General Election June 8th

[Machiavelli]

Surely not, reading this thread you would think the defecit had been wiped out and the economy was thriving.

I thought that was decided by how many cranes you can count in town?

 

[Blue Til Death]

Tories will win by 100+ seats, then they will carry on sorting the country out, just like they always do, a labour government would be an utter disaster for this country...
Unfunded empty promises which can only be delivered by bankrupting the country.. Dianne Abbot as home secretary should be enough to prevent even the most rabid laborite putting a cross in their box, let alone the mealy mouthed Corbyn being the PM....

 

[The perfect fumble]

I think it would have been a lot more honest and noble of you to just say, "OK fair point", instead of all that crap.

It's a long time since I've come across someone as naive as you.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Are you forgetting the Tories have racked up more debt that any labour gov ever?

You are aware of that I hope?

They are a disaster.

Last time I responded to a post like this, I got banned, so I will have to choose my words more carefully. I questioned whether the previous poster was dense, and I am sure you are not.

You must surely realise that if you have a deficit, then your debt rises every year?

10 in debt + 5 more = 15
15 + 3 more = 18
18 + 2 more = 20

The debt is rising because of the deficit. You do understand this, don't you? And therefore by definition, when a government comes into power and inherits a high deficit, then the debt increases every year. This is because of the deficit.

Which government caused the deficit? The Labour one. It was £170bn when the Tories took over. Which government is therefore responsible for the rising debt? The Labour one.

I genuinely don't know if some people just fail to understand this, or whether they seek to deceive others.

 

[Chippy_boy]

It's a long time since I've come across someone as naive as you.

Naive enough to expect you might actually admit you were wrong, or even to admit that someone who disagrees with you makes a fair point? Yes, I guess that is naive.

 

[inbetween]

Labour will try to tax the rich. The rich will move or avoid the tax (as paying to do so will be cheaper than their new tax rate) and we'll end up taking less in tax from them. Because we're now bring in less tax (despite the higher rates - fancy that?!), they'll have to increase the taxes on the next most rich, and so on and so on, until the people they're hitting with increases have no means to not pay it.

You are bang on.

The last VAT tax rise was by the coalition government because it was necessary. This was at a time when corporation tax was where Labour plan to take it back up to AND the 50p rate was in place. How they can rule out tax rises for everyone whilst going on this spending spree when just 6 years ago we could not even afford to stop VAT going up. It is inevitable they will not raise the money because it we weren't raising enough money half a decade ago we won't now either.

I watched Question Time last night and Barry Gardiner said they have costed to raise £45bn, Mcdonnell last week said they will need £250bn over the lifetime of the Parliament. It is utter madness to think in that time the tax income will balance spending. This is also forgetting completely about any potential after effects of Brexit.

And what about the deficit as well which still stands at tens of billions in the minus, they have said nothing how they plan to bring it down, total lunacy.

 

[Stuuuuuu]

Last time I responded to a post like this, I got banned, so I will have to choose my words more carefully. I questioned whether the previous poster was dense, and I am sure you are not.

You must surely realise that if you have a deficit, then your debt rises every year?

10 in debt + 5 more = 15
15 + 3 more = 18
18 + 2 more = 20

The debt is rising because of the deficit. You do understand this, don't you? And therefore by definition, when a government comes into power and inherits a high deficit, then the debt increases every year. This is because of the deficit.

Which government caused the deficit? The Labour one. It was £170bn when the Tories took over. Which government is therefore responsible for the rising debt? The Labour one.

I genuinely don't know if some people just fail to understand this, or whether they seek to deceive others.

OK, but what are your feelings on the Tories' assertion that they would reduce it last time around?

 

[Stuuuuuu]

Tories will win by 100+ seats, then they will carry on sorting the country out, just like they always do...

In what ways have they been sorting the country out over the last seven years? What progress have they made?

 

[inbetween]

OK, but what are your feelings on the Tories' assertion that they would reduce it last time around?

The deficit is not reducing no but the rate at which we add to it is reducing under the Tories. At some point that rate will = 0 and the deficit total will begin to reduce.

Labour have no plans to address it because it is inevitable they will add to it.

 

[SWP's back]

Because he didn't list them doesn't mean they don't exist. They do.

No, he says you don't need empirical facts when you can use your eyes.

