General Election June 8th

[Gaylord du Bois]

Quiet please. Bluemoons kangaroo court is now in session.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Like your gift of diverting attention away from your cock ups? I seem to recall the argument that the alleged "social democratic economic model" is commonplace everywhere else and it is only the UK that is so capitalist, right-wing and under-taxed.

Look, I'm not in the mood to piss on your chips. Comparing tax bands from countries as different as Peru, Denmark and Papua New Guinea is a waste of time. There are 11 countries that have no income tax at all! And others that use tax simply to supplement their rulers lavish lifestyle.

Country comparisons are worthless.

 

[The perfect fumble]

Like your gift of diverting attention away from your cock ups? I seem to recall the argument that the alleged "social democratic economic model" is commonplace everywhere else and it is only the UK that is so capitalist, right-wing and under-taxed.

You clearly don't get out much.

 

[Len Rum]

Tory immigration 'policy' already in tatters. Three statements made yesterday.
Policing Minister- down to tens of thousands by the end of next parliament.
Mavis - hinting but not committing to target by end of next parliament.
David Davis - can't make any promises.
Meanwhile in other news , 'in the know' and well connected 'Boy' George 'Ozzie' Osborne has already made it clear that Cabinet Ministers in private are disowning the policy ( sorry aim, or is it aspiration?).

 

[Chippy_boy]

The problem for the socialists is they are totally reliant on that 45% or more, what happens if those people go elsewhere? Who funds the system then?

Socialism does not work unless everyone participates and it seems the plan is to get only the rich to participate. Ask the poorer to pay more and there would be uproar, socialism however dictates that everyone contributes and inversely therefore shares in the rewards.

My guess is many people are not prepared to contribute which is why they are now asking the rich to instead, imagine if Labour announced a VAT rise or a rise in taxes on the middle classes to fund all of these fantasy land things. There would be utter uproar and that is why a social democratic state simply will never work.

I can tell you now that if bringing in Labour ever meant higher council tax or higher taxes which it will, people will soon change their tune.

Because it is the rich we are happy to shift that burden to them because it won't affect us and we will reap the benefits without putting anything back in but unfortunately it just does not work like that. It is inevitable that Labour's plans will not work out, the rich are best placed to divert their taxes away from here and suddenly the only people left to fund the merry-go-round is you and me.

Spot on again.

It's all I WANT, I WANT, I WANT, so long as someone else gets the bill.

This is what Nick Clegg had to say on it, last night:

The money needs to come from somewhere. There's no such thing as "free stuff". Money doesn't just appear out of thin air. Now, so the question is, how do you raise the taxes? I think the fundamental fallacy about the Labour Party's proposals is they are saying you can all have lots and lots of free stuff and only 5% of the tax paying population is going to pay for it. I can tell you, having spent 5 years pouring over the tax system in our country, the most difficult bit of the British economy to tax effectively is the top 5%, whether you like it or not. They move! This is what the institute of fiscal studies<said>, they change their behaviour, they relocate.

 

[mekonmcfc]

Spot on again.

It's all I WANT, I WANT, I WANT, so long as someone else gets the bill.

This is what Nick Clegg had to say on it, last night:

The money needs to come from somewhere. There's no such thing as "free stuff". Money doesn't just appear out of thin air. Now, so the question is, how do you raise the taxes? I think the fundamental fallacy about the Labour Party's proposals is they are saying you can all have lots and lots of free stuff and only 5% of the tax paying population is going to pay for it. I can tell you, having spent 5 years pouring over the tax system in our country, the most difficult bit of the British economy to tax effectively is the top 5%, whether you like it or not. They move! This is what the institute of fiscal studies<said>, they change their behaviour, they relocate.

so you're saying Labour will tax everyone and not just the rich ?

 

[Chippy_boy]

Look, I'm not in the mood to piss on your chips. Comparing tax bands from countries as different as Peru, Denmark and Papua New Guinea is a waste of time. There are 11 countries that have no income tax at all! And others that use tax simply to supplement their rulers lavish lifestyle.

Country comparisons are worthless.

So you say that the UK has low tax, and when I show you that it does not, you say that how the UK's tax compares to that of Germany, Spain, Italy, the US, Belgium, Holland, Hungary etc, is not worth considering.

That really is priceless and a new low for your already desperate arguments. I sense you are on an 8-count and staggering around the ring.

 

[Chippy_boy]

so you're saying Labour will tax everyone and not just the rich ?

I don't think they'll get in.

If they were to get in, I honestly don't know which form of "diabolical" would ensue. It could take a number of forms. What is clear is that their taxation plans would not raise anything like enough money, not by half.

So they could choose not deliver the majority of spending commitments they've made. Or they could push up borrowing and our debt much higher and abandon any hope of getting it under control in the next decade, with grave consequences for our credit rating and cost of borrowing. Or they could renege on their pledge not to increase taxes on the many.

