoof said:

    Laschet might well not get a seat in the Bundestag. He is not standing in a constituency and the CDU are predicted not to get any "list candidates" elected in his state. But he might still be chosen to be chancellor.

    In that scenario wouldn't the chances of the CDU/CSU leading the coalition be very low?
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    eristdoof said:

    Well they would claim that, that is the group that brought the referendum. There is no official news yet.
    OK I have just seen an atricle that says it "is likely" to have passed.
  • HYUFD said:

    It is taking the family home.

    I know you are a former New Labour voter who does not care about many core Tory principles but I do.

    The median house price is also £342,000 in the South East now and £495,000 in London so the average property there is above the threshold already. There are also plenty of properties in wealthier parts of the North and Midlands and Wales which would also be hit by a rise in IHT.

    https://lginform.local.gov.uk/reports/lgastandard?mod-metric=5230&mod-area=E92000001&mod-group=AllRegions_England&mod-type=namedComparisonGroup

    It is not taking the family home

    You are so frustrating

    The owner is deceased and the estate pays IHT over £325,000 which by your own admission is not far below the SE

    The residue is payable to the beneficiaries

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    UK deaths

    image
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333

    If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?

    Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,286
    @eristdoof the results are here: https://www.wahlen-berlin.de/abstimmungen/VE2021/AFSPRAES/ergebnisse_gemeinde_1100.html

    Looks like a yes, especially given how many have counted.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,063
    edited September 2021

    Well said. A woman who has been abused may share her experience.

    A man who abuses others almost certainly does not share their experience.

    I don't know of anyone who has done anything to "blow the whistle" on. Not a single thing. Now if Cyclefree is saying that its happened but I wasn't aware of it . . . well how could I blow the whistle if I'm not aware of it?
    I can accept, particularly in the case of harrassment, that I have not seen something that should have been obvious, that I have not reported language that I should have perhaps, and that too many people, probably otherwise decent people, have seen actions that they should have reported but did nothing for one reason or another. And that I, and many men, have much to learn about what is or was thought acceptable.

    What I won't accept is the absurd proposition that all men know a rapist and harrasser, and know that person is a racist and harrasser, and did nothing, without the acknowledgement that the second part of that proposition is simply not true, and thus the premise that either something was done or it was covered up must be true. Those are not the only options.

    If the argument is too many do know someone committed such offences and still did nothing? I can accept that too. But that was not the argument put. And, clearly, from such an erudite person, deliberately not put.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    Age related data

    image
    image
    image
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,504
    Age related data scaled to 100K

    image
    image
    image
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    HYUFD said:

    Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
    4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
  • MikeL said:

    Thanks - yes - I see now.

    Not sure why there is such a big difference between the two votes?
    It's quite common to split the vote in Germany. Check the scottish parliament election as well. Virtually all the green votes were split votes as only a couple stood in their constituencies.
  • The thing is that you're both right.

    More tax has got to come from somewhere, and wealth rather than incomes is the clear way to do it.

    But it will also make the Conservative core vote very unhappy bunnies.

    So BoJo can either make himself unpopular quickly (with even more tax rises) or slowly (as the fiscal wheels fall off).

    Which is more likely?
    I expect Rishi will make a balanced case for a wealth tax next month
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333

    .

    How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.

    And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
    Becoming a home owner rather than a renter is an example of social mobility, of course.

    More of our top professions like law and medicine had state educated practitioners when we had more grammar schools than now when they are mainly dominated by private schools. Grammars had and have a good record of Oxbridge entry, certainly better than most comprehensives. We also had plenty of grammar school PMs, we have yet to have a PM fully educated at a comprehensive
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069

    In that scenario wouldn't the chances of the CDU/CSU leading the coalition be very low?
    In practice no, because the overall numbers are the same, but I think that it should make huge diffrence, "no seat, no place round the table".
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,924
    HYUFD said:

    Indeed, if Scholz does become chancellor, Soder is nailed on for Union chancellor candidate in 2025 given Laschet's defeat
    Something always seems to happen to stop the CSU candidate from becoming chancellor, whether it's the voters or those who choose the Union candidate.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347

    .

    How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.

    And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
    Yes, they bettered themselves to become Conservatives. This is what he means. And he does mean it too. Total sincerity there.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,100
    HYUFD said:

    You cannot claim the state pension without NI payments or credits, nor can you claim JSA without sufficient NI contributions
    Er... You know about Pension Credit and UC right?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    edited September 2021
    eristdoof said:

    4 years is a long time to find another leader. The CSU is not liked by much of Germany.
    The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.

    Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
  • eristdoof said:

    In practice no, because the overall numbers are the same, but I think that it should make huge diffrence, "no seat, no place round the table".
    Yes, that's what I meant - the impact in terms of loss of political credibility and the corresponding effect on what the FDP and Greens will do.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069

    If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?

