Stuartinromford said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

When Boris won a large majority in 2019 he was squatting like a toad over British politics and commencing a thousand year reign. If Starmer wins a similar majority this time he’ll be presiding over a castle built of sand.

Either pundits have learned from the last 5 years, or they are exhibiting their own unconscious biases about “the natural party of government” vs “the other party”.

Robert Peston is making the very same analysis however


“It is all very well for Starmer to set expectations relatively low for what a Labour government could achieve in the short term. But he is telling British people he represents “change”, which does not sound modest.

If in fact Starmer delivers more of the same, his apotheosis may be just as short as Johnson’s.”

https://x.com/peston/status/1801914360706564255?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

But I thought the general principle here was that Peston analysis wasn't always very good?

On the substantive point, the Conservative victory in 2019 really ought to have been big enough to see them through two terms. All they had to do was not stuff up too badly. Unfortunately, stuffing up badly was exactly what they have done. At many times, in many ways and on a scale that the most creative satirist couldn't invent. With the consequences now beginning to play out. (I think we can say that, if postal votes have started to go out, voting has begun.)

That is what should haunt the entire British centre-right. What's happening to them is very largely self-inflicted. Not entirely- there was Covid, there is Ukraine. But the rest of it is the "Find Out" phase of FAFO.

Now it's possible that Boring Old Starmer will stuff up to a similar degree. But ask yourself- is it likely?

Many people have noted that this election could see the decline of the Tories similar to the decline of the Liberals in the 1920s.
There is a parallel in that 2019 could be seen as a "coupon" election (as in 1918) with the sitting Tory MPs getting the "Brexit" coupon then from Brexit/Reform. And now Farage has kicked that crutch away.

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Is there anything more bellend-ish than boasting about your income?

Yes, the woodlice like @OllyT @Tres @murali_s and @Northern_Al crawling out from under their decomposing logs to cry class war over it, and express schadenfreude at anyone affected.

Thanks. I usually get ignored on here; all publicity is good.

boulay said:

Stuartinromford said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

When Boris won a large majority in 2019 he was squatting like a toad over British politics and commencing a thousand year reign. If Starmer wins a similar majority this time he’ll be presiding over a castle built of sand.

Either pundits have learned from the last 5 years, or they are exhibiting their own unconscious biases about “the natural party of government” vs “the other party”.

Robert Peston is making the very same analysis however


“It is all very well for Starmer to set expectations relatively low for what a Labour government could achieve in the short term. But he is telling British people he represents “change”, which does not sound modest.

If in fact Starmer delivers more of the same, his apotheosis may be just as short as Johnson’s.”

https://x.com/peston/status/1801914360706564255?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

But I thought the general principle here was that Peston analysis wasn't always very good?

On the substantive point, the Conservative victory in 2019 really ought to have been big enough to see them through two terms. All they had to do was not stuff up too badly. Unfortunately, stuffing up badly was exactly what they have done. At many times, in many ways and on a scale that the most creative satirist couldn't invent. With the consequences now beginning to play out. (I think we can say that, if postal votes have started to go out, voting has begun.)

That is what should haunt the entire British centre-right. What's happening to them is very largely self-inflicted. Not entirely- there was Covid, there is Ukraine. But the rest of it is the "Find Out" phase of FAFO.

Now it's possible that Boring Old Starmer will stuff up to a similar degree. But ask yourself- is it likely?

“ there was Covid, there is Ukraine”

Not exactly small matters - the worst outside factors to hit the country since WW2 would have hammered whoever was in government.

Ukraine hasn't hurt the Government.

Johnson was too weak to see through his original Covid policy, which was much the same as Sweden's highly successful policy. As soon as he caved and locked down he handed the pass to the big state enthusiasts.

He didn't even believe in it himself, which is how he was upended for not following it.

Thatcher would not have countenanced the unfortunate residents of poky inner city flats being under house arrest in them for 23 hours a day. Unlike Sunak and Johnson she did not grow up in a wealthy household.

But it was ultimately weakness that has been Johnsons Downfall and with it, this government, his instincts were right, but he didn't have the courage to see them through.

No_Offence_Alan said:

Stuartinromford said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

When Boris won a large majority in 2019 he was squatting like a toad over British politics and commencing a thousand year reign. If Starmer wins a similar majority this time he’ll be presiding over a castle built of sand.

Either pundits have learned from the last 5 years, or they are exhibiting their own unconscious biases about “the natural party of government” vs “the other party”.

Robert Peston is making the very same analysis however


“It is all very well for Starmer to set expectations relatively low for what a Labour government could achieve in the short term. But he is telling British people he represents “change”, which does not sound modest.

If in fact Starmer delivers more of the same, his apotheosis may be just as short as Johnson’s.”

https://x.com/peston/status/1801914360706564255?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

But I thought the general principle here was that Peston analysis wasn't always very good?

On the substantive point, the Conservative victory in 2019 really ought to have been big enough to see them through two terms. All they had to do was not stuff up too badly. Unfortunately, stuffing up badly was exactly what they have done. At many times, in many ways and on a scale that the most creative satirist couldn't invent. With the consequences now beginning to play out. (I think we can say that, if postal votes have started to go out, voting has begun.)

That is what should haunt the entire British centre-right. What's happening to them is very largely self-inflicted. Not entirely- there was Covid, there is Ukraine. But the rest of it is the "Find Out" phase of FAFO.

Now it's possible that Boring Old Starmer will stuff up to a similar degree. But ask yourself- is it likely?

Many people have noted that this election could see the decline of the Tories similar to the decline of the Liberals in the 1920s.
There is a parallel in that 2019 could be seen as a "coupon" election (as in 1918) with the sitting Tory MPs getting the "Brexit" coupon then from Brexit/Reform. And now Farage has kicked that crutch away.

The big difference in the demise of the liberals was the massive expansion of suffrage, first to people without property, then to women. The first - essentially the enfranchisement of the working class, made the demise of one if the main parties and the rise of a workers’ party inevitable. And it was inevitably the Liberals because they occupied the left of centre ground that Labour would eat up.

There’s no such change in enfranchisement now. There are demographic changes that lead to shifts, but they are slow enough for the duopoly to react.

Stuartinromford said:

boulay said:

Stuartinromford said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

When Boris won a large majority in 2019 he was squatting like a toad over British politics and commencing a thousand year reign. If Starmer wins a similar majority this time he’ll be presiding over a castle built of sand.

Either pundits have learned from the last 5 years, or they are exhibiting their own unconscious biases about “the natural party of government” vs “the other party”.