They'd have to do one or more of the above. My suspicion is they would actually do all three. They'd probably try more stealth taxes, like increasing tax on airfares and other things and announce tax changes 1 year out so that when they are announced, people aren't so upset because its a year away, and when it actually comes in people have forgotten. They'd perhaps lower the 40% threshold. They'd run up debt, certainly. And probably have to bin the privatisation plans.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Tory immigration 'policy' already in tatters. Three statements made yesterday.
Policing Minister- down to tens of thousands by the end of next parliament.
Mavis - hinting but not committing to target by end of next parliament.
David Davis - can't make any promises.
Meanwhile in other news , 'in the know' and well connected 'Boy' George 'Ozzie' Osborne has already made it clear that Cabinet Ministers in private are disowning the policy ( sorry aim, or is it aspiration?).

On this I agree Len. It's an idiotic policy and repeating it in face of years of failure to achieve it is even more idiotic. This is for me, the worst run Conservative Party election campaign in my 57 year memory.

 

[CityStu]

so you're saying Labour will tax everyone and not just the rich ?

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.

 

[Chippy_boy]

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.

AND they'd borrow like mad and let debt spiral, AND not have sufficient funds to do most of the things they've committed to.

 

[vonkeynotvenky]

I don't think they'll get in.

If they were to get in, I honestly don't know which form of "diabolical" would ensue. It could take a number of forms. What is clear is that their taxation plans would not raise anything like enough money, not by half.

So they could choose not deliver the majority of spending commitments they've made. Or they could push up borrowing and our debt much higher and abandon any hope of getting it under control in the next decade, with grave consequences for our credit rating and cost of borrowing. Or they could renege on their pledge not to increase taxes on the many.

They'd have to do one or more of the above. My suspicion is they would actually do all three. They'd probably try more stealth taxes, like increasing tax on airfares and other things and announce tax changes 1 year out so that when they are announced, people aren't so upset because its a year away, and when it actually comes in people have forgotten. They'd perhaps lower the 40% threshold. They'd run up debt, certainly. And probably have to bin the privatisation plans.

We do know that manifestos don't have to be honoured and both the incumbent party and the party in waiting can be very economical with the truth. We're living in a political salesroom and every candidate has shiny teeth and a new lie to spin to get you to sign their HP agreement with no cooling off period.

 

[mekonmcfc]

AND they'd borrow like mad and let debt spiral, AND not have sufficient funds to do most of the things they've committed to.

Lets hope it never happens then !!!!

 

[tshirtman]

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.

 

[Magicpole]

AND they'd borrow like mad and let debt spiral, AND not have sufficient funds to do most of the things they've committed to.

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.

 

[The perfect fumble]

So how the UK's tax compares to that of Germany, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Holland, Hungary etc, is not worth considering.

That really is priceless and a new low for your already desperate arguments. I sense you are on an 8-count and staggering around the ring.

Income tax is but one tax amongst others, there is VAT and various sales tax, inheritance, stamp duty, fuel duty, taxes on fags and drink etc, etc, etc the list goes on. To begin to work out valid comparisons you have to calculate the mix, the effect this mixture of taxes has on the average man or woman in the street and how regressive these taxes are. It's possible to have a frontline low rate of income tax but a whole bunch of regressive taxes that hide the real tax burden. When you've done that you have to work out what that tax is spent on, the outcomes....Such as health, education, transport, police and so on and importantly what money is left after tax and how much is it worth? Say against a basket of groceries or to rent a flat, buy a house, fill the car.

When you have that kind of data you are in the suburbs of a meaningful comparison, go away and get that.

Otherwise leave me alone.

 

[Metal Biker]

Well, it's a good thing for you then that socialism isn't on offer in this election.

You should tell the youngsters that then on facebook and twitter, because that's the rhetoric they're using.

In my workplace they believe Corbyn is going to bring about socialism, too.

 

[The perfect fumble]

You should tell the youngsters that then on facebook and twitter, because that's the rhetoric they're using.

In my workplace they believe Corbyn is going to bring about socialism, too.

They're going to be disappointed on two counts.

 

[willipp]

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.

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

 

[Chippy_boy]

Income tax is but one tax amongst others, there is VAT and various sales tax, inheritance, stamp duty, fuel duty, taxes on fags and drink etc, etc, etc the list goes on. To begin to work out valid comparisons you have to calculate the mix, the effect this mixture of taxes has on the average man or woman in the street and how regressive these taxes are. It's possible to have a frontline low rate of income tax but a whole bunch of regressive taxes that hide the real tax burden. When you've done that you have to work out what that tax is spent on, the outcomes....Such as health, education, transport, police and so on and importantly what money is left after tax and how much is it worth? Say against a basket of groceries or to rent a flat, buy a house, fill the car.

When you have that kind of data you are in the suburbs of a meaningful comparison, go away and get that.

Otherwise leave me alone.

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.