Tonight’s polls in sharp contrast to YouGov’s 10% CON lead – politicalbetting.com
Options
Comments
-
Anyway it is time to rest
Sombre week next week then Rishi tax raising budget on the 27th
Good night0 -
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see0 -
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.6 -
Good for you but you have just proved my point as you are now a high earner NOT an average earner.londonpubman said:
Worst post of all time!HYUFD said:
What a load of rubbish.londonpubman said:
No. We need to tax the Mummy and Daddy money away as that distorts the property market in South East so ordinary decent working class people have a chance to get on.HYUFD said:
People in the North and Midlands and Scotland and Wales and NI on average incomes have far lower costs of living than in the South and can afford to buy a property on an average wage.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am being polite as I can when I say you are so boringHYUFD said:
Well please go to Starmer Labour or the LDs then to pursue your case further as the Tories are not going to remove it as Osborne's raising the IHT thereshold to £1 million was the most popular Tory policy this century, especially in London and the SouthBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
And entirely self interest - why should people in the north subside your housing deposit in the south
People on an average wage in most of London and much of the South East need to inherit or have parental assistance to help them be able to afford the deposit and be able to buy a property
As long as London remains a global city and attracts foreign investment and large numbers of high earning incomers from across the UK and abroad those born there will not be able to afford to buy there unless they get a high income or inherit.
Londoners who cannot afford to buy in the capital will then move out to the Home Counties to buy in turn pricing out those born in the Home Counties unless they get an above average income or inherit.
I being from a poor working class background have managed to buy a house in London by my own achievements and without the help of mummy or daddy money which is a good job as there wasn't any.
@HYUFD did you buy your flat in Epping fully on your own resources?
Your policies on inheritance deny social mobility and you really have no idea whatsoever.
I did have some parental support to buy my property as do most people on average wages in the London commuter belt otherwise they would not be able to afford to buy there.
Take inheritance and family support away and most earners on average wages in the London commuter belt would rent as I used to and as much of London already does. A total disaster for the Tory Party sending seat after seat in the blue wall to Labour or the LDs0 -
Glad to hear Mr CF is on the mend and Daughter's business is surviving despite all. Whereabouts was it in the Lakes? Will promise to visit when we mange to get up there again.Cyclefree said:@Theuniondivvie
I have been buying art since my late 20's. I have quite a collection - mostly painting but some sculpture as well. One of the joys of moving to the Lakes is that I have space to hang some of my bigger paintings. I've inherited quite a bit as well. And I did buy my last painting last year in June.
@Richard_Tyndall
There is another sad - and sadly apposite - anniversary this week. A year ago yesterday marked the day a schoolteacher was beheaded by a terrorist in France - Samuel Paty: a teacher doing his job - just like Sir David Amess.
I note, incidentally, that his attacker is believed - at least according to the Times today - to have been born in the UK.
On a more personal level Husband's throat test results came back and there is no abnormality suggesting anything serious. Which is a relief. Not just for the obvious reason but also because Himself was finding ever more creative ways of playing the "I am probably dying so you must do this for me" card. And I was beginning to find this a teensy bit tiresome.
Also Daughter's chef finally left hospital after seven weeks having had an extremely serious car crash. He will need more operations. But he is lucky to be alive and on the recovery path. It has been an immensely difficult time and he is not yet in a position to work. But he is alive and will get better which is the important thing.
Daughter has now taken on the chef's role as well. That girl's resilience and calmness under pressure is astonishing. Son has been appointed Front of House Manager where I - newly promoted to waitress, potato peeler and chips maker and, get this, pudding chef (sundaes, Eton Mess and syrup puddings my speciality) - have discovered that he too has the Cyclefree bossiness gene. Quite right too.
I am in London next week for work. I shall check out all the excitement on offer.0 -
Could you pay for mine too please?HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see4 -
It's just a bloody Ponzi scheme.HYUFD said:
Good for you but you have just proved my point as you are now a high earner NOT an average earner.londonpubman said:
Worst post of all time!HYUFD said:
What a load of rubbish.londonpubman said:
No. We need to tax the Mummy and Daddy money away as that distorts the property market in South East so ordinary decent working class people have a chance to get on.HYUFD said:
People in the North and Midlands and Scotland and Wales and NI on average incomes have far lower costs of living than in the South and can afford to buy a property on an average wage.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am being polite as I can when I say you are so boringHYUFD said:
Well please go to Starmer Labour or the LDs then to pursue your case further as the Tories are not going to remove it as Osborne's raising the IHT thereshold to £1 million was the most popular Tory policy this century, especially in London and the SouthBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
And entirely self interest - why should people in the north subside your housing deposit in the south
People on an average wage in most of London and much of the South East need to inherit or have parental assistance to help them be able to afford the deposit and be able to buy a property
As long as London remains a global city and attracts foreign investment and large numbers of high earning incomers from across the UK and abroad those born there will not be able to afford to buy there unless they get a high income or inherit.
Londoners who cannot afford to buy in the capital will then move out to the Home Counties to buy in turn pricing out those born in the Home Counties unless they get an above average income or inherit.
I being from a poor working class background have managed to buy a house in London by my own achievements and without the help of mummy or daddy money which is a good job as there wasn't any.
@HYUFD did you buy your flat in Epping fully on your own resources?
Your policies on inheritance deny social mobility and you really have no idea whatsoever.