Robert Peston is making the very same analysis however


“It is all very well for Starmer to set expectations relatively low for what a Labour government could achieve in the short term. But he is telling British people he represents “change”, which does not sound modest.

If in fact Starmer delivers more of the same, his apotheosis may be just as short as Johnson’s.”

https://x.com/peston/status/1801914360706564255?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

But I thought the general principle here was that Peston analysis wasn't always very good?

On the substantive point, the Conservative victory in 2019 really ought to have been big enough to see them through two terms. All they had to do was not stuff up too badly. Unfortunately, stuffing up badly was exactly what they have done. At many times, in many ways and on a scale that the most creative satirist couldn't invent. With the consequences now beginning to play out. (I think we can say that, if postal votes have started to go out, voting has begun.)

That is what should haunt the entire British centre-right. What's happening to them is very largely self-inflicted. Not entirely- there was Covid, there is Ukraine. But the rest of it is the "Find Out" phase of FAFO.

Now it's possible that Boring Old Starmer will stuff up to a similar degree. But ask yourself- is it likely?

“ there was Covid, there is Ukraine”

Not exactly small matters - the worst outside factors to hit the country since WW2 would have hammered whoever was in government.

True, but look at the things that hammered the Conservative ratings. Johnson's Triple Scandal and the Trusstershambles.

If the country hadn’t been in a financial mess from Covid/Ukraine those events might have turned out differently. For example we don’t know if the events of Johnson’s scandals would have happened if Covid hadn’t happened (no parties for starters). I’m sure he would have got into a pickle somehow but if Covid hadn’t happened maybe levelling up and big projects favoured by Boris might have actually happened.

If these things changed then we either don’t have Boris having to quit or a different candidate to Truss and Sunak in the run-off as the country is in good economic shape.

If Ukraine doesn’t happen but Covid does then there is extra time to repay Covid costs and get back on track but the gov is having to spend a fortune on energy help and being blamed for massive inflation.

So Covid but no Ukraine then even if Sunak is PM somehow he has a hell of a lot more room for spending or tax cuts.

I hope to god we don’t get another Covid or Ukraine within months of Starmer taking over but if it did it would derail his plans and the medicine would set the country back again just as things start to get vaguely stable.

Foxy said:

Heathener said:

Foxy said:

williamglenn said:

Foxy said:

williamglenn said:

Heathener said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

TimS said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Its not the super rich fleeing they want to worry about it is the middle giving up.

Personally I am part time now, which keeps me below £50k. Before I was stuffing huge amounts into Pension additional voluntary contributions. Don't mind paying 28% but damned if I will pay 70% marginal rate in tax and child benefit withrawals. So by trying to get 70% off me instead of 28% they get 0%.

There are similar things happening at £100k with childcare/personal allowance cliff.

The last two years have seen inflation matching benefit rises of 10% and 8% with tax allowances. on those working (and getting much lower pay rises) to pay for it.

So people are changing sides. A huge amount of those claiming working age sickness benefits are for conditions with a subjective diagnosis (backache/mental health condition). Only 16% were turned down.

Do I blame them. No. If I had no qualifications and rented and the choice was go on the sick, get my rent paid, get a stipend, get cost of living payments, get 75% of council tax paid, pay social utility rates, get a free mobility car...

...or get an unpleasant McJob that involved being treated poorly and unsocial night shifts and having 25% more cash at the end of it if I was lucky, I'm not sure I wouldn't do the same (that is before taking into account cash in hand receipts for the former).

So tax and benefit rises are already turning net contributors into net receivers. More of the same from Labour is the path to Bankruptcy

Latest in the familiar genre of “the Tories have made things shit. So you’d better not vote Labour because they might ruin it”.

Quite the opposite. I am explaining why they are going to get the drubbing of their lives and are behind Farages lot.

However, if Labour double down on it and increase benefits and taxes further, they will go the same way in 2029. They are going to have tu implement almost Dickensian reform if they want a second term.

As I have been at pains to point out, historically if Labour do achieve a 150+ seat majority they won’t be leaving office for at least 9 years, or 10 if they go full two terms.

The right can try to console itself over what is happening but it’s flight reaction from the reality of the present situation.

Historical precedents won't apply because of the way the parties are realigning. It doesn't take much of a swing to go from this to NOM, and then it doesn't take much more movement before Labour are going the same way as the Tories and the Lib Dems and Reform or its successor dominate the political map.

williamglenn said:

If the current trends continue, a result like this isn't out of the question, however it would only take a swing of a further 2% to Reform to wipe out the Labour majority entirely so it would be very volatile.

Yes but those are just made up figures, and even those have a Labour majority!

The point is to illustrate that not all big majorities are equal. One achieved like that would leave Labour vulnerable to very small swings.

It's not going to happen, but you could make a fortune on the Spreads by buying Reform if you really believed it.

I think it quite likely that they won't win a single seat.

Has the possibility been discussed on here of Reform winning 2 or 3 seats but Nigel Farage isn’t one of them?

I think that very possible. Not only do many Tories dislike Farage, in Clacton there is a very obvious Stop Farage Candidate. It's the only seat in the UK where I would vote Conservative, and I am not the only one thinking that.

Even in 2015 at the height of UKIP mania, Carswell had only a modest majority and was well known locally as a constituency MP. Now Watling has that advantage.

Yes, that was my thought. Carswell got half the Conservative vote, IIRC. Others were pretty much unchanged.

Also, when Carswell joined UKIP, he bought a number of organisers with him from the local party. Which meant he ran a well managed, GOTV campaign.

Farage has never, I believe, put together such an organisation. Which is a reason why his attempts at elective politics have failed.

George Galloway has, which is why he has succeeded several times at his ventures in politics.

kyf_100 said:

TimS said:

kyf_100 said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Its not the super rich fleeing they want to worry about it is the middle giving up.

Personally I am part time now, which keeps me below £50k. Before I was stuffing huge amounts into Pension additional voluntary contributions. Don't mind paying 28% but damned if I will pay 70% marginal rate in tax and child benefit withrawals. So by trying to get 70% off me instead of 28% they get 0%.

There are similar things happening at £100k with childcare/personal allowance cliff.

The last two years have seen inflation matching benefit rises of 10% and 8% with tax allowances. on those working (and getting much lower pay rises) to pay for it.

So people are changing sides. A huge amount of those claiming working age sickness benefits are for conditions with a subjective diagnosis (backache/mental health condition). Only 16% were turned down.

