politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With Scotland looking so difficult Labour’s big hope is th

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting market, my money is on Clegg and Salmond

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8ReXyiIEAAZE9a.png

Really?? Surely Farage is the bet?

Salmond is a terrible bet, you drasticly underestimate what is happening with the SNP if you think it is decent. Its as bad as Ed Miliband or Cameron himself in this market imo.

Clegg has an almighty majority - Farage is a 3 way marginal where he could well win on a low vote%.

Farage looks the bet to me.

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting market, my money is on Clegg and Salmond

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8ReXyiIEAAZE9a.png

Really?? Surely Farage is the bet?

I expect Farage to win Thanet South.

So which of the five don't you expect to win their seat? If you expect them all to, then it doesn't matter if you think Farage will win Thanet South

Going for Clegg ahead of Farage in this seat makes a mockery of tipping him at 1-3. I'm on Clegg, at slightly above 1-2 due to hedging, but how can one possibly say 1-3 Clegg and backing him in this market both make sense ?!!!!!!!!!!

Pulpstar said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting market, my money is on Clegg and Salmond

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8ReXyiIEAAZE9a.png

Really?? Surely Farage is the bet?

Salmond is a terrible bet, you drasticly underestimate what is happening with the SNP if you think it is decent. Its as bad as Ed Miliband or Cameron himself in this market imo.

Clegg has an almighty majority - Farage is a 3 way marginal where he could well win on a low vote%.

Farage looks the bet to me.

Yes seems so to me for the same reasons

Indigo said:

MarqueeMark said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Socrates said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

isam said:

Winston MacKenzie seen leaving Downing St after "interesting meeting" with senior Conservatives

Please, no!

He's one we wouldn't mind getting rid of.

Odd then that he too had a speaking slot at the UKIP conference - another one of the top figures, clearly.

He has been got rid of hasn't he?

Isn't he still your candidate in Croydon?

http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Winston-McKenzie-steps-branch-chairman-stand-Ukip/story-25887957-detail/story.html

It seems so!

Well let me say right now, I don't rate him either

It seems the shorter list might be those in your party you do rate....

Maybe, but previous scandals like this have shown that the kipper voter doesn't care, and after this they still wont care. They are not voting for policies, or politicians, they are voting because they are goddam pissed off.

UKIP are in essence the "inchoate rage vote", the "mad as hell and not going to take it any more" vote, the "had just about as much as I can stand of political correctness" vote, the "the country's going to the dogs" vote, they are pissed off and they want to stick it to the "parties of government", the Conservatives, the LDs and Labour. Bashir and Kerry Smith wont affect that in the slightest.

So basically, the coalition of the ungovernable. If UKIP got a 100 seat majority, it wouldn't take their voters five minutes to be raging in an inchoate manner about how poor the UKIP MPs were and how it wasn't this shit in the Good Old Days of Tory Governments.

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting market, my money is on Clegg and Salmond

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8ReXyiIEAAZE9a.png

Really?? Surely Farage is the bet?

I expect Farage to win Thanet South.

So which of the five don't you expect to win their seat? If you expect them all to, then it doesn't matter if you think Farage will win Thanet South

I think Farage is biggest in the betting to win his seat isn't he?

Havent done the research but on first look I'd rather be on Farage at 11/10

I expect them all to win their seats.

The bet is about who will get the lowest share of the vote regardless of winning or losing.

isam said:

Dair said:

isam said:

Dair said:

No, it's not.

And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.

There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.

Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.

But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.

The Greens are communist, and their policies are all geared to a society based on the end of wealth inequality.. its the only way their big ideas could work

You're making unsubstantiated claims which are completely unrelated to the proposal of the Citizen's Incomes as the greens want to establish it.

There is no redistributive impact.
There is no wage equality.

You can argue the Greens are "communists" in other areas if you want, there's not really much evidence and you've provided none at all so far but if you want to try you are free to do so.

But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.

Yeah yeah

What will be the top rate of tax when this £72 a week is given to top rate tax payers? And when will top rate kick in?

You were asked to explain why your assertion that "The Greens are just commies" had any basis in reality. You have so far failed to provide any argument or evidence to support the claim.

Now you change the subject. Not helping your case, just the consistent knee jerk reaction when people don't understand alternative policies.