I did have some parental support to buy my property as do most people on average wages in the London commuter belt otherwise they would not be able to afford to buy there.
Take inheritance away and most earners on average wages in the London commuter belt would rent as I used to and as much of London already does. A total disaster for the Tory Party
And how does it fit with the Tories' ertwhile claim to be the party of equal opportunity? Equal opportunity, provided your parents were well-off.0 -
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and their heirs and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed0 -
Then why do I generally vote Labour as a home owner?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed0 -
No as you already vote LabourNorthern_Al said:
Could you pay for mine too please?HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see0 -
The Tory party has always been the party of preservation of assets first.Benpointer said:
It's just a bloody Ponzi scheme.HYUFD said:
Good for you but you have just proved my point as you are now a high earner NOT an average earner.londonpubman said:
Worst post of all time!HYUFD said:
What a load of rubbish.londonpubman said:
No. We need to tax the Mummy and Daddy money away as that distorts the property market in South East so ordinary decent working class people have a chance to get on.HYUFD said:
People in the North and Midlands and Scotland and Wales and NI on average incomes have far lower costs of living than in the South and can afford to buy a property on an average wage.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am being polite as I can when I say you are so boringHYUFD said:
Well please go to Starmer Labour or the LDs then to pursue your case further as the Tories are not going to remove it as Osborne's raising the IHT thereshold to £1 million was the most popular Tory policy this century, especially in London and the SouthBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
And entirely self interest - why should people in the north subside your housing deposit in the south
People on an average wage in most of London and much of the South East need to inherit or have parental assistance to help them be able to afford the deposit and be able to buy a property
As long as London remains a global city and attracts foreign investment and large numbers of high earning incomers from across the UK and abroad those born there will not be able to afford to buy there unless they get a high income or inherit.
Londoners who cannot afford to buy in the capital will then move out to the Home Counties to buy in turn pricing out those born in the Home Counties unless they get an above average income or inherit.
I being from a poor working class background have managed to buy a house in London by my own achievements and without the help of mummy or daddy money which is a good job as there wasn't any.
@HYUFD did you buy your flat in Epping fully on your own resources?
Your policies on inheritance deny social mobility and you really have no idea whatsoever.
I did have some parental support to buy my property as do most people on average wages in the London commuter belt otherwise they would not be able to afford to buy there.
Take inheritance away and most earners on average wages in the London commuter belt would rent as I used to and as much of London already does. A total disaster for the Tory Party
And how does it fit with the Tories' ertwhile claim to be the party of equal opportunity? Equal opportunity, provided your parents were well-off.
The Liberals were the party of supposed meritocracy in the 19th and early 20th century, just the Tories took the mantle of meritocracy on against socialist Labour to win over middle class Liberals to keep Labour out1 -
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core vote
How can you resist, BigG! (I believe you quite like Keir?)1 -
Well spotted. It was worth a try, though.HYUFD said:
No as you already vote LabourNorthern_Al said:
Could you pay for mine too please?HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see0 -
Careful, I think he might have a breakdown trying to compute that.Gallowgate said:
Then why do I generally vote Labour as a home owner?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed0 -
Yes I knew you did which is why I tried to draw this out.HYUFD said:
Good for you but you have just proved my point as you are now a high earner NOT an average earner.londonpubman said:
Worst post of all time!HYUFD said:
What a load of rubbish.londonpubman said:
No. We need to tax the Mummy and Daddy money away as that distorts the property market in South East so ordinary decent working class people have a chance to get on.HYUFD said:
People in the North and Midlands and Scotland and Wales and NI on average incomes have far lower costs of living than in the South and can afford to buy a property on an average wage.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am being polite as I can when I say you are so boringHYUFD said:
Well please go to Starmer Labour or the LDs then to pursue your case further as the Tories are not going to remove it as Osborne's raising the IHT thereshold to £1 million was the most popular Tory policy this century, especially in London and the SouthBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
And entirely self interest - why should people in the north subside your housing deposit in the south
People on an average wage in most of London and much of the South East need to inherit or have parental assistance to help them be able to afford the deposit and be able to buy a property
As long as London remains a global city and attracts foreign investment and large numbers of high earning incomers from across the UK and abroad those born there will not be able to afford to buy there unless they get a high income or inherit.
Londoners who cannot afford to buy in the capital will then move out to the Home Counties to buy in turn pricing out those born in the Home Counties unless they get an above average income or inherit.
I being from a poor working class background have managed to buy a house in London by my own achievements and without the help of mummy or daddy money which is a good job as there wasn't any.
@HYUFD did you buy your flat in Epping fully on your own resources?
Your policies on inheritance deny social mobility and you really have no idea whatsoever.
I did have some parental support to buy my property as do most people on average wages in the London commuter belt otherwise they would not be able to afford to buy there.
Take inheritance and family support away and most earners on average wages in the London commuter belt would rent as I used to and as much of London already does. A total disaster for the Tory Party sending seat after seat in the blue wall to Labour or the LDs
Tax inheritance and capital transfers properly and those who are not in a position to benefit from these will have more of a chance of getting on the property ladder as inheritance and capital transfers eg gifts from wealthy parents to pay for property push prices up and distort the market. Especially in London/SE.
Anyway off to bed now. Hope to be here tomorrow, sure you will be here too!