Do I blame them. No. If I had no qualifications and rented and the choice was go on the sick, get my rent paid, get a stipend, get cost of living payments, get 75% of council tax paid, pay social utility rates, get a free mobility car...

...or get an unpleasant McJob that involved being treated poorly and unsocial night shifts and having 25% more cash at the end of it if I was lucky, I'm not sure I wouldn't do the same (that is before taking into account cash in hand receipts for the former).

So tax and benefit rises are already turning net contributors into net receivers. More of the same from Labour is the path to Bankruptcy

This has been the most amazing thing about a Tory government. What the core problem with UK PLC, productivity, what things have Tories done...reduced CGT threshold and entrepreneurial relief on CGT from first business sale, introduce pension pot limit on tax relief, NI rises, introduced new NI++, and continued £50k cliff edge, £100k cliff edge,.....all great for growth and improved productivity, not.

Indeed, and the expectation for a Labour government would be to make every one of those worse.

We heard a lof talk of people moving abroad in the run up to 1997 too. Its a familiar scare story that the right wing parties like to run.

Anyone who did missed out on a long period of economic growth with taxes unchanged, at least until the aftermath of the GFC.

Worth noting too that under Conservative plans tax take goes up every year of the next parliament.

In 1997 nobody was talking about doubling taxes on capital at the next budget.

Imagine if it was mooted -and not denied- that the higher rate of income tax was going to go from 40% this year to 80% next. It might cause some consternation.

I might even stick around to pay 25% cgt. But 20% to 40% overnight makes it makes it worth my while to get out. And I'm only a poor wage slave with a mil or two as an investment portfolio. The calculation becomes even more obvious for the uber-rich.

Why would you need to realise your capital gains now anyway?

Differential CGT and income tax rates drive serious behavioural distortions in the economy, something Lawson understood when he equalised the rates in the 80s. Even after equalisation there is no NI so it remains beneficial relative to income.

I think one sensible option would be to equalise the rates but I cease the annual exempt amount.

Actually a clever option would be to raise immediately to 30% then pre-announce a further rise to equal income tax. That would trigger a huge surge in realisations, a big injection of cash into the treasury that could be spent on some immediate priorities. A bit like Brown’s 3G auction windfall.

For me, it's having a completely unbalanced portfolio. Imagine investing 50k in 5 different stocks in 2014, and one of them is now worth well over a mil, while the others still amount for less than 10% of your portfolio combined.

Without doxxing myself, as I've said earlier, a 10k investment in NVDA in 2014 would be worth over 1m today. Would you want your entire portfolio hingeing on its success?

I'm happy to pay 20% on that to rebalance, once you hit 40% it's in my interest to become a grumpy gammon tax exile. I'd rather pay the 20%.

It doesn't matter what you say.

As far as the class warriors are concerned you have more than they do, and therefore any level of tax is justified on you.

MisterBedfordshire said:

boulay said:

Stuartinromford said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

When Boris won a large majority in 2019 he was squatting like a toad over British politics and commencing a thousand year reign. If Starmer wins a similar majority this time he’ll be presiding over a castle built of sand.

Either pundits have learned from the last 5 years, or they are exhibiting their own unconscious biases about “the natural party of government” vs “the other party”.

Robert Peston is making the very same analysis however


“It is all very well for Starmer to set expectations relatively low for what a Labour government could achieve in the short term. But he is telling British people he represents “change”, which does not sound modest.

If in fact Starmer delivers more of the same, his apotheosis may be just as short as Johnson’s.”

https://x.com/peston/status/1801914360706564255?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

But I thought the general principle here was that Peston analysis wasn't always very good?

On the substantive point, the Conservative victory in 2019 really ought to have been big enough to see them through two terms. All they had to do was not stuff up too badly. Unfortunately, stuffing up badly was exactly what they have done. At many times, in many ways and on a scale that the most creative satirist couldn't invent. With the consequences now beginning to play out. (I think we can say that, if postal votes have started to go out, voting has begun.)

That is what should haunt the entire British centre-right. What's happening to them is very largely self-inflicted. Not entirely- there was Covid, there is Ukraine. But the rest of it is the "Find Out" phase of FAFO.

Now it's possible that Boring Old Starmer will stuff up to a similar degree. But ask yourself- is it likely?

“ there was Covid, there is Ukraine”

Not exactly small matters - the worst outside factors to hit the country since WW2 would have hammered whoever was in government.

Ukraine hasn't hurt the Government.

Johnson was too weak to see through his original Covid policy, which was much the same as Sweden's highly successful policy. As soon as he caved and locked down he handed the pass to the big state enthusiasts.

He didn't even believe in it himself, which is how he was upended for not following it.

Thatcher would not have countenanced the unfortunate residents of poky inner city flats being under house arrest in them for 23 hours a day. Unlike Sunak and Johnson she did not grow up in a wealthy household.

But it was ultimately weakness that has been Johnsons Downfall and with it, this government, his instincts were right, but he didn't have the courage to see them through.

I don’t blame him for this. Nobody had experienced a pandemic before. We oscillated between fear and complacency.

I went from “lockdown now” in March 2020 to “give this nonsense a rest” by spring 2021. But many of Johnson’s most loyal voters, the over 70s, were still favouring things like permanently banning nightclubs in polls in 2022.

Thatcher’s initial response to the AIDS epidemic suggests we shouldn’t be too sure how she would have reacted to Covid.

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Voters find Starmer’s Labour more patriotic than Tories

Rishi Sunak was scored second lowest in a list of politicians when it came to perceptions about patriotism

Voters think that Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour Party is more proud to be British than the Conservatives under Rishi Sunak, polling has found ahead of the general election.

Mr Sunak was scored second lowest in a list of politicians when it came to perceptions about patriotism, with only Jeremy Corbyn viewed as less patriotic than the Prime Minister.

The research by the UCL Policy Lab and the More in Common think tank also found that the public think that politicians are less patriotic today than they used to be.

Last week, More in Common polled 2,037 adults in Great Britain on the subject of patriotism.

Respondents were asked to think about a number of political parties under various recent leaders and “to what extent would you say they are proud or embarrassed to be British”.

Two in five (40 per cent) thought that the Labour Party under Sir Keir is proud to be British, with 13 per cent thinking it is embarrassed.

For the Conservatives under Mr Sunak, 24 per cent felt that the party is proud to be British, with 28 per cent believing the Tories under his leadership are embarrassed to be British.

The Tories under Mr Sunak also scored below the Conservative Party under Boris Johnson, and Reform UK under Nigel Farage.