Stereotomy said:

Dair said:

isam said:

Dair said:

isam said:

Dair said:

isam said:

Oh I am.. I lived and studied in Brighton quite recently and many of the things Bennett said where the same nonsense I heard from Marxist humanities lecturers there... the mantra they brainwashed the kids with was "there is no such thing as common sense".

It's just a version of communism, it doesn't work and its unpopular.

I don't really see the relevance of your reply here.

The Greens aren't dismissive of common sense/human nature like a student Trot is. They are accepting of it and what you see as a problem (non-work lifestyle choices) they see as a desirable goal as the income levels for their non-work lifestyle choices are not what most consider "comfortable". Therefore they are encouraging low consumption and low impact lifestyles - a major goal of Green policy.

Anyone who thinks equality of wealth is achievable or sustainable is dismissive or ignorant of common sense/ human nature

Citizen's Income has nothing to do with wealth equality.

Yes it does

No, it's not.

And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.

There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.

Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.

But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.

Could you explain this? Why would 100% be recoverable in tax?

It isn't 100% recoverable.

Cameron @ 8-1 was huge lol. But gone

Tissue_Price said:

Farage looks the obvious value there. Not so sure about the other market, though. Cameron @ 8/1? UKIP eating into both EM & DC's share, and Salmond a massive wild card...

Highest % vote share in their seat:

Salmond 5/6
Miliband 11/10
Cameron 8/1
Clegg 33/1
Farage 33/1

PS isam, tell your mate that he's very brave offering all of these...

I think Salmond is a worthy favourite there, although Cameron at 8/1 looks alright too.. would back both I guess

Love the UKIP candidate last time in Witney

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Tolstoy

Indigo said:

MarqueeMark said:

So basically, the coalition of the ungovernable. If UKIP got a 100 seat majority, it wouldn't take their voters five minutes to be raging in an inchoate manner about how poor the UKIP MPs were and how it wasn't this shit in the Good Old Days of Tory Governments.

A coalition of the ungovernable just won in Greece, fun times....

Due to the mistaken but widely held belief, and not just in Greece, that "they couldn't do any worse". There's always a way of things getting worse.

CarlottaVance said:

isam said:

saddened said:

isam said:

saddened said:

isam said:

TheWatcher said:

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Isam and MikeK etc
Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....

What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?

Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.

Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup

You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?

No but I suspect there may be a poster of Nigel with his arm around each of the expelled, imprisoned or de-selected kippers before the campaign is over.

So what?

You tell me, you seem to think Cameron's misguided picture with UKIP's latest disaster zone is a big deal.

ts the bloke she is with now that feels a wally

Do you think Amjad will ever be selected to stand as a Conservative MEP?

Couldn't care less

Indigo said:

Dair said:

But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.

That might be true, but the fact remains you gave a millionaire £71 that week, if he subsequently gave you back half of it through the tax system, the country is still down £35 or so a week, about £1800 a year, compared to if you didn't have the policy but had the same tax bands.

Anyone with an income returns 100% of it in tax. 100%. Demonstrably.

The Citizens Income is £3744 per annum.
The increase in tax on the first £10,500 of income is £3800.

100% recovery from tax on the first £10,500 in income.

Dair said:

isam said:

Dair said:

isam said:

Dair said:

No, it's not.

And this is demonstrable. The entire Citizen's Income is recovered in tax on the first £10,500 of income. This means there is NO redistributive effect of the policy. None at all, you are wrong.

There could be a redistributive effect if you set it at a higher level and changed tax rates. At £145 a week with a new tiered tax rate then it could balance people so no-one In Work earns below the Modal Income of £19,500 which is where I would focus Citizen's Income.

Of course the blunt hammer of a much more appropriate minimum wage would likely work better and be my preferred option.

But this isn't what the Greens are doing with Citizen's Income - they are using it to encourage low income, low aspiration, low impact non-work lifestyle choices.

The Greens are communist, and their policies are all geared to a society based on the end of wealth inequality.. its the only way their big ideas could work

You're making unsubstantiated claims which are completely unrelated to the proposal of the Citizen's Incomes as the greens want to establish it.

There is no redistributive impact.
There is no wage equality.

You can argue the Greens are "communists" in other areas if you want, there's not really much evidence and you've provided none at all so far but if you want to try you are free to do so.

But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.

Yeah yeah

What will be the top rate of tax when this £72 a week is given to top rate tax payers? And when will top rate kick in?

You were asked to explain why your assertion that "The Greens are just commies" had any basis in reality. You have so far failed to provide any argument or evidence to support the claim.