GN all0 -
Not really. I think most people in politics (most Tories too!) have a general image of the society they'd like Britain to become, and it doesn't especially involve enriching a particular group. But if you meant pragmatically that each party has to draw more of its votes from some sectors than others, that's true (but a pity IMO).HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and their heirs and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed0 -
Some public sector workers and stiudents even vote Tory but most vote Labour as most home owners vote ToryGallowgate said:
Then why do I generally vote Labour as a home owner?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed0 -
They won't at all. Precisely the opposite, they will have less chance of buying as without inheritance and capital transfers those on average earnings in London and the SE will move from potential property owners to renters.londonpubman said:
Yes I knew you did which is why I tried to draw this out.HYUFD said:
Good for you but you have just proved my point as you are now a high earner NOT an average earner.londonpubman said:
Worst post of all time!HYUFD said:
What a load of rubbish.londonpubman said:
No. We need to tax the Mummy and Daddy money away as that distorts the property market in South East so ordinary decent working class people have a chance to get on.HYUFD said:
People in the North and Midlands and Scotland and Wales and NI on average incomes have far lower costs of living than in the South and can afford to buy a property on an average wage.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am being polite as I can when I say you are so boringHYUFD said:
Well please go to Starmer Labour or the LDs then to pursue your case further as the Tories are not going to remove it as Osborne's raising the IHT thereshold to £1 million was the most popular Tory policy this century, especially in London and the SouthBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
And entirely self interest - why should people in the north subside your housing deposit in the south
People on an average wage in most of London and much of the South East need to inherit or have parental assistance to help them be able to afford the deposit and be able to buy a property
As long as London remains a global city and attracts foreign investment and large numbers of high earning incomers from across the UK and abroad those born there will not be able to afford to buy there unless they get a high income or inherit.
Londoners who cannot afford to buy in the capital will then move out to the Home Counties to buy in turn pricing out those born in the Home Counties unless they get an above average income or inherit.
I being from a poor working class background have managed to buy a house in London by my own achievements and without the help of mummy or daddy money which is a good job as there wasn't any.
@HYUFD did you buy your flat in Epping fully on your own resources?
Your policies on inheritance deny social mobility and you really have no idea whatsoever.
I did have some parental support to buy my property as do most people on average wages in the London commuter belt otherwise they would not be able to afford to buy there.
Take inheritance and family support away and most earners on average wages in the London commuter belt would rent as I used to and as much of London already does. A total disaster for the Tory Party sending seat after seat in the blue wall to Labour or the LDs
Tax inheritance and capital transfers properly and those who are not in a position to benefit from these will have more of a chance of getting on the property ladder as inheritance and capital transfers eg gifts from wealthy parents to pay for property push prices up and distort the market. Especially in London/SE.
Anyway off to bed now. Hope to be here tomorrow, sure you will be here too!
GN all
Otherwise the only things which would make a difference are to slash immigration and drastically cut foreign investment into London and ensure that all new houses built, especially those classified as 'affordable', are only available to those who have lived in the local area for at least 7-10 years0 -
Jo SwinsonGallowgate said:
Then why do I generally vote Labour as a home owner?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed0 -
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.0 -
I would vote for the Benpointer PartyBenpointer said:
My suggestion: 1% pa on all individual assets over £1m. Legal obligation to self-declare and complete an annual return.Big_G_NorthWales said:
As a matter of interest how do you see a wealth tax workingeek said:
The only options are borrow more or create a wealth tax - IHT won’t generate muchBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
So, assets of £1m = £0 Wealth Tax (WT) pa
Assets of £1.5m = £5k WT pac(£500k over threshold x 1%)
Assets of £2m = £10k WT pa (£1m over threshold x 1%)
Assets of £10m = £90k WT pa
Assets of £101m = £1m WT pa
etc.0 -
I clearly need to see a therapist in HYUFD's view. As a retired, outright home-owning, comfortably off, southern-living leftie who doesn't see the need to leave all his money/property to his kids I just don't know why I don't vote Tory as it's obviously in my interest to do so. I also mix with a lot of similar people. HYUFD, do you offer counselling services as well?0
-
.
I admire your honesty HY even if your political purity is as mad as that of a march hare.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see1 -
Nick - no, CON and LD did not stand in Batley and Spen 2016. IE same as I am agreeing with LAB and LD in Southend WNickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.
Are we talking at cross purposes here?0 -
No. The Conservatives and LDs did not stand in the 2016 by-election.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-election0 -
I dont think anyone should be elected to parliament without being challenged electorally so not sure i approve. there is no precedent for this either.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.0 -
Yes but they need the support of their core vote in order to get elected to fulfil their vision and their vision mostly aligns with that of their core vote anyway.NickPalmer said:
Not really. I think most people in politics (most Tories too!) have a general image of the society they'd like Britain to become, and it doesn't especially involve enriching a particular group. But if you meant pragmatically that each party has to draw more of its votes from some sectors than others, that's true (but a pity IMO).HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and their heirs and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed
No business can turn off its core consumers and loyal customers and make a profit, just as no political party can ignore its core vote and hope to get elected0 -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-electionstate_go_away said:
I dont think anyone should be elected to parliament without being challenged electorally so not sure i approve. there is no precedent for this either.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.0 -
Have faith - you're not alone!Northern_Al said:I clearly need to see a therapist in HYUFD's view. As a retired, outright home-owning, comfortably off, southern-living leftie who doesn't see the need to leave all his money/property to his kids I just don't know why I don't vote Tory as it's obviously in my interest to do so. I also mix with a lot of similar people. HYUFD, do you offer counselling services as well?