Very scientific.

 

[SWP's back]

Quiet please. Bluemoons kangaroo court is now in session.

It's the neighbour. He looks shifty. Hang him.

(Good enough?)

 

[Chippy_boy]

OK, but what are your feelings on the Tories' assertion that they would reduce it last time around?

Reduce the deficit? Or reduce the debt?

They have reduced the deficit, very substantially, down to I believe about 1/4 of what it was when they took over (don't have the figures to hand but I think it's about that.) They had hoped to eliminate it of course, but as I've said in a previous post, running a country is far from easy and you have lots of conflicting challenges and objectives.

To get rid of the deficit, you need to raise tax revenue of course and/or reduce public spending, i.e. cuts. But raising taxes, depresses the economy - it takes spending money off people so they don't have it to spend in shops etc. What you really want is growth, and that's best achieved by keeping taxes low. And cuts are very painful - no-one likes to see an underfunded local hospital or school or police force. So you can only cut so much. Labour say the Tories have cut far too much. Had they cut less, the deficit would be higher than it is now, and the debt higher still.

So getting rid of the deficit is hard, and that's why its taking so long. And until its gone, the debt rises.

 

[SWP's back]

There are 11 countries that have no income tax at all!

Woop woop :-)

 

[The perfect fumble]

Naive enough to expect you might actually admit you were wrong, or even to admit that someone who disagrees with you makes a fair point? Yes, I guess that is naive.

You don't have the wherewithal to understand what's going on.

Do you even understand my replies?

 

[SWP's back]

I see Teresa May has gone hiding again, all other European leaders have sent letters of concern to Trump regarding the Paris accord,
May says nothing!

Anyone who thinks this weak and feeble woman can get a good Brexit deal are deluded.

You're a bit late on that. Try up to date news. It took her six hours (whilst she was more than likely asleep).

 

[SWP's back]

Surely not, reading this thread you would think the defecit had been wiped out and the economy was thriving.

So you don't want cuts but you want the deficit reducing faster.

Great stuff.

 

[Chippy_boy]

You are bang on.

The last VAT tax rise was by the coalition government because it was necessary. This was at a time when corporation tax was where Labour plan to take it back up to AND the 50p rate was in place. How they can rule out tax rises for everyone whilst going on this spending spree when just 6 years ago we could not even afford to stop VAT going up. It is inevitable they will not raise the money because it we weren't raising enough money half a decade ago we won't now either.

I watched Question Time last night and Barry Gardiner said they have costed to raise £45bn, Mcdonnell last week said they will need £250bn over the lifetime of the Parliament. It is utter madness to think in that time the tax income will balance spending. This is also forgetting completely about any potential after effects of Brexit.

And what about the deficit as well which still stands at tens of billions in the minus, they have said nothing how they plan to bring it down, total lunacy.

Not to mention the pure insanity of proposing to unilaterally raise the rate of corporation tax, right in the middle of the Brexit process, when businesses are rethinking their 5, 10, 15 year plans about where to build plant and base their operations as a result of us leaving the EU.

Even IF raising corporation tax was a good idea (and it isn't) the timing is terrible. Any foreign company thinking about leaving will be given just the bit of extra incentive they need to up sticks and take the jobs abroad.

It's a perfectly potty policy from the potty party.

 

[Chippy_boy]

This is what the proposed corporation tax changes would achieve (from Full fact):

Claim: "No Labour government has ever left office with unemployment lower than when it started, despite the name of the party."

Fullfact: While the figures we do have back up the claim, some Conservative governments have also left office with higher unemployment

 

[Chippy_boy]

You don't have the wherewithal to understand what's going on.

Do you even understand my replies?

I understand your pig-headedness fully. And I don't need to stoop to insulting you about your lack of intelligence. And I also understand why you cling to this idea that the rich must be punished, since were you to accept that their tax burden is already reasonable, you would simultaneously have to accept that Labour's spending plans are bollocks.

So you are stuck, trying to defend an indefensible argument, thrashing around like a landed cod waiting for the fishermans mallet.

 

[willipp]

So you don't want cuts but you want the deficit reducing faster.

Great stuff.

That isn't particularly what i thought, just frustrating in this thread to see between the bull and actual information to try and help make an informed decision on who to vote for.