Now you change the subject. Not helping your case, just the consistent knee jerk reaction when people don't understand alternative policies.

I understand it ok... if you don't understand that people paying top rate tax will be much worse off REGARDLESS of the £72 a week, then I am not surprised you fell for it

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting market, my money is on Clegg and Salmond

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8ReXyiIEAAZE9a.png

Really?? Surely Farage is the bet?

I expect Farage to win Thanet South.

So which of the five don't you expect to win their seat? If you expect them all to, then it doesn't matter if you think Farage will win Thanet South

I think Farage is biggest in the betting to win his seat isn't he?

Havent done the research but on first look I'd rather be on Farage at 11/10

I expect them all to win their seats.

The bet is about who will get the lowest share of the vote regardless of winning or losing.

Yes I know, but saying

"I expect Farage to win Thanet South."

as justification for backing Clegg & Salmond implies you think him winning it has something to do with the bet.. it doesn't

So why is Clegg a better bet to win this market than Farage, despite being much shorter in the betting to win the seat?

Can I offer a side bet on vote percentage? Clegg vs Farage EVEN money, I'll take Clegg

Pulpstar said:

Cameron price has gone again.

I know what price I think it should be, and it's not 8/1, 7/1 or 6/1.

TGOHF said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

For those wot missed it yesterday:

https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/559681942908841984

Going by your graph - Kippers are missing a negative sign infront of the 1.5

Must be your imagination, the minus sign is there

Just to confirm:
Electoral LeaderBoard Of the Week 25/1:

Lab 32.9 (-0.3)
Con 32.0 (+0.3)
UKIP 14.5 (-1.5)
LD 7.9 (+0.7)
Grn 7.4 (+1.2)

Lab lead 0.9% (-0.7)

* Third lowest Labour weekly lead since August
* Greens outpoll last week's LD score (to their credit, LDs also up, but not by as much as the Greens)
* UKIP lose the ground they made up last week

Highest vote share could go either way between Miliband and Cameron IMO. I'd make Salmond a relatively distant third favourite.

Ishmael_X said:

CarlottaVance said:

isam said:

saddened said:

isam said:

saddened said:

isam said:

TheWatcher said:

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Isam and MikeK etc
Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....

What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?

Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.

Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup

You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?

No but I suspect there may be a poster of Nigel with his arm around each of the expelled, imprisoned or de-selected kippers before the campaign is over.

So what?

You tell me, you seem to think Cameron's misguided picture with UKIP's latest disaster zone is a big deal.

ts the bloke she is with now that feels a wally

Do you think Amjad will ever be selected to stand as a Conservative MEP?

You mean he isn't going to stand down for re-election like Carswell and Reckless?

You really aren't doing well at all. Take a break.

Oh dear...another one who doesn't understand how the European Parliament Election works.......

Go on - explain how a European Parliament bye-election works......

Indigo said:

Dair said:

Indigo said:

Dair said:

But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.

That might be true, but the fact remains you gave a millionaire £71 that week, if he subsequently gave you back half of it through the tax system, the country is still down £35 or so a week, about £1800 a year, compared to if you didn't have the policy but had the same tax bands.

Anyone with an income returns 100% of it in tax. 100%. Demonstrably.

The Citizens Income is £3744 per annum.
The increase in tax on the first £10,500 of income is £3800.

100% recovery from tax on the first £10,500 in income.

Obviously

But previously that £3800 would have been spent on Education or Health or whatever, and now it is being spent giving money to a millionaire.

If I'm understanding Dair correctly, he's saying that the introduction of the citizen's income would be coupled with a raise in tax on the first £10,500 which would even it out by the time you reached that much income. It's not really fair to consider the tax rise in isolation from the citizen's income if they're being sold as mutually interdependent policies.

Mr. F, it's when they praise Typhon you need to worry.

CarlottaVance said:

isam said:

saddened said:

isam said:

saddened said:

isam said:

TheWatcher said:

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Isam and MikeK etc
Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....

What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?

Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.

Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup

You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?

No but I suspect there may be a poster of Nigel with his arm around each of the expelled, imprisoned or de-selected kippers before the campaign is over.

So what?

You tell me, you seem to think Cameron's misguided picture with UKIP's latest disaster zone is a big deal.

ts the bloke she is with now that feels a wally

Do you think Amjad will ever be selected to stand as a Conservative MEP?