4 -
I'm not sure I approve either. It basically disenfranchises voters.Benpointer said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-electionstate_go_away said:
I dont think anyone should be elected to parliament without being challenged electorally so not sure i approve. there is no precedent for this either.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.0 -
but there wasnt further back with NEave and Gow- It is insulting to voters to not have a choice .The Tory party does not own Southend and it should not be up to them to chose the MP , the voters do thatBenpointer said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-electionstate_go_away said:
I dont think anyone should be elected to parliament without being challenged electorally so not sure i approve. there is no precedent for this either.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.0 -
The Green - just under Black Combe - near the Duddon Estuary.Benpointer said:
Glad to hear Mr CF is on the mend and Daughter's business is surviving despite all. Whereabouts was it in the Lakes? Will promise to visit when we mange to get up there again.Cyclefree said:@Theuniondivvie
I have been buying art since my late 20's. I have quite a collection - mostly painting but some sculpture as well. One of the joys of moving to the Lakes is that I have space to hang some of my bigger paintings. I've inherited quite a bit as well. And I did buy my last painting last year in June.
@Richard_Tyndall
There is another sad - and sadly apposite - anniversary this week. A year ago yesterday marked the day a schoolteacher was beheaded by a terrorist in France - Samuel Paty: a teacher doing his job - just like Sir David Amess.
I note, incidentally, that his attacker is believed - at least according to the Times today - to have been born in the UK.
On a more personal level Husband's throat test results came back and there is no abnormality suggesting anything serious. Which is a relief. Not just for the obvious reason but also because Himself was finding ever more creative ways of playing the "I am probably dying so you must do this for me" card. And I was beginning to find this a teensy bit tiresome.
Also Daughter's chef finally left hospital after seven weeks having had an extremely serious car crash. He will need more operations. But he is lucky to be alive and on the recovery path. It has been an immensely difficult time and he is not yet in a position to work. But he is alive and will get better which is the important thing.
Daughter has now taken on the chef's role as well. That girl's resilience and calmness under pressure is astonishing. Son has been appointed Front of House Manager where I - newly promoted to waitress, potato peeler and chips maker and, get this, pudding chef (sundaes, Eton Mess and syrup puddings my speciality) - have discovered that he too has the Cyclefree bossiness gene. Quite right too.
I am in London next week for work. I shall check out all the excitement on offer.
https://en-gb.facebook.com/pg/Punchbowl.TheGreen/reviews/?ref=page_internal1 -
In exceptional circumstances like these the sitting party is effectively appointing a replacement until the next GE.Gallowgate said:
I'm not sure I approve either. It basically disenfranchises voters.Benpointer said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-electionstate_go_away said:
I dont think anyone should be elected to parliament without being challenged electorally so not sure i approve. there is no precedent for this either.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.
Seems pragmatic and sensible to me. Most voters in the constituency will have voted for the party not the person in 2019.
0 -
You are the master of the sweeping statement.HYUFD said:
Some public sector workers and stiudents even vote Tory but most vote Labour as most home owners vote ToryGallowgate said:
Then why do I generally vote Labour as a home owner?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed
I am not entirely sure some of your analysis is wholly accurate either. I suspect, for example, in 2019 a substantial percentage (maybe not a majority) of public sector workers voted Conservative.0 -
Some no doubt did but if only public sector workers had voted in 2019, Corbyn would now be PM with an overall majority.Mexicanpete said:
You are the master of the sweeping statement.HYUFD said:
Some public sector workers and stiudents even vote Tory but most vote Labour as most home owners vote ToryGallowgate said:
Then why do I generally vote Labour as a home owner?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed
I am not entirely sure some of your analysis is wholly accurate either. I suspect, for example, in 2019 a substantial percentage (maybe not a majority) of public sector workers voted Conservative.
It is mainly private sector workers and pensioners who elect Conservative governments0 -
Your core vote is now White Van Man in Stoke on Trent.HYUFD said:
Yes but they need the support of their core vote in order to get elected to fulfil their vision and their vision mostly aligns with that of their core vote anyway.NickPalmer said:
Not really. I think most people in politics (most Tories too!) have a general image of the society they'd like Britain to become, and it doesn't especially involve enriching a particular group. But if you meant pragmatically that each party has to draw more of its votes from some sectors than others, that's true (but a pity IMO).HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and their heirs and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed
No business can turn off its core consumers and loyal customers and make a profit, just as no political party can ignore its core vote and hope to get elected
Thanks for another evening of entertainment and I bid you, and everyone, goodnight.0 -
I had a look at the data tables for the latest YouGov and Opinium polls, which have Green scores of 8% and 5% respectively.Stuartinromford said:Does anyone know why YouGov are systematically getting a different reading for the Lab/Green ratings to the others?
A lot turns on whether the situation is C41L31 (Carrie can start planning the next round of Downing Street redecoration; I recommend plenty of wipe-clean surfaces and rounded edges) and C41L37 (Starmer is making boring but solid post-vaccine progress; C40L38 is probably enough to make the next government a Coalition of Chaos).
