Has anyone ever changed who they vote for by debating on blue moon?

  • Thread starter Thread starter worsleyweb
  • Start date Start date
W W

worsleyweb

Guest
I will start - no.

Although for 0.0001 second I was convinced once by one of fumbles arguments.
 
It’s hard to tell. As someone who has voted for all 3 major parties since 2015 (including Euro elections) and up until 2016 didn’t have a clue about the EU, so changed my mind x amount of times before eventually bottling it and just choosing remain as the status quo, I think I must have been influenced by being on here.

It’s mostly because information is often shared and it’s a good place to get regular updates if you cannot stomach Twitter, as opposed to a specific member changing my mind.

Every aspect of our lives changes our opinion and being on here is just one of many areas in which it can and will happen.
 
Probably not as far as that because I like to think most of my views are pretty reasonable already but I've definitely had some of my views weakened/strengthened by reading certain posts over the years.
 
Not because of posts on here but Ian Austin has convinced me to vote Tory........Nnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooooootttttttttttttttt
 
I'm slightly left of centre socially and slightly right of centre economically.... and most of the arguments on here from the socialist brigade convince me that austerity will be back with a bang within 2 years if Labour get anywhere near power.
There is no such thing as a free lunch.
 
Last edited:
I must have changed my mind at some point because I appear to be on the same side as @Chippy_boy these days and never thought that would happen. Can't recall the moment exactly, was it the merits of low taxation that Chippy enthuses for, or @worsleyweb's devotion for home ownership, or the frontal lobotomy.

Who knows?
 
TheRemainsOfTheDave said:
I must have changed my mind at some point because I appear to be on the same side as @Chippy_boy these days and never thought that would happen. Can't recall the moment exactly, was it the merits of low taxation that Chippy enthuses for, or @worsleyweb's devotion for home ownership, or the frontal lobotomy.

Who knows?
Click to expand...
Just an aside mate, I don't enthuse for low taxation in particular.

I just don't want punitively high levels, and I want the burden to be more evenly spread, not very disproportionately loaded onto people who happen to have been successful. I resent this Labour line of "the rich must pay their fare share", with the implication that they are not. The top rate (inc NI) is 47% already, and anyone on PAYE has no choice other than to pay it. How Labour can argue that this is not a fare share, I do not understand.

Out of the top 150 countries, our top rate is already 16th highest. The EU average is 38%. Europe average 31%. US 37%. We are 47% already. Pushing it to 52% would put us to 6th out of the 150, with only Sweden, Japan, Denmark, Austria and Finland with higher rates.

In corporate tax, our rates are currently low(ish) but the scope of what is taxed is much broader than elsewhere. In France for example, although the headline rate is much higher (28% vs our 19%) they get a rebate of 7% of their payroll cost. And they get exceptions for R&D expenditure and more generous capital allowances. The net effect is that the amount of tax we collect, is mid-table compared to other EU countries, even though our rate is lower. Labour's changes would put the UK at the top. Combine that with our lower productivity than other EU countries, and that slaps a dirty great big "Investors Not Welcome Here" sign right across the UK.

Moreover, our bottom rate of tax (20%) is extremely low compared to other EU countries, especially those which are more "socialist" and the sorts of economies which we are repeatedly reminded by Labour we should aspire to me more like - for example in the Nordics. (I exclude Norway because of their enormous oil and gas revenues - more per capita than Saudi Arabia). The lowest tax rate in Denmark is 36%. The lowest rate in Sweden is 32%. etc.

Nowhere else is the government trying to impose 50%+ taxes on the better off, whilst taxing the less well off at only 20%. Labour is seeking to make the UK more punitive against the better off than any other state. It is that principally which I object to. If we want much more money spent on public services then people - most people, not a select few - must pay more money. Let's just be honest about it and see if people want to vote for that.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Just an aside mate, I don't enthuse for low taxation in particular.

I just don't want punitively high levels, and I want the burden to be more evenly spread, not very disproportionately loaded onto people who happen to have been successful. I resent this Labour line of "the rich must pay their fare share", with the implication that they are not. The top rate (inc NI) is 47% already, and anyone on PAYE has no choice other than to pay it. How Labour can argue that this is not a fare share, I do not understand.

Out of the top 150 countries, our top rate is already 16th highest. The EU average is 38%. Europe average 31%. US 37%. We are 47% already. Pushing it to 52% would put us to 6th out of the 150, with only Sweden, Japan, Denmark, Austria and Finland with higher rates.

In corporate tax, our rates are currently low(ish) but the scope of what is taxed is much broader than elsewhere. In France for example, although the headline rate is much higher (28% vs our 19%) they get a rebate of 7% of their payroll cost. And they get exceptions for R&D expenditure and more generous capital allowances. The net effect is that the amount of tax we collect, is mid-table compared to other EU countries, even though our rate is lower. Labour's changes would put the UK at the top. Combine that with our lower productivity than other EU countries, and that slaps a dirty great big "Investors Not Welcome Here" sign right across the UK.

Moreover, our bottom rate of tax (20%) is extremely low compared to other EU countries, especially those which are more "socialist" and the sorts of economies which we are repeatedly reminded by Labour we should aspire to me more like - for example in the Nordics. (I exclude Norway because of their enormous oil and gas revenues - more per capita than Saudi Arabia). The lowest tax rate in Denmark is 36%. The lowest rate in Sweden is 32%. etc.

Nowhere else is the government trying to impose 50%+ taxes on the better off, whilst taxing the less well off at only 20%. Labour is seeking to make the UK more punitive against the better off than any other state. It is that principally which I object to. If we want much more money spent on public services then people - most people, not a select few - must pay more money. Let's just be honest about it and see if people want to vote for that.
Click to expand...
Well that killed my joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top