He already is one though! Sorry I forgot

Will he be deselected?

Indigo said:

MarqueeMark said:

Indigo said:

MarqueeMark said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

Socrates said:

Richard_Nabavi said:

isam said:

Winston MacKenzie seen leaving Downing St after "interesting meeting" with senior Conservatives

Please, no!

He's one we wouldn't mind getting rid of.

Odd then that he too had a speaking slot at the UKIP conference - another one of the top figures, clearly.

He has been got rid of hasn't he?

Isn't he still your candidate in Croydon?

http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/Winston-McKenzie-steps-branch-chairman-stand-Ukip/story-25887957-detail/story.html

It seems so!

Well let me say right now, I don't rate him either

It seems the shorter list might be those in your party you do rate....

Maybe, but previous scandals like this have shown that the kipper voter doesn't care, and after this they still wont care. They are not voting for policies, or politicians, they are voting because they are goddam pissed off.

UKIP are in essence the "inchoate rage vote", the "mad as hell and not going to take it any more" vote, the "had just about as much as I can stand of political correctness" vote, the "the country's going to the dogs" vote, they are pissed off and they want to stick it to the "parties of government", the Conservatives, the LDs and Labour. Bashir and Kerry Smith wont affect that in the slightest.

So basically, the coalition of the ungovernable. If UKIP got a 100 seat majority, it wouldn't take their voters five minutes to be raging in an inchoate manner about how poor the UKIP MPs were and how it wasn't this shit in the Good Old Days of Tory Governments.

A coalition of the ungovernable just won in Greece, fun times....

Let's see how long it takes for Buyers Remorse to set in there.....

Pulpstar said:

antifrank said:

Pulpstar said:

Cameron price has gone again.

I know what price I think it should be, and it's not 8/1, 7/1 or 6/1.

Well it ain't longer.

Cameron starts off with 58.8%, UKIP will eat into the Miliband vote MORE than in Dave's seat I think (UKIP are racking up decent numbers without threatening many seats here in South Yorkshire) and if Salmond wins Gordon with over 55% of the vote then all my Scottish bets should land anyway :P

Alex Salmond will do well to get over 50% of the vote in Gordon.

A recent Survation poll (not exactly the Conservatives' friendliest pollster) put David Cameron on 52.9% of the vote in Witney:

http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Full-Witney-Tables.pdf

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Interesting market, my money is on Clegg and Salmond

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B8ReXyiIEAAZE9a.png

Really?? Surely Farage is the bet?

I expect Farage to win Thanet South.

So which of the five don't you expect to win their seat? If you expect them all to, then it doesn't matter if you think Farage will win Thanet South

I think Farage is biggest in the betting to win his seat isn't he?

Havent done the research but on first look I'd rather be on Farage at 11/10

I expect them all to win their seats.

The bet is about who will get the lowest share of the vote regardless of winning or losing.

Yes I know, but saying

"I expect Farage to win Thanet South."

as justification for backing Clegg & Salmond implies you think him winning it has something to do with the bet.. it doesn't

So why is Clegg a better bet to win this market than Farage, despite being much shorter in the betting to win the seat?

Can I offer a side bet on vote percentage? Clegg vs Farage EVEN money, I'll take Clegg

Because I'm aware of private polling in the seats and betting based on that wouldn't be fair on you.

TheWatcher said:

Ishmael_X said:

CarlottaVance said:

isam said:

saddened said:

isam said:

saddened said:

isam said:

TheWatcher said:

isam said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Isam and MikeK etc
Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates? UKIP usually manages to lose half the MEPs elected under the UKIP banner during each parliament. A remarkable record. Lost to either the jail or expenses fraud or defections. Often they just resign in disgust at the folk they find themselves in bed with in the euro groupings. But if you do insist on writing on this issue as you have such a great interest, have you any advice for your party on how it can improve its woeful selection methods? Should UKIP ever join a Govt, the skill of being able to understand what good administration looks like is a benefit in dealing with our lamentable civil service....

What price he is ever pictured with Cameron again on Conservative media/literature?

Unlike UKIP & Farage , who clearly loved having his photo taken with Bashir.

Maybe so, just posing the question.. When the defection was announced there were pictures of Dave & Amjad all over the press, the Cons thought it a coup

You reckon Dave will ever have his pic done with Amjad again?

No but I suspect there may be a poster of Nigel with his arm around each of the expelled, imprisoned or de-selected kippers before the campaign is over.