One thing that is immediately obvious is that the numbers in the YouGov poll look more credible. The Greens have higher support among younger voters, than oldsters (14% in 18-24 and 5% in 65+), while in the Opinium poll there was no clear pattern by age. YouGov also has a much stronger contrast by Brexit referendum vote (12% of Remain voters and 3% of Leave voters saying Green) compared to a 7-4 split in Opinium. Opinium manages to find a quarter of 2019 Brexit Party voters now intending to vote Green - I suppose you can make a case for this on an itinerant protest vote basis, but the 2% figure given by YouGov seems more credible.
So my guess is that other pollsters are not finding as a good a sample of young voters as YouGov, and are missing out on an accurate picture of current voting intention when it comes to the Greens and young voters.
Labour will hope that the realities of FPTP will force these rebellious youngsters into the red column for a general election, but I'd be inclined to trust YouGov polls for a present snapshot.0 -
Is that fact or conjecture?HYUFD said:
Some no doubt did but if only public sector workers had voted in 2019, Corbyn would now be PM with an overall majority.Mexicanpete said:
You are the master of the sweeping statement.HYUFD said:
Some public sector workers and stiudents even vote Tory but most vote Labour as most home owners vote ToryGallowgate said:
Then why do I generally vote Labour as a home owner?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed
I am not entirely sure some of your analysis is wholly accurate either. I suspect, for example, in 2019 a substantial percentage (maybe not a majority) of public sector workers voted Conservative.
It is mainly private sector workers and pensioners who elect Conservative governments0 -
Ah, fair enough, I misremembered. In that case, definitely we should reciprocate.Benpointer said:
No. The Conservatives and LDs did not stand in the 2016 by-election.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-election1 -
Fact.Mexicanpete said:
Is that fact or conjecture?HYUFD said:
Some no doubt did but if only public sector workers had voted in 2019, Corbyn would now be PM with an overall majority.Mexicanpete said:
You are the master of the sweeping statement.HYUFD said:
Some public sector workers and stiudents even vote Tory but most vote Labour as most home owners vote ToryGallowgate said:
Then why do I generally vote Labour as a home owner?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed
I am not entirely sure some of your analysis is wholly accurate either. I suspect, for example, in 2019 a substantial percentage (maybe not a majority) of public sector workers voted Conservative.
It is mainly private sector workers and pensioners who elect Conservative governments
A 2014 BES study for example had the Tories 2% ahead amongst private sector workers and 11% ahead amongst the self employed but Labour 13% ahead amongst public sector workers
https://electionsetc.com/2015/03/17/the-public-private-electoral-divide/
0 -
He seems to have a lot of rules though, through His representatives at least. The celestial bureacuracy seems like a real burden.Foxy said:
I am no Catholic, but my understanding of God is that He isn't a stickler for the paperwork.CarlottaVance said:On the last rights question as Amess was stabbed 17 times and the paramedics had battled to save him isn’t “the nature of the scene” code for “it was a bloodbath”?
0 -
O/T
"No Time to Pee – why today’s blockbusters are just too long
Want to see the new Bond? Ridley Scott’s ‘The Last Duel’? ‘Dune’? Better pack a three-course meal and consult an osteopath, says Fiona Sturges. Or better still, just make the movies shorter"
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/long-blockbusters-no-time-to-die-b1938980.html0 -
I was thinking about this earlier. While my immediate instinct is to agree with you that no-one should be elected without a contest, on reflection I realised that I would find it sickening if a change in the political balance of the Commons was to follow a murder.state_go_away said:
I dont think anyone should be elected to parliament without being challenged electorally so not sure i approve. there is no precedent for this either.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.0 -
I don't mind long movies, but I did have to pee twice during The Last Duel tonight as I misjudged its length and thus how long I'd have to wait. It was an ok movie, but you won't miss much if you do have to nip out.Andy_JS said:O/T
"No Time to Pee – why today’s blockbusters are just too long
Want to see the new Bond? Ridley Scott’s ‘The Last Duel’? ‘Dune’? Better pack a three-course meal and consult an osteopath, says Fiona Sturges. Or better still, just make the movies shorter"
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/long-blockbusters-no-time-to-die-b1938980.html0 -
Plus home owners in the South and their heirs, the Tories need them and White Van Man in the RedWall for a majoritySandyRentool said:
Your core vote is now White Van Man in Stoke on Trent.HYUFD said:
Yes but they need the support of their core vote in order to get elected to fulfil their vision and their vision mostly aligns with that of their core vote anyway.NickPalmer said:
Not really. I think most people in politics (most Tories too!) have a general image of the society they'd like Britain to become, and it doesn't especially involve enriching a particular group. But if you meant pragmatically that each party has to draw more of its votes from some sectors than others, that's true (but a pity IMO).HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and their heirs and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed
No business can turn off its core consumers and loyal customers and make a profit, just as no political party can ignore its core vote and hope to get elected
Thanks for another evening of entertainment and I bid you, and everyone, goodnight.0 -
Richelle Mead's succubus novels are a very entertaining introduction to the bureaucracy of both heaven and hell.kle4 said:
He seems to have a lot of rules though, through His representatives at least. The celestial bureacuracy seems like a real burden.Foxy said:
I am no Catholic, but my understanding of God is that He isn't a stickler for the paperwork.CarlottaVance said:On the last rights question as Amess was stabbed 17 times and the paramedics had battled to save him isn’t “the nature of the scene” code for “it was a bloodbath”?