Thirty-six per cent said that Reform under Mr Farage was proud to be British, with 21 per cent believing them to be embarrassed. Thirty one per cent felt the Tories under Mr Johnson were proud to be British, compared to to the same amount who thought the party was embarrassed to be British.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/15/voters-find-starmers-labour-more-patriotic-than-tories/

Even before DDgate many on the right including Rishi have a very weird concept of patriotism at the moment. The UK is simultaneously an overly woke, lazy, crime ridden cesspit full of people who don't even speak proper and also the best place to live in the world. If anyone else than them says a word against the country they are a traitor.

It is most confusing to many of us.

I think we're just at a place where Rishi and the Tories would clearly lose any and all sorts of match-ups to Labour, and its not measuring what we think it is.

Casino_Royale said:

kyf_100 said:

TimS said:

kyf_100 said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Its not the super rich fleeing they want to worry about it is the middle giving up.

Personally I am part time now, which keeps me below £50k. Before I was stuffing huge amounts into Pension additional voluntary contributions. Don't mind paying 28% but damned if I will pay 70% marginal rate in tax and child benefit withrawals. So by trying to get 70% off me instead of 28% they get 0%.

There are similar things happening at £100k with childcare/personal allowance cliff.

The last two years have seen inflation matching benefit rises of 10% and 8% with tax allowances. on those working (and getting much lower pay rises) to pay for it.

So people are changing sides. A huge amount of those claiming working age sickness benefits are for conditions with a subjective diagnosis (backache/mental health condition). Only 16% were turned down.

Do I blame them. No. If I had no qualifications and rented and the choice was go on the sick, get my rent paid, get a stipend, get cost of living payments, get 75% of council tax paid, pay social utility rates, get a free mobility car...

...or get an unpleasant McJob that involved being treated poorly and unsocial night shifts and having 25% more cash at the end of it if I was lucky, I'm not sure I wouldn't do the same (that is before taking into account cash in hand receipts for the former).

So tax and benefit rises are already turning net contributors into net receivers. More of the same from Labour is the path to Bankruptcy

This has been the most amazing thing about a Tory government. What the core problem with UK PLC, productivity, what things have Tories done...reduced CGT threshold and entrepreneurial relief on CGT from first business sale, introduce pension pot limit on tax relief, NI rises, introduced new NI++, and continued £50k cliff edge, £100k cliff edge,.....all great for growth and improved productivity, not.

Indeed, and the expectation for a Labour government would be to make every one of those worse.

We heard a lof talk of people moving abroad in the run up to 1997 too. Its a familiar scare story that the right wing parties like to run.

Anyone who did missed out on a long period of economic growth with taxes unchanged, at least until the aftermath of the GFC.

Worth noting too that under Conservative plans tax take goes up every year of the next parliament.

In 1997 nobody was talking about doubling taxes on capital at the next budget.

Imagine if it was mooted -and not denied- that the higher rate of income tax was going to go from 40% this year to 80% next. It might cause some consternation.

I might even stick around to pay 25% cgt. But 20% to 40% overnight makes it makes it worth my while to get out. And I'm only a poor wage slave with a mil or two as an investment portfolio. The calculation becomes even more obvious for the uber-rich.

Why would you need to realise your capital gains now anyway?

Differential CGT and income tax rates drive serious behavioural distortions in the economy, something Lawson understood when he equalised the rates in the 80s. Even after equalisation there is no NI so it remains beneficial relative to income.

I think one sensible option would be to equalise the rates but I cease the annual exempt amount.

Actually a clever option would be to raise immediately to 30% then pre-announce a further rise to equal income tax. That would trigger a huge surge in realisations, a big injection of cash into the treasury that could be spent on some immediate priorities. A bit like Brown’s 3G auction windfall.

For me, it's having a completely unbalanced portfolio. Imagine investing 50k in 5 different stocks in 2014, and one of them is now worth well over a mil, while the others still amount for less than 10% of your portfolio combined.

Without doxxing myself, as I've said earlier, a 10k investment in NVDA in 2014 would be worth over 1m today. Would you want your entire portfolio hingeing on its success?

I'm happy to pay 20% on that to rebalance, once you hit 40% it's in my interest to become a grumpy gammon tax exile. I'd rather pay the 20%.

It doesn't matter what you say.

As far as the class warriors are concerned you have more than they do, and therefore any level of tax is justified on you.

Indeed.

I could have moved abroad to dodge the 20%, tbh, since by my own personal calculation it would be cheaper to live abroad for five years than to even pay the 20%. But I was happy to get my chequebook out and pay the 20% on my investments because I *am* lucky to be richer than most people, and I want to contribute.

But no amount is ever enough. So instead of picking up 300k-ish from me next year, the exchequer will get nowt.

MisterBedfordshire said:

kinabalu said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Heathener said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Leon said:

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Tres said:

kyf_100 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Nigelb said:

Starmer rules out CGT on primary residences for the duration of the next parliament.

But not CGT from other avenues.

Indeed. It's rather obvious at this point they are coming for capital gains in a big way. Canada did similar earlier this year, and is already seeing capital flight.

Fpt my story is fairly simple, I used to be on a high income, paying 40% on that and investing about half my net PAYE pay. Over the last decade I've accumulated seven figures in unrealised gains.

Let's assume 1,000,000 exactly for a quick calculation. At current rates that's 200k tax. Which is doable. At 40% that becomes 400k in tax. Which to avoid, you have to leave the UK for 5 years after making the disposal (preferably in a 0% jurisdiction such as Dubai.)

So the choice is to pay HMRC 400k, or spend, say, 200k on a nice 5 year holiday backpacking round the far east, and still being up 200k more than if remaining in the UK. From a personal perspective it really is a no brainer and I imagine most would be exploring the same options I currently am.

Capital is mobile, and tbh I'd rather pay a reasonable amount. Cgt at 40%+ would be one of the most punitive tax regimes in the world and a lot of people with more than a million or two in gains - think successful entrepreneurs cashing out of their businesses - will be making the same calculation.

but most people have no capital gains to tax. It's like the parent's crying about VAT on private school, not enough of you to matter.

The top 1% of Britons in income pay 30% of the tax. I believe. Be very careful what you wish for

How much of the income do they get?

It doesn’t matter if half of them fuck off. Suddenly you’ve got an ENORMOUS hole in already stretched HMG finances, and Britain is bankrupt. Bravo

I tired of rich people holding the country hostage. I say, tax them more. I'm willing to bet most of them stay put. Most people have friends and family and lives here. Uprooting your life is a huge time and emotional cost. It most cases it won't be worth the trouble. I say, bring it on.