    They might have got a few more %-points, but "walked it" is certainly an over exaggeration,
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333

    It is not taking the family home

    You are so frustrating

    The owner is deceased and the estate pays IHT over £325,000 which by your own admission is not far below the SE

    The residue is payable to the beneficiaries

    The family estate pays IHT over the threshold ie that means most estates in London and the South East and part of the value of the family home therefore taken by the state
  • eristdoof said:

    They might have got a few more %-points, but "walked it" is certainly an over exaggeration,
    A few more percentage points on 25% is a big deal.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    eristdoof said:

    They might have got a few more %-points, but "walked it" is certainly an over exaggeration,
    A few more points was all they needed to stay in power
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333

    Er... You know about Pension Credit and UC right?
    Non contributory and funded by income tax
  • .

    How did council house sales improve social mobility? I am sure you have a raft of dubious evidence, but anecdotally I don't see it. Unless by social mobility you mean as home owners they became Conservatives.

    And don't get me started on Grammar Schools. I went to a s*** one.
    You don't think people owning their own home makes aids social mobility?

    Its not simply that they became Conservatives, many didn't, but by owning their own home it gave them security. And owning your own home dramatically improves your own welfare as once you've paid off the mortgage you are able to live rent-free for the rest of your life.

    If two people are on the same income, but half of what one person takes home goes on rent - and the other never has a penny of rent to pay - don't you think the latter has improved their social mobility?

    Ridiculously now we tax the ones who have to pay their rent through their wages much higher than those on the same income with unearned wealth and no rent to pay.
  • Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?

    20% threshold of MPs nominations.

    Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39

  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069

    Yes, that's what I meant - the impact in terms of loss of political credibility and the corresponding effect on what the FDP and Greens will do.
    But it seems that the Germans don't consider it in that way. If he is the chancellor candidate and has a chance to negotiate then he has a right to be around the table. I think that the FDP and Greens can say to him "you don't have a mandate, Next"
  • HYUFD said:

    The last 2 times the CDU chancellor candidate lost an election, 1976 and 1998, the Union candidate at the next election was from the CSU. Strauss in 1980 and Stoiber in 2002.

    Given this will be Laschet and the CDU's defeat the CSU will likely refuse to back any candidate but Soder next time
    Stoiber was the candidate in 2002 because of sexism in the CDU as well as a pragmatic decision by Merkel that Schröder would win so it was better to let another male rival carry the can.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333

    Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:

    Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT
    HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.

    Drinks all round!
    If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.

    Hence Boris would not do it
  • HYUFD said:

    The family estate pays IHT over the threshold ie that means most estates in London and the South East and part of the value of the family home therefore taken by the state
    Quite right too but the home is not taken, tax is taken
  • eristdoof said:

    But it seems that the Germans don't consider it in that way. If he is the chancellor candidate and has a chance to negotiate then he has a right to be around the table. I think that the FDP and Greens can say to him "you don't have a mandate, Next"
    Ah, interesting, thanks.
  • If the CDU had chosen a less voter-repellent leader, they'd have walked this, wouldn't they?

    Yes. Given the strong preference for Scholz as Chancellor in the polls, the SPD have done relatively badly. You'd have to think that with no preference for either candidate for Chancellor that the CDU would have a clear lead.
  • Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:

    Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT
    HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.

    Drinks all round!
    Some tweaking around the edges of IHT is not going to cause a wipe out. Ridiculous.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333

    Stoiber was the candidate in 2002 because of sexism in the CDU as well as a pragmatic decision by Merkel that Schröder would win so it was better to let another male rival carry the can.
    Stoiber was just 3 seats behind Schroder in that election and tied on votes
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    RobD said:

    @eristdoof the results are here: https://www.wahlen-berlin.de/abstimmungen/VE2021/AFSPRAES/ergebnisse_gemeinde_1100.html

    Looks like a yes, especially given how many have counted.

    Thanks, yes, that looks like a "yes" not only in terms of over 50% but there is also an absolute number of "yesses" votes and that has also been achieved.
  • kinabalu said:

    Yes, they bettered themselves to become Conservatives. This is what he means. And he does mean it too. Total sincerity there.
    Thatchers right to buy made hundreds of thousands of former tenants and Labour voters into Tories. That has persisted to this day.
  • Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?

    20% threshold of MPs nominations.

    Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39

    All else being equal, getting 36 nominees from 232 is considerably easier than 39 nominees from 199. Some of the lost seats would include those who would have been on that side (eg Pidcock).