0 -
Agree with this. 2 hours should be regarded as long for a film. If the story that is to be told doesn't fit, then make it into a mini-series - it's not like there isn't a lot of money in TV these days. Or find a competent editor.Andy_JS said:O/T
"No Time to Pee – why today’s blockbusters are just too long
Want to see the new Bond? Ridley Scott’s ‘The Last Duel’? ‘Dune’? Better pack a three-course meal and consult an osteopath, says Fiona Sturges. Or better still, just make the movies shorter"
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/long-blockbusters-no-time-to-die-b1938980.html0 -
Blade Runner 2049 was 2hr 45 minutes long but it didn't feel that long to me, I was engaged throughout and it didn't feel it dragged. Conversely Ad Astra was about 2 hours long and I felt like I had aged ten years sitting through the damn thing.LostPassword said:
Agree with this. 2 hours should be regarded as long for a film. If the story that is to be told doesn't fit, then make it into a mini-series - it's not like there isn't a lot of money in TV these days. Or find a competent editor.Andy_JS said:O/T
"No Time to Pee – why today’s blockbusters are just too long
Want to see the new Bond? Ridley Scott’s ‘The Last Duel’? ‘Dune’? Better pack a three-course meal and consult an osteopath, says Fiona Sturges. Or better still, just make the movies shorter"
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/long-blockbusters-no-time-to-die-b1938980.html
So it can work, but it does seem like big name directors in particular don't seem fans of editing.1 -
I'm not sure you're right, you know. As I recall it, Ad Astra was four or five hours long.kle4 said:
Blade Runner 2049 was 2hr 45 minutes long but it didn't feel that long to me, I was engaged throughout and it didn't feel it dragged. Conversely Ad Astra was about 2 hours long and I felt like I had aged ten years sitting through the damn thing.LostPassword said:
Agree with this. 2 hours should be regarded as long for a film. If the story that is to be told doesn't fit, then make it into a mini-series - it's not like there isn't a lot of money in TV these days. Or find a competent editor.Andy_JS said:O/T
"No Time to Pee – why today’s blockbusters are just too long
Want to see the new Bond? Ridley Scott’s ‘The Last Duel’? ‘Dune’? Better pack a three-course meal and consult an osteopath, says Fiona Sturges. Or better still, just make the movies shorter"
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/long-blockbusters-no-time-to-die-b1938980.html
So it can work, but it does seem like big name directors in particular don't seem fans of editing.1 -
I'd have no issue with it being contested, but I cannot say I agree it disenfrancises voters. Any party can choose to stand, they cannot be forced to do so if they do not want to, and whilst very unlikely the voters can select other options from Independents or minor parties if they are unhappy with the choice they are offered. But it's not disenfranchisement for parties to be selective, just unfortunate.Gallowgate said:
I'm not sure I approve either. It basically disenfranchises voters.Benpointer said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Batley_and_Spen_by-electionstate_go_away said:
I dont think anyone should be elected to parliament without being challenged electorally so not sure i approve. there is no precedent for this either.NickPalmer said:
Interesting - I think I approve, but I'd thought the opposite precedent had been set with Batley and Spen.londonpubman said:Just got in from the pub.
I see from Sky News that LAB and LD will not be standing in Southend W. As a moderate working class Conservative I appreciate this from the opposition. I also appreciate the appearance of Keir and the Speaker in Leigh on Sea today.
For instance, I don't agree with the policy of not standing against the sitting Speaker, a policy which has not been universally followed in history anyway. I think the parties are wrong to give the Speaker such a free ride, and a new one could always be selected if the voters don't return them. But I accept that voters can still register their dissatisfaction if they don't like the free ride.0 -
There was no reason a priest could not have been let through to give him the last rites.kle4 said:
He seems to have a lot of rules though, through His representatives at least. The celestial bureacuracy seems like a real burden.Foxy said:
I am no Catholic, but my understanding of God is that He isn't a stickler for the paperwork.CarlottaVance said:On the last rights question as Amess was stabbed 17 times and the paramedics had battled to save him isn’t “the nature of the scene” code for “it was a bloodbath”?
Boris must amend this asap to ensure that Catholic priests and Ministers of other denominations and Imams and Rabbis etc must be let through by police to see victims at murder scenes who are religious. The government must change the law to make that clear if necessary as a top priority0 -
It had numbed me into a trance, so who the hell knows. Awful film, with truly bizarre direction for the actors - I was convinced there was going to be a major thing how everyone was doped up on mood tranquilizers hence acting like boring zombies, but it didn't seem to go anwhere and it was just that everyone was acting weird. And the only moment of interest was a completely out of context space baboon attack.rcs1000 said:
I'm not sure you're right, you know. As I recall it, Ad Astra was four or five hours long.kle4 said:
Blade Runner 2049 was 2hr 45 minutes long but it didn't feel that long to me, I was engaged throughout and it didn't feel it dragged. Conversely Ad Astra was about 2 hours long and I felt like I had aged ten years sitting through the damn thing.LostPassword said:
Agree with this. 2 hours should be regarded as long for a film. If the story that is to be told doesn't fit, then make it into a mini-series - it's not like there isn't a lot of money in TV these days. Or find a competent editor.Andy_JS said:O/T
"No Time to Pee – why today’s blockbusters are just too long
Want to see the new Bond? Ridley Scott’s ‘The Last Duel’? ‘Dune’? Better pack a three-course meal and consult an osteopath, says Fiona Sturges. Or better still, just make the movies shorter"
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/features/long-blockbusters-no-time-to-die-b1938980.html
So it can work, but it does seem like big name directors in particular don't seem fans of editing.0 -
He says what a lot of Tories think but don't say.Mexicanpete said:.