250k UK citizens have moved to Dubai in the last few years. Its happening already.

Given that UK citizens emigrating is about 100k per year in total, you probably need to qualify "in the last few years".

Er, in the last year 532,000 people emigrated from the UK

ONS:

“1.2 million people migrated into the UK and 532,000 people emigrated from it, leaving a net migration figure of 685,000. This represents the balance of long-term migrants moving in and out of the country.”

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06077/

Farroq said UK citizens.

Farooq said:

Carnyx said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Farooq said:

Leon said:

Tres said:

kyf_100 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Nigelb said:

Starmer rules out CGT on primary residences for the duration of the next parliament.

But not CGT from other avenues.

Indeed. It's rather obvious at this point they are coming for capital gains in a big way. Canada did similar earlier this year, and is already seeing capital flight.

Fpt my story is fairly simple, I used to be on a high income, paying 40% on that and investing about half my net PAYE pay. Over the last decade I've accumulated seven figures in unrealised gains.

Let's assume 1,000,000 exactly for a quick calculation. At current rates that's 200k tax. Which is doable. At 40% that becomes 400k in tax. Which to avoid, you have to leave the UK for 5 years after making the disposal (preferably in a 0% jurisdiction such as Dubai.)

So the choice is to pay HMRC 400k, or spend, say, 200k on a nice 5 year holiday backpacking round the far east, and still being up 200k more than if remaining in the UK. From a personal perspective it really is a no brainer and I imagine most would be exploring the same options I currently am.

Capital is mobile, and tbh I'd rather pay a reasonable amount. Cgt at 40%+ would be one of the most punitive tax regimes in the world and a lot of people with more than a million or two in gains - think successful entrepreneurs cashing out of their businesses - will be making the same calculation.

but most people have no capital gains to tax. It's like the parent's crying about VAT on private school, not enough of you to matter.

The top 1% of Britons in income pay 30% of the tax. I believe. Be very careful what you wish for

How much of the income do they get?

It doesn’t matter if half of them fuck off. Suddenly you’ve got an ENORMOUS hole in already stretched HMG finances, and Britain is bankrupt. Bravo

I tired of rich people holding the country hostage. I say, tax them more. I'm willing to bet most of them stay put. Most people have friends and family and lives here. Uprooting your life is a huge time and emotional cost. It most cases it won't be worth the trouble. I say, bring it on.

250k UK citizens have moved to Dubai in the last few years. Its happening already.

Given that UK citizens emigrating is about 100k per year in total, you probably need to qualify "in the last few years".

Er, in the last year 532,000 people emigrated from the UK

ONS:

“1.2 million people migrated into the UK and 532,000 people emigrated from it, leaving a net migration figure of 685,000. This represents the balance of long-term migrants moving in and out of the country.”

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn06077/

Farroq said UK citizens.

Exactly, and then because that's what FrancisUrquhart lead with. Just sticking to the terms of the conversation is apparently enough to make Leon dizzy and fall over.

I don’t say you were wrong I was pointing out the absurdly narrow focus of your argument. On top of 100,000 uk emigrants 400,000 others left. Who were they? How many were long term residents who actually paid a lot of tax? And how many of the trillions of incomers are going to be a net drain on the treasury, instead?

I fear the details won’t be good for UK PLC

The tax system is very harsh on writers who get big sums then very little for potentially years.

James Herriot's sons autobiography of him recounts how during the Labour 74-79 era he handed the vast majority of his book earnings to the treasury and attempted to contact the only other well earning writer who was still in the country only to find that he too had bolted.

It was iirc George Osborne who put a stop to authors being able to spread their earnings over several years

p.s. be sure to pass this back to your masters in CCHQ

Are you mad. I have already said that I will vote Reform (heart) or (God Help Me) Labour (head) to make sure the Tories lose in my seat. I am furious with them.

And I am not that new. Remember Brexit and the 6:1 bet the day before?

Your ♥ surely cannot lie with Nigel Farage. Where's the romance in bad breath and obsessing about immigration?

If Reform actually won the election I would be horrified. I suspect Farage would be too.

Like Johnson after the EU referendum.

The country needs entrepreneurs like @kyf_100.
Taxing them into exile is not a solution.

We need to tax unproductive wealth.
That essentially means property, and I say this as the owner of two in London.

Thankfully (for me personally) no government has the cojones to do that.

Gallowgate said:

Is there anything more bellend-ish than boasting about your income?

He was taking about having worked his socks off , saved diligently , invested wisely , already paid lots of tax and not being happy to be taxed on it yet again. Sounds more bellend-ish being envious of that.

Tres said:

Gallowgate said:

Is there anything more bellend-ish than boasting about your income?

boasting about how much tax you've paid

Never heard anyone boast , complain yes

malcolmg said:

Gallowgate said:

Is there anything more bellend-ish than boasting about your income?

He was taking about having worked his socks off , saved diligently , invested wisely , already paid lots of tax and not being happy to be taxed on it yet again. Sounds more bellend-ish being envious of that.

We're not an aspirational country anymore.

FrancisUrquhart said:

There seems to be a bit of an air of f##k business / rich people creeping in. Haven't we already had enough of that over the past 5 years?

Tsk. Tax the rich, not fuck the rich. Maximising tax should be the aim. Better for rich people to pay than poor people and there are big bills to cover.

If some people go into tax exile you have probably set the rates correctly for maximum revenue. If everyone does, you need to think again.

New MRP polling by Survation for Best for Britain predicts the Conservatives could win just 72 seats.

Labour is projected to win a landslide of 456 seats, with a majority of 262.

The Liberal Democrats are set for 56 seats, Reform UK 7 and Greens 1.

Conservatives are set to lose seats in every region while Labour gains everywhere.

All seven of Reform UK’s gains were won by the Tories in 2019.

Conservatives have no “safe” seats, with majorities of less than 2 per cent in 19 of 72 constituencies.

Cabinet ministers Jeremy Hunt and Penny Mordaunt would lose seats.

Rishi Sunak, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss and Dame Priti Patel would keep theirs.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-landslide-could-leave-tories-with-just-72-seats-mrp-poll-finds-bxfqk38xs

kyf_100 said:

TimS said:

kyf_100 said:

Foxy said:

Sandpit said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

MisterBedfordshire said:

Its not the super rich fleeing they want to worry about it is the middle giving up.

Personally I am part time now, which keeps me below £50k. Before I was stuffing huge amounts into Pension additional voluntary contributions. Don't mind paying 28% but damned if I will pay 70% marginal rate in tax and child benefit withrawals. So by trying to get 70% off me instead of 28% they get 0%.