    Worth remembering in 2015 that Corbyn only got to the 36 because Margaret Beckett chose to sign the nomination paper "to widen the debate" and came to deeply regret it. The same mistake should not happen again next time, but people do tend to forget to learn from history.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,100
    edited September 2021

    Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?

    20% threshold of MPs nominations.

    Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39

    Interesting use of the word 'exactly'
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,063

    Have I missed something on the rule change that Starmer has won that have shattered the Left?

    20% threshold of MPs nominations.

    Labour only have 199 MPs - so a Corbyn type would need basically exactly the same number of signatures as he did in 2015 ≈ 36 vs 39

    Presumably they are banking both on there being fewer of the awkward left than in 2015 as a proportion of the total MPs, and that next time MPs won't be so silly as to ignore their own concerns and the spirit of the rules in order to let through an unacceptable candidate.

    Neither seems certain to me.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347
    kle4 said:

    That's an exceptionally stupidly put question if I may say so, which given your ability to be very clear is surprising. You've jumped straight from saying that statistically we must know someone who has raped or sexually harassed a woman to presuming we know about it happening.

    At the very least allow the possibility of us being blind enough to not realise we know a rapist or sexual assaulter and criticise that, than jump immediately to an implicit accusation we've decided not to report a rapist.

    As it stands your question doesn't make any point about whistleblowing, since a whistleblower knows something is up and you've apparently granted all men the power of omniscence.

    If you want to make the point that men should be far more alert to the signs someone is a rapist or sexual assaulter, perhaps say that rather than presume everyone knows but does nothing.

    You are right people do not like those who blow the whistle - it's why many whistleblowing policies are not worth the paper they are printed on, since the desire to punish remains. But your question to illustrate it doesn'trelate to that at all.
    You're being overly sensitive imo. I think it's a fair enough question. Eg I have known men who've harassed women and have not always called it out. Bet this applies to other posters on here too. Can't be just me. So, why didn't I? Why didn't they? This is not a stupid question. It's quite an interesting and important question.
  • Gosh, I really hope both you and Big G are right:

    Big G - Rishi will definitely raise IHT
    HYUFD - if he does, Tories will face a 1997 style wipeout.

    Drinks all round!
    Remember I am not a true believer and can clear off along with other fellow conservative posters

    I have heard it said IHT is on Rishi list and he needs more revenue and IHT and CGT are sensible targets
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    edited September 2021

    Some tweaking around the edges of IHT is not going to cause a wipe out. Ridiculous.
    It would, trust me. Tory voters across the home counties would see their inheritances vanish and would stay home or vote RefUK, what is the point of voting Tory if only to raise taxes across the board.

    The LDs would thus sweep Home Counties marginals by default and in London the same would apply handing Starmer Tory marginals in the capital by default.

    The Blue Wall would be broken as much as the Red Wall was in 2019
  • HYUFD said:

    If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.

    Hence Boris would not do it
    If the Tories raise IHT then "the only Tory in the village" will be on here singing about why its such a good idea.
  • Heinz Brandenburg @HzBrandenburg
    The terrible news for the size of the Bundestag is that the CSU only lost one seat in Munich, winning 45 of 46 (2 outstanding, but unlikely to go elsewhere).
    But only 31.8% of the list vote.

    That could increase Bavaria's share of seats to 130 and the Bundestag to at least 840.

    https://twitter.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1442250849976127489
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,286

    Interesting use of the word 'exactly'
    Basically exactly. ;)
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,100
    edited September 2021

    All else being equal, getting 36 nominees from 232 is considerably easier than 39 nominees from 199. Some of the lost seats would include those who would have been on that side (eg Pidcock).

    Worth remembering in 2015 that Corbyn only got to the 36 because Margaret Beckett chose to sign the nomination paper "to widen the debate" and came to deeply regret it. The same mistake should not happen again next time, but people do tend to forget to learn from history.
    Minor point but wouldn't it require 40 MPs to achieve a 20% threshold of 199?

    Edit: And isn't 35 sufficient to achieve 15% of 232?. Thus it's 35 versus 40.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,286

    Heinz Brandenburg @HzBrandenburg
    The terrible news for the size of the Bundestag is that the CSU only lost one seat in Munich, winning 45 of 46 (2 outstanding, but unlikely to go elsewhere).
    But only 31.8% of the list vote.

    That could increase Bavaria's share of seats to 130 and the Bundestag to at least 840.

    https://twitter.com/HzBrandenburg/status/1442250849976127489

    Terrible news indeed, hah!
  • It is not taking the family home

    You are so frustrating

    The owner is deceased and the estate pays IHT over £325,000 which by your own admission is not far below the SE

    The residue is payable to the beneficiaries

    Isn't it actually £1million for a "family home" i.e. married couple???
  • eekeek Posts: 29,399
    edited September 2021
    HYUFD said:

    It would, trust me. Tory voters across the home counties would see their inheritances vanish and would stay home or vote RefUK, what is the point of voting Tory if only to raise taxes across the board.