I admire your honesty HY even if your political purity is as mad as that of a march hare.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see1 -
I would probably go for 0.5%, but agree with the principle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems fair enoughBenpointer said:
My suggestion: 1% pa on all individual assets over £1m. Legal obligation to self-declare and complete an annual return.Big_G_NorthWales said:
As a matter of interest how do you see a wealth tax workingeek said:
The only options are borrow more or create a wealth tax - IHT won’t generate muchBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
So, assets of £1m = £0 Wealth Tax (WT) pa
Assets of £1.5m = £5k WT pac(£500k over threshold x 1%)
Assets of £2m = £10k WT pa (£1m over threshold x 1%)
Assets of £10m = £90k WT pa
Assets of £101m = £1m WT pa
etc.0 -
Very long films in the past sometimes had "intermission" breaks to allow people to stretch their legs. In fact some of them had two intermissions — perhaps Gandhi was one of them?0
-
Are we going for herd immunity?0
-
The strategy is, I think, the same one it has been since the first lockdown was announced - minimum level of restrictions consistent with preventing the catastrophic collapse of the hospital system.Leon said:Are we going for herd immunity?
This is. obviously, a much lower level of restrictions now that most people are vaccinated.1 -
I think theres £584 billion in adult isas from the latest stats I can find....Benpointer said:
Ok first off, I haven't designed a whole fecking policy - I am just floating an idea.Scrapheap_as_was said:
What is wealth please.... Is it someone with £1M in their pension pot or someone with a DB pension of £50k pa? The latter being worth more obviously.... Despite what the LTA says. Or is it Isas which were and are supposed to be tax-free... And what about VCTs?Benpointer said:
My suggestion: 1% pa on all individual assets over £1m. Legal obligation to self-declare and complete an annual return.Big_G_NorthWales said:
As a matter of interest how do you see a wealth tax workingeek said:
The only options are borrow more or create a wealth tax - IHT won’t generate muchBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
So, assets of £1m = £0 Wealth Tax (WT) pa
Assets of £1.5m = £5k WT pac(£500k over threshold x 1%)
Assets of £2m = £10k WT pa (£1m over threshold x 1%)
Assets of £10m = £90k WT pa
Assets of £101m = £1m WT pa
etc.
But all your points are answerable as part of an actual policy:
Pension pots - I'd say exclude until crystalised, there are existing rules for that (which can also be used for DB pensions - if the LTA rules are wrong (which I agree they are) they need fixing anyway). If you draw down or buy an annuity you convert your pension pot into an income (as was always intended). If you choose to take it as a lump sum well, tough titty, you have a potentially WTable asset.
ISAs I'd be inclined to include regardless, they were only sold as free from income and CGT imo. But really, if you exclude them, fair dos - you could still include values invested from 2022/3 onwards. Or exclude the completely - they're not holding the bulk of the wealth of the super-wealthy who are the target of this.
VCTs - definitely include as an asset. Fecking scam for the wealthy imo.
Drawdown pensions are crystallised but unlike an annuity aren't a guaranteed income but a lump sum you take taxable income from which depletes the pot so I don't understand the tough titty tax proposal on that drawdown pot.
Cash savings are wealth too presumably, eg premium bonds and savings accounts so with interest rates so low, we're essentially taxing those with low risk savings into negative nominal returns as well as real returns with this wealth taxing.
If its really about property. Just call it a revamped council tax. Always goes down a storm with voters that.
0 -
With a wealth tax on non property assets, imagine how many £50 notes would be stuffed under the national mattress, or gold bars for that matter.
Suddenly yield would be less of an issue for an asset as the value of not being taxed each year would be a return for the wealthy person...2 -
Yes, that makes senseLostPassword said:
The strategy is, I think, the same one it has been since the first lockdown was announced - minimum level of restrictions consistent with preventing the catastrophic collapse of the hospital system.Leon said:Are we going for herd immunity?
This is. obviously, a much lower level of restrictions now that most people are vaccinated.