There are similar things happening at £100k with childcare/personal allowance cliff.

The last two years have seen inflation matching benefit rises of 10% and 8% with tax allowances. on those working (and getting much lower pay rises) to pay for it.

So people are changing sides. A huge amount of those claiming working age sickness benefits are for conditions with a subjective diagnosis (backache/mental health condition). Only 16% were turned down.

Do I blame them. No. If I had no qualifications and rented and the choice was go on the sick, get my rent paid, get a stipend, get cost of living payments, get 75% of council tax paid, pay social utility rates, get a free mobility car...

...or get an unpleasant McJob that involved being treated poorly and unsocial night shifts and having 25% more cash at the end of it if I was lucky, I'm not sure I wouldn't do the same (that is before taking into account cash in hand receipts for the former).

So tax and benefit rises are already turning net contributors into net receivers. More of the same from Labour is the path to Bankruptcy

This has been the most amazing thing about a Tory government. What the core problem with UK PLC, productivity, what things have Tories done...reduced CGT threshold and entrepreneurial relief on CGT from first business sale, introduce pension pot limit on tax relief, NI rises, introduced new NI++, and continued £50k cliff edge, £100k cliff edge,.....all great for growth and improved productivity, not.

Indeed, and the expectation for a Labour government would be to make every one of those worse.

We heard a lof talk of people moving abroad in the run up to 1997 too. Its a familiar scare story that the right wing parties like to run.

Anyone who did missed out on a long period of economic growth with taxes unchanged, at least until the aftermath of the GFC.

Worth noting too that under Conservative plans tax take goes up every year of the next parliament.

In 1997 nobody was talking about doubling taxes on capital at the next budget.

Imagine if it was mooted -and not denied- that the higher rate of income tax was going to go from 40% this year to 80% next. It might cause some consternation.

I might even stick around to pay 25% cgt. But 20% to 40% overnight makes it makes it worth my while to get out. And I'm only a poor wage slave with a mil or two as an investment portfolio. The calculation becomes even more obvious for the uber-rich.

Why would you need to realise your capital gains now anyway?

Differential CGT and income tax rates drive serious behavioural distortions in the economy, something Lawson understood when he equalised the rates in the 80s. Even after equalisation there is no NI so it remains beneficial relative to income.

I think one sensible option would be to equalise the rates but I cease the annual exempt amount.

Actually a clever option would be to raise immediately to 30% then pre-announce a further rise to equal income tax. That would trigger a huge surge in realisations, a big injection of cash into the treasury that could be spent on some immediate priorities. A bit like Brown’s 3G auction windfall.

For me, it's having a completely unbalanced portfolio. Imagine investing 50k in 5 different stocks in 2014, and one of them is now worth well over a mil, while the others still amount for less than 10% of your portfolio combined.

Without doxxing myself, as I've said earlier, a 10k investment in NVDA in 2014 would be worth over 1m today. Would you want your entire portfolio hingeing on its success?

I'm happy to pay 20% on that to rebalance, once you hit 40% it's in my interest to become a grumpy gammon tax exile. I'd rather pay the 20%.

better problem to have than being broke mind you. Can you not just do it over time using ISA's , smaller sales.

TudorRose said:

Yougov are asking the wrong question; how many Tories would vote Reform if they thought it had a chance of winning might be a better choice. Tactical voting is going to be an issue for the right at this election.

How long before the Tories start backing proportional representation?
They're already saying don't give Labour too big a majority.

FF43 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

There seems to be a bit of an air of f##k business / rich people creeping in. Haven't we already had enough of that over the past 5 years?

Tsk. Tax the rich, not fuck the rich. Maximising tax should be the aim. Better for rich people to pay than poor people and there are big bills to cover.

If some people go into tax exile you have probably set the rates correctly for maximum revenue. If everyone does, you need to think again.

Perhaps we should ask why some in our wealthy country are so reliant upon the money of others?

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Is there anything more bellend-ish than boasting about your income?

Yes, the woodlice like @OllyT @Tres @murali_s and @Northern_Al crawling out from under their decomposing logs to cry class war over it, and express schadenfreude at anyone affected.

However angry you may be that does not give you the right to make abusive comments of that sort about people who see things differently to you. I am 75, very well-off (thankfully) and about as far from a "class warrior" as you are likely to get. It does you no credit whatsoever.

TheScreamingEagles said:

wooliedyed said:

Casino_Royale said:

noneoftheabove said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Voters find Starmer’s Labour more patriotic than Tories

Rishi Sunak was scored second lowest in a list of politicians when it came to perceptions about patriotism

Voters think that Sir Keir Starmer’s Labour Party is more proud to be British than the Conservatives under Rishi Sunak, polling has found ahead of the general election.

Mr Sunak was scored second lowest in a list of politicians when it came to perceptions about patriotism, with only Jeremy Corbyn viewed as less patriotic than the Prime Minister.

The research by the UCL Policy Lab and the More in Common think tank also found that the public think that politicians are less patriotic today than they used to be.

Last week, More in Common polled 2,037 adults in Great Britain on the subject of patriotism.

Respondents were asked to think about a number of political parties under various recent leaders and “to what extent would you say they are proud or embarrassed to be British”.

Two in five (40 per cent) thought that the Labour Party under Sir Keir is proud to be British, with 13 per cent thinking it is embarrassed.

For the Conservatives under Mr Sunak, 24 per cent felt that the party is proud to be British, with 28 per cent believing the Tories under his leadership are embarrassed to be British.

The Tories under Mr Sunak also scored below the Conservative Party under Boris Johnson, and Reform UK under Nigel Farage.

Thirty-six per cent said that Reform under Mr Farage was proud to be British, with 21 per cent believing them to be embarrassed. Thirty one per cent felt the Tories under Mr Johnson were proud to be British, compared to to the same amount who thought the party was embarrassed to be British.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/15/voters-find-starmers-labour-more-patriotic-than-tories/

Even before DDgate many on the right including Rishi have a very weird concept of patriotism at the moment. The UK is simultaneously an overly woke, lazy, crime ridden cesspit full of people who don't even speak proper and also the best place to live in the world. If anyone else than them says a word against the country they are a traitor.

It is most confusing to many of us.

I think we're just at a place where Rishi and the Tories would clearly lose any and all sorts of match-ups to Labour, and its not measuring what we think it is.

It's a bit like 'trust on issues' polling - it's just an artefact of VI with a bit of variance. One follows the other

Not always.