So what?

You tell me, you seem to think Cameron's misguided picture with UKIP's latest disaster zone is a big deal.

ts the bloke she is with now that feels a wally

Do you think Amjad will ever be selected to stand as a Conservative MEP?

You mean he isn't going to stand down for re-election like Carswell and Reckless?

Remind me how MEP's stand down, and are re-elected.

He's really not having a good day.....first (was it first?) it was the Winston McKenzie Defection to the Tories, now its MEP stands down to fight European Parliament bye-election

Do you think we can lure him onto UKIP policy next?

Sunil_Prasannan said:

AndyJS said:

"Syriza forms government with rightwing Independent Greeks party

Radical leftists form government with populist rightwing party after less than an hour of coalition negotiations"

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/26/syriza-forms-government-rightwing-independent-greeks-party

Should be interesting!

Sounds like a recipe for stability... or maybe not.

isam said:

Dair said:

You were asked to explain why your assertion that "The Greens are just commies" had any basis in reality. You have so far failed to provide any argument or evidence to support the claim.

Now you change the subject. Not helping your case, just the consistent knee jerk reaction when people don't understand alternative policies.

I understand it ok... if you don't understand that people paying top rate tax will be much worse off REGARDLESS of the £72 a week, then I am not surprised you fell for it

The topic was the citizen's income, you're claiming its a "commie" policy, you still haven't backed that up. You're now changing the subject to claim the Greens in totalis are "commie" you still haven't backed that up.

Is the United States a commie state because top rate of Income Tax is 56%?

Indigo said:

Stereotomy said:

Indigo said:

Dair said:

Indigo said:

Dair said:

But the Citizen's Income is, demonstrably and with numbers, been shown not to be a "communist" policy. It's the opposite. It gives to all REGARDLESS of their need. And takes from (nearly) all REGARDLESS of their income.

That might be true, but the fact remains you gave a millionaire £71 that week, if he subsequently gave you back half of it through the tax system, the country is still down £35 or so a week, about £1800 a year, compared to if you didn't have the policy but had the same tax bands.

Anyone with an income returns 100% of it in tax. 100%. Demonstrably.

The Citizens Income is £3744 per annum.
The increase in tax on the first £10,500 of income is £3800.

100% recovery from tax on the first £10,500 in income.

Obviously

But previously that £3800 would have been spent on Education or Health or whatever, and now it is being spent giving money to a millionaire.

If I'm understanding Dair correctly, he's saying that the introduction of the citizen's income would be coupled with a raise in tax on the first £10,500 which would even it out by the time you reached that much income. It's not really fair to consider the tax rise in isolation from the citizen's income if they're being sold as mutually interdependent policies.

Indeed, hence my original rely was qualified by saying "compared to if you didn't have the policy but had the same tax bands." If they want to raise tax to pay for it thats something else, but its still raising tax to give money to millionaires, even if its their "own" tax, tax is still tax, it could still have been spent on something more socially useful.

I really don't think that's fair at all, because there's no reason (as far as I'm aware- correct me if I'm wrong) to think that they'd raise the tax in the same way if the citizen's income wasn't introduced. The policies are intrinsically coupled. You might think of it as choosing between two options:

Option 1.
-Raise tax on the lowest bound by X% (where X may be 0)
-No introduction of citizen's income

Option 2.
-Raise tax on lowest bound by X + Y% where Y is the amount needed to fully recover citizen's income by the time $10,500 income is reached
-Introduction of citizen's income

Between the two of them, it's clear that neither benefits millionaires in terms of more income after tax. Insisting on only thinking of the tax aspect without the citizen's income or vice-versa seems very disingenuous, especially because the whole point of the Y part of the tax raise is clearly just to make sure people above a certain income don't benefit after tax from the citizen's income.

DavidL said:

MarqueeMark said:

Ishmael_X said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Isam and MikeK etc
Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in UKIPs selection of MEP candidates?

Must you go on and on and on pointing out the deficiencies in CCHQ's selection of candidates for two hours of the Prime Minister's presumably valuable time?

Tory posters like Keynesians in a recession this morning.

I don't doubt that his former senior-player colleagues in UKIP are crapping themselves at what Mr. Bashir has told CCHQ. No wonder they have to trash his credibility....

Intel on the state of the party they have left is about the only use for defectors. Very few make any impact after they change sides. Nobody trusts them.

I think Churchill managed to have some impact.