We just gotta live with this fucker
It doesn’t excuse HMG’s sluggishness on booster vaccines and vax-for-kids, tho0 -
Wouldn't it be better if each party tried to do what's best for the country as a whole?HYUFD said:
Every party exists to enrich its client vote.Gallowgate said:
At least you admit that the party only exists to enrich it's client vote rather than any noble desire to improve the country.HYUFD said:
Well in a minute I will pay for your Labour membership card myself before you start polluting the Tory party with anymore electorally disastrous proposals for our core voteBig_G_NorthWales said:
I am not in any partyHYUFD said:
You are in total denial you are in the wrong party.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are in total denialHYUFD said:
Crap.Big_G_NorthWales said:
The point you are blind to is that due to covid and climate change the conservatives will have no choiceHYUFD said:
Labour would have put up income tax and IHT too and imposed a wealth tax and spent more than the Tories tooGallowgate said:
Tax and spend is the modern Conservative Party whether you like it or not. It's just only the workers who get taxed.HYUFD said:
We don't need any more tax rises, we are the Conservative party we are already spending quite enough as it is so no more rises in spending and we continue with cuts in overseas aid etc which were protected in the Cameron years.Stuartinromford said:
Partly donors, but also symbolism.Benpointer said:
I accept that the term wealth tax is emotive, but surely the actual impact depends on the threshold? If you set the threshold so that only the top 5% of wealth owners are impacted, and deliver that message clearly, most Tory voters will realise it's not affecting them. The 5% can afford it frankly.IshmaelZ said:
It would be even less palatable to the Tory vote than a beefed up inheritance tax, which at least doesn't affect you till you are dead. So it makes no sense to go to a wealth tax rather than beef up iht - scrap the property exemption, abolish the 7 year rule.Benpointer said:
Imo you can tax wealth a lot before it starts impacting the economy! Most wealth is doing absolutely nothing for the economy: all that tied up in property for a start.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Rishi needs to tax wealth but then is that enough and how much can you tax wealth before it becomes negative to the economyBenpointer said:
Yes but Labour have an easier way out if they care to choose it... tax the wealthy.Big_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
But the beauty is you really don't need to tax it that much at all to get vast amounts of debt-reducing government income.
PS The Tories will never do it properly because... donors.
Still not happening though because... Tory donors.
As @HYUFD reminds us, the raising of the IHT threshold was very popular with Conservative supporters. Not so much because of the amounts to tax paid and saved, but because of what it represented. In many ways, inheritance is a rational time for tax to happen- the deceased has gone to a place where they won't mind and a tax taking a slice of a windfall is less painful than a tax on regular income. But the symbolism grates.
The other tax that falls in the same category is fuel duty. It's been frozen for ages now, to the extent that it's a non-trivial hole in the national finances. We ought to be discouraging driving and encouraging more efficient use of vehicles. But it's untouchable. Partly out of fear of the fuel protests two decades ago, partly because White Van Man is the archetype of a type of Toryism, not to be punished.
Rishi's problem is that the hefty tax rises announced in the Spring Budget (remember those?) and the NI increase announced in September don't look like being enough.
And he's running out of sofas to rummage in for a few more coppers.
If voters want more tax and spend they can vote Labour, that is what Labour is for
Lockdown has ended, furlough has ended and hospitalisations have fallen sharply. There are no extra funds needed beyond those already given and climate change has sod all to do with public spending but replacing fossil fuels with renewables which we are world leaders in anyway. Otherwise it is getting the US, China and India to do something as they will have far more impact on it than we would
There are none so blind as those who will not see
That's something.
Labour's client vote is the public sector, students and academics and those on welfare just as much as the Tories client vote is home owners and their heirs and pensioners.
The LDs less so but even they have a client vote of socially liberal relatively high earning graduates to feed1 -
"Josh Glancy
@joshglancy
I spoke to the father of Ali Harbi Ali, David Amess' alleged killer, outside the family's house in north London.
"It's not something I ever expected or even dreamt of," Harbi Ali Kullane told me and @KatieTarrant_"
https://twitter.com/joshglancy/status/14495229536206520320 -
Will kill off farming. All the land will have to be sold to housing developers.rcs1000 said:
I would probably go for 0.5%, but agree with the principle.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Seems fair enoughBenpointer said:
My suggestion: 1% pa on all individual assets over £1m. Legal obligation to self-declare and complete an annual return.Big_G_NorthWales said:
As a matter of interest how do you see a wealth tax workingeek said:
The only options are borrow more or create a wealth tax - IHT won’t generate muchBig_G_NorthWales said:
I assume you mean IHT which I have argued incessantly with @HYUFD about as I believe I million exemption is too highGallowgate said:
Easy - from future generationsBig_G_NorthWales said:
ExactlyBenpointer said:FPT:
Where's the money coming from Big_G?Big_G_NorthWales said:
It looks as if pensioners are going to receive a near 4% rise in April and I assume other benefits will rise by the same amountBenpointer said:
Shortages are just one thing; increased taxes and prices will also potentially begin to impact.Leon said:
Quite an odd poll. Looks like movement straight from the Tories to the LDs.Scott_xP said:Westminster voting intention:
CON: 38% (-4)
LAB: 37% (-)
LDEM: 9% (+3)
via @DeltapollUK, 13 - 15 Oct
Chgs. w/ 26 Jul
Tory Remainers finally incensed by Brexit ‘shortages’? Suggests it won’t last IF the shortages ease
Disaffected Tory voters flocking to the LibDems is nothing new.
But this is just one poll - see how things look by the end of the year.
Also expect a substantial rise in the minimum wage in the budget, together with other measures to help the low paid
I would be very surprised if Rishi does not do the above
And that is the unanswered question for both parties as they face the same demands
At least on the 27th we may have some idea
If not maybe you could expand your view
So, assets of £1m = £0 Wealth Tax (WT) pa
Assets of £1.5m = £5k WT pac(£500k over threshold x 1%)
Assets of £2m = £10k WT pa (£1m over threshold x 1%)
Assets of £10m = £90k WT pa
Assets of £101m = £1m WT pa
etc.0 -
Yes. As I’ve said before, those who won’t get vaccinated, or can’t, can expect to gain immunity through infection. That’s the plan. Just no one in sage or government is coming on the tv to say it.Leon said:Are we going for herd immunity?
0
This discussion has been closed.