Even in 2013/14 when the Tories were sinking in the polls Dave still led in quite a few metrics such as the NHS.

Lead was less pronounced though, so you'd expect some mix and match. But yes, I accept its not a hard and fast rule but generally you want who you intend to vote for to be better, else why vote for them

darkage said:

@kyf_100
I have a lot of sympathy with you even though I am in nothing like the same position.
Not sure about this 5 year backpacking option. Surely you just would create ambiguous tax risks/liabilities wherever in the world you went, particularly in countries with not very advanced legal systems?
Plus £200k could get eaten up pretty quickly in a global tax dispute if it involves accountants, consultants, lawyers and barristers in various different countries.
I personally arrived at the view that amassing lots of money just creates lots of problems.

It's actually quite simple, tbh, with a bit of forward planning. The trick is to never remain in one place for long enough to become tax resident there (180 days is generally the number).

Two examples from my extended friendship circle -

1. A guy who works in oil and gas - never in the same country for long, and never stays in a single country for enough days to become tax resident there. A working class tradie who's done very well for himself, so not your typical "jet set, has to move every three months" type. He knows bugger all about tax, his accountant takes care of it all for him and ensures he never pays tax as he's never tax resident anywhere. A true citizen of nowhere!

2. A mate who set up a business as a spin-out from his PhD. His stake probs worth about five mil, give or take. Moved to dubai last year and established tax residence there before selling up his share in the company, saving him £1m on the sale. All he has to do is not live in the UK for 5 whole years - which is fairly easy to do when you've just sold a company for £5m. Even if he spends 100k living in Dubai a year, he's up 500k on where he would have been if he sold while UK tax resident. Now do that calculation at 40-45% CGT.

Most countries have a CGT of between 15 and 30%, and tbh, I think if you make 5m then it's a bit churlish to go dubai-bye to save yourself 500k (after cost of living abroad for 5 years taken into account). Saving $2m on the other hand...

The UK taxing capital gains as income would make it one of the most expensive countries in the world for entrepreneurs and investors, leading to inevitable capital flight.

Just in from a friend in the museum world.

The British Museum has caught several transgressors and banned them from their collections.

Their crime - they were caught creating catalogues of objects in their field of interest in the collections behind the scenes.

For this terrible crime they’ve been banned from having access.

No, they weren’t damaging anything or breaking any actual rules. Except, probably, embarrassing management.

Mortimer said:

dixiedean said:

Fact is.
Somebody, somewhere is going to have to pay more tax.
The cuts laughably projected by the Tories would mean whole sectors collapsing and Councils bankrupt and in breach of the Law by being unable to provide Statutory services.

Or:

- Individuals could take more responsibility. Some parents should be feeding their children better before school. Those who can afford it should take out private medical insurance. Ditto private sector education.

- The state bureaucratic machine could be more efficient. We are a very wealthy country and tax reciepts are high. A huge proportion of GDP.

- People should stop expecting others to provide for them. This especially applies to pensioners.

Well you could.
But then don't spend 14 years piling more and more statutory requirements onto local authorities without any intention to, nor care for how they are to be funded.
Stop moaning about the horrendous effects of lockdown on kids whilst refusing to pay anything at all to mitigate its effects.
And make the political case for it. Cos right now that isn't where the country sits.
14 years of dissembling and dishonesty have led us here.

Farooq said:

I'm extremely wealthy and it's such a burden. Please reply with sympathy.

I've never paid CGT 😡

TheScreamingEagles said:

New MRP polling by Survation for Best for Britain predicts the Conservatives could win just 72 seats.

Labour is projected to win a landslide of 456 seats, with a majority of 262.

The Liberal Democrats are set for 56 seats, Reform UK 7 and Greens 1.

Conservatives are set to lose seats in every region while Labour gains everywhere.

All seven of Reform UK’s gains were won by the Tories in 2019.

Conservatives have no “safe” seats, with majorities of less than 2 per cent in 19 of 72 constituencies.

Cabinet ministers Jeremy Hunt and Penny Mordaunt would lose seats.

Rishi Sunak, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss and Dame Priti Patel would keep theirs.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-landslide-could-leave-tories-with-just-72-seats-mrp-poll-finds-bxfqk38xs

Reform are slowly creeping up in the MRP polls too.

Its looking about as good for England in the cricket as the Tories in the GE.

Stuartinromford said:

Leon said:

TimS said:

When Boris won a large majority in 2019 he was squatting like a toad over British politics and commencing a thousand year reign. If Starmer wins a similar majority this time he’ll be presiding over a castle built of sand.

Either pundits have learned from the last 5 years, or they are exhibiting their own unconscious biases about “the natural party of government” vs “the other party”.

Robert Peston is making the very same analysis however


“It is all very well for Starmer to set expectations relatively low for what a Labour government could achieve in the short term. But he is telling British people he represents “change”, which does not sound modest.

If in fact Starmer delivers more of the same, his apotheosis may be just as short as Johnson’s.”

https://x.com/peston/status/1801914360706564255?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

But I thought the general principle here was that Peston analysis wasn't always very good?

On the substantive point, the Conservative victory in 2019 really ought to have been big enough to see them through two terms. All they had to do was not stuff up too badly. Unfortunately, stuffing up badly was exactly what they have done. At many times, in many ways and on a scale that the most creative satirist couldn't invent. With the consequences now beginning to play out. (I think we can say that, if postal votes have started to go out, voting has begun.)

That is what should haunt the entire British centre-right. What's happening to them is very largely self-inflicted. Not entirely- there was Covid, there is Ukraine. But the rest of it is the "Find Out" phase of FAFO.

Now it's possible that Boring Old Starmer will stuff up to a similar degree. But ask yourself- is it likely?

Yeah, Johnson had it all everything he needed to go on for 2 terms. Still can't believe he fucked it up so quickly.

TheScreamingEagles said:

New MRP polling by Survation for Best for Britain predicts the Conservatives could win just 72 seats.

Labour is projected to win a landslide of 456 seats, with a majority of 262.

The Liberal Democrats are set for 56 seats, Reform UK 7 and Greens 1.

Conservatives are set to lose seats in every region while Labour gains everywhere.

All seven of Reform UK’s gains were won by the Tories in 2019.

Conservatives have no “safe” seats, with majorities of less than 2 per cent in 19 of 72 constituencies.

Cabinet ministers Jeremy Hunt and Penny Mordaunt would lose seats.