He actually said 'Very few make any impact', thats 'very few'. Those that do have to be quite remarkable. Throughout the thirties Churchill was in 'the wilderness' and not trusted and not listened to.
Its quite understandable that no party likes to see its members defect and all parties feel quite smug when someone defects to them.
'That tory' Carswell who made a big thing about accepting immigrants and recognising their worth must be quite worried about people with immigrant backgrounds leaving UKIP.
I think we all know that when UKIP talk about immigrants its main target is coloured immigrants especially Pakistanis, and nothing to do with the EU. Kippers will howl and scream and deny, but we 'know' what the issue is with them. They are ploughing that furrow for all its worth and anyone who votes for them had better realise it. Carswell included.

isam said:

Dair said:

isam said:

Dair said:

You were asked to explain why your assertion that "The Greens are just commies" had any basis in reality. You have so far failed to provide any argument or evidence to support the claim.

Now you change the subject. Not helping your case, just the consistent knee jerk reaction when people don't understand alternative policies.

I understand it ok... if you don't understand that people paying top rate tax will be much worse off REGARDLESS of the £72 a week, then I am not surprised you fell for it

The topic was the citizen's income, you're claiming its a "commie" policy, you still haven't backed that up. You're now changing the subject to claim the Greens in totalis are "commie" you still haven't backed that up.

Is the United States a commie state because top rate of Income Tax is 56%?

I have backed it up.. the top rate of tax will go through the roof, the level at which it start will come down, there will be a "wealth tax" on anyone worth £3m.. the £72 a week will be like the money you used to get for taking empties back to the shop

So I have backed up and didn't change the subject

NEXT!

Your personal opinion without any supporting evidence is not backing up your point. It's just a stark reminder than any economic policy is viewed by most people dogmatically instead of scientifically.

The Greens will probably opt for non-optimal tax rates, higher than rates which would maximise income, and this is a valid criticism of the entire left wing where they view tax as a punishment rather than income generation. But the idea that this makes them "commies" isn't borne out by any evidence.

And the likelihood of Stupid Tax is pretty slim. Plenty of countries do perfectly acceptably with 60% marginal tax rates even if they could have more tax income at 45%ish. But the France debacle isn't going to be repeated by anyone any time soon.

CD13 said:

Dair,

I don't claim to be an economist, but if low-income is an aim of the Greens, that is easily achieved. We can argue about the means, but are you really saying you'd prefer low consumption of everything?.

Me personally, of course not. I quite like consumerist society. The arguments I'm putting forward here are that people are too dismissive of Green policy and this is based on inherent personal bias and no understanding at all of how the policy would actually work.

CD13 said:

Look at fuel and cigarettes - the best way to lower consumption is to ban it or make it very expensive, what other option do you think will work? And if low consumption is an overall aim to create a land of green fields and the happiness how would you prevent those nasty "consumers" spoiling things?

I don't see consumption as the problem, the Greens aren't consistent (never have been as far as I can tell apart from the "pay people for sterlisiation" Deep Greens.

There is, however, a fundamental, unaddressed problem with the Capitalist system which all the politicians choose to ignore - the consistent and inevitable Diminution of Wages

Trickle Down doesn't work. Thirty years of its failure have made things worse.
Minimum Wage is a blunt hammer, even the Australian Wage Commission model is quite unsubtle in the way it works.
Citizen Income COULD be a more subtle and effective way to address the problem by providing an OPTION to SOME of low impact, low consumption non-work lifestyle choice and reducing Labour supply therefore increasing wages.

Far left Greek politicians join with far right Greek politicians in coalition. Hardly a surprise.

malcolmg said:

CarlottaVance said:

Its not just Labour who are split in Scotland:

A bitter behind-the-scenes row between two leading nationalists about exploiting onshore gas has resulted in a complaint to the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, the Sunday Herald can reveal...

......The row comes as pressure mounts in the run-up to the UK general election for the SNP to make clear where it stands on unconventional gas and fracking. There are proposals at different stages in Scotland to mine coalbed methane, frack for shale gas and gasify coal under the sea.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/environment/msps-clash-over-shale-gas-sparks-complaint-to-sturgeon.116871742

Good to see they are not just kow towing to ministers, hopefully he got his collar felt. No time for prima donna's doing any sucking up to the gentry.

Gentry. If you want a communist government then vote SNP. No wonder labours lefty loonies are flocking to the SNP.