    The LDs would thus sweep Home Counties marginals by default and in London the same would apply handing Starmer Tory marginals in the capital by default
    IHT generates peanuts, (well £5.1bn).

    It needs to be a land value or similar tax if you want real additional tax revenue.
  • HYUFD said:

    If the Tories raise IHT even I would have to think about staying home at the next general election, it would be such a betrayal of Tory principles and large numbers of Tories round here would feel the same and stay home or vote ReformUK in protest.

    Hence Boris would not do it
    I really do not think you staying at home will be on either Boris or Rishi mind to be honest
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 44,347

    IHT should be completely abolished, and any money received simply taxed as income. Which should include NI too as that should be merged with income tax.

    It is repugnant to say that an inheritance is less worthy of being taxed than money actually worked for.
    Crashes onto the right side of history.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 54,202
    edited September 2021
    HYUFD said:

    Stoiber was just 3 seats behind Schroder in that election and tied on votes
    Yes it was close, but the point is that Merkel was still consolidating her power in the party at that time. She did a deal to become the combined Union leader in parliament in return for letting Stoiber be chancellor candidate, so she came out of it the winner.

    If she had insisted on being the candidate and then lost, there would have been pressure to replace her.
  • Minor point but wouldn't it require 40 MPs to achieve a 20% threshold of 199?

    Edit: And isn't 35 sufficient to achieve 15% of 232?. Thus it's 35 versus 40.
    :lol: Do they round up or down?
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    HYUFD said:

    Stoiber was just 3 seats behind Schroder in that election and tied on votes
    Well Stoiber only got 4,3 million votes, but Schröder got 18,5 million votes.
  • If the Tories raise IHT then "the only Tory in the village" will be on here singing about why its such a good idea.
    Now that did give me a chuckle
  • I really do not think you staying at home will be on either Boris or Rishi mind to be honest
    @HYUFD can join me, @david_herdson, @MaxPB, and @Philip_Thompson in a new party. Might require a bit of argy-bargy to get a new platform agreed, mind.
  • I really do not think you staying at home will be on either Boris or Rishi mind to be honest
    If Boris makes HYUFD stay at home, I just might have to rejoin the Tories! 😂
  • kle4 said:

    Presumably they are banking both on there being fewer of the awkward left than in 2015 as a proportion of the total MPs, and that next time MPs won't be so silly as to ignore their own concerns and the spirit of the rules in order to let through an unacceptable candidate.

    Neither seems certain to me.
    Exactly.

    Basically.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    eristdoof said:

    Well Stoiber only got 4,3 million votes, but Schröder got 18,5 million votes.
    The Union which Stoiber led got 18.482 million votes, Schroder got 18.488 million votes
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,100

    :lol: Do they round up or down?
    Not relevant. It's 20% (was 15%) or over. No rounding required.
  • Minor point but wouldn't it require 40 MPs to achieve a 20% threshold of 199?

    Edit: And isn't 35 sufficient to achieve 15% of 232?. Thus it's 35 versus 40.
    It depends if you round up or down. If the rule is "rounding down" then 20% of 199 is 39.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,100
    RobD said:

    Basically exactly. ;)
    35 versus 40
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    edited September 2021

    I really do not think you staying at home will be on either Boris or Rishi mind to be honest
    The prospect of millions of Tory voters in London and the South like me doing the same however or going LD or RefUK might, it would collapse the Blue Wall as badly as the Red Wall went in 2019.

    Hence it will not be done. Certainly not for properties under £1 million which are largely exempt from IHT now
  • Isn't it actually £1million for a "family home" i.e. married couple???
    Indeed and there is plenty of scope to make modest changes
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    HYUFD said:

    A few more points was all they needed to stay in power
    Stay in power is what May did in 2017, walked it was what Johnson did in 2019. Do you not see a difference?
  • Indeed and there is plenty of scope to make modest changes
    imho a 2nd higher rate (maybe 50% or 60%?) for the higher end of things would be worth looking at.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,069
    HYUFD said:

    The Union which Stoiber led got 18.482 million votes, Schroder got 18.488 million votes

    No. You said that Stoiber got as many votes ar Schröder, but it is on record that his party only got 4.3 million votes.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,333
    edited September 2021
    eristdoof said:

    Stay in power is what May did in 2017, walked it was what Johnson did in 2019. Do you not see a difference?
    Both won most seats and stayed in power, Soder would have done the same, probably by a margin bigger than May's over the main centre left party albeit smaller than Boris'.

    Laschet it seems will not even stay in power and come second on seats
This discussion has been closed.