Rishi Sunak, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss and Dame Priti Patel would keep theirs.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-landslide-could-leave-tories-with-just-72-seats-mrp-poll-finds-bxfqk38xs

Anything of interest from behind the paywall?

dixiedean said:

Mortimer said:

dixiedean said:

Fact is.
Somebody, somewhere is going to have to pay more tax.
The cuts laughably projected by the Tories would mean whole sectors collapsing and Councils bankrupt and in breach of the Law by being unable to provide Statutory services.

Or:

- Individuals could take more responsibility. Some parents should be feeding their children better before school. Those who can afford it should take out private medical insurance. Ditto private sector education.

- The state bureaucratic machine could be more efficient. We are a very wealthy country and tax reciepts are high. A huge proportion of GDP.

- People should stop expecting others to provide for them. This especially applies to pensioners.

Well you could.
But then don't spend 14 years piling more and more statutory requirements onto local authorities without any intention to, nor care for how they are to be funded.
Stop moaning about the horrendous effects of lockdown on kids whilst refusing to pay anything at all to mitigate its effects.
And make the political case for it. Cos right now that isn't where the country sits.
14 years of dissembling and dishonesty have led us here.

The govt have failed to make the argument for a smaller state and personal responsibility.

It should be to the utter shame of those in Govt.

NEW THREAD

TheScreamingEagles said:

New MRP polling by Survation for Best for Britain predicts the Conservatives could win just 72 seats.

Labour is projected to win a landslide of 456 seats, with a majority of 262.

The Liberal Democrats are set for 56 seats, Reform UK 7 and Greens 1.

Conservatives are set to lose seats in every region while Labour gains everywhere.

All seven of Reform UK’s gains were won by the Tories in 2019.

Conservatives have no “safe” seats, with majorities of less than 2 per cent in 19 of 72 constituencies.

Cabinet ministers Jeremy Hunt and Penny Mordaunt would lose seats.

Rishi Sunak, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss and Dame Priti Patel would keep theirs.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-landslide-could-leave-tories-with-just-72-seats-mrp-poll-finds-bxfqk38xs

Momentum towards second party very much still with the LDs. I think they will do it with Ed Davey as LOTO.

Heathener said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

New MRP polling by Survation for Best for Britain predicts the Conservatives could win just 72 seats.

Labour is projected to win a landslide of 456 seats, with a majority of 262.

The Liberal Democrats are set for 56 seats, Reform UK 7 and Greens 1.

Conservatives are set to lose seats in every region while Labour gains everywhere.

All seven of Reform UK’s gains were won by the Tories in 2019.

Conservatives have no “safe” seats, with majorities of less than 2 per cent in 19 of 72 constituencies.

Cabinet ministers Jeremy Hunt and Penny Mordaunt would lose seats.

Rishi Sunak, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss and Dame Priti Patel would keep theirs.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-landslide-could-leave-tories-with-just-72-seats-mrp-poll-finds-bxfqk38xs

Do you have dates for the survey? Or anything more you can safely publish on here (it’s behind their paywall)

It's on the new thread.

dixiedean said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

New MRP polling by Survation for Best for Britain predicts the Conservatives could win just 72 seats.

Labour is projected to win a landslide of 456 seats, with a majority of 262.

The Liberal Democrats are set for 56 seats, Reform UK 7 and Greens 1.

Conservatives are set to lose seats in every region while Labour gains everywhere.

All seven of Reform UK’s gains were won by the Tories in 2019.

Conservatives have no “safe” seats, with majorities of less than 2 per cent in 19 of 72 constituencies.

Cabinet ministers Jeremy Hunt and Penny Mordaunt would lose seats.

Rishi Sunak, Suella Braverman, Liz Truss and Dame Priti Patel would keep theirs.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/labour-landslide-could-leave-tories-with-just-72-seats-mrp-poll-finds-bxfqk38xs

Any lead on what those 7 Reform seats are?
I suspect best value me be on those.

Some sensible ones:
Clacton, Ashfield
A "hmm" one:
Gt Yarmouth
Some that look like glitches, unless local knowledge says otherwise:
Suffolk S, Norfolk NW, Leicestershire Mid, Exmouth+Exeter E

The overall shares on the MRP are
L40C24R12LD11, which may already be put of date.

OllyT said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Is there anything more bellend-ish than boasting about your income?

Yes, the woodlice like @OllyT @Tres @murali_s and @Northern_Al crawling out from under their decomposing logs to cry class war over it, and express schadenfreude at anyone affected.

However angry you may be that does not give you the right to make abusive comments of that sort about people who see things differently to you. I am 75, very well-off (thankfully) and about as far from a "class warrior" as you are likely to get. It does you no credit whatsoever.

Nothing wrong with woodlice, though. Vegetarian and extremely important recyclers.

Jonathan said:

Why am I getting 1992 vibes? Started this morning feeling this was a 2010 style election, albeit in the right direction, but ended even more pessimistic. Not sure. Just not getting the vibe, despite the polls.

Agree. Not 1992 but Labour squeak home or NOM with Lab/LD together making a majority feels a possible still.

The other vibe is about what happens after 4th July. There is now no result that isn't seismic.

OllyT said:

Heathener said:

OllyT said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Is there anything more bellend-ish than boasting about your income?

Yes, the woodlice like @OllyT @Tres @murali_s and @Northern_Al crawling out from under their decomposing logs to cry class war over it, and express schadenfreude at anyone affected.

However angry you may be that does not give you the right to make abusive comments of that sort about people who see things differently to you. I am 75, very well-off (thankfully) and about as far from a "class warrior" as you are likely to get. It does you no credit whatsoever.

Having also been on the receiving end I don’t really understand what happens with him. 75% of the time he’s amicable but 25% he’s vile to people. Like some switch just flicks and rage and abuse takes over.

He has very little tolerance of anyone who doesn't see things the way he does. He also has a very short fuse.

Maybe then participate in the below the lines discussions, like a normal person?

You normally only pop up to throw invective and abusive.

Zero time for it, and thus zero respect for you.

OllyT said:

Casino_Royale said:

Gallowgate said:

Is there anything more bellend-ish than boasting about your income?

Yes, the woodlice like @OllyT @Tres @murali_s and @Northern_Al crawling out from under their decomposing logs to cry class war over it, and express schadenfreude at anyone affected.

However angry you may be that does not give you the right to make abusive comments of that sort about people who see things differently to you. I am 75, very well-off (thankfully) and about as far from a "class warrior" as you are likely to get. It does you no credit whatsoever.

Yet you are strident about people need to lose money constantly because you know you wont be the victim