The Labour Government

[Gray]

Its an offence under the UN Refugee Convention to hinder (or punish) the safe passage of an asylum seeker (Article 31.1 IIRC) ...... This is why the French Police are struggling with the rules for puncturing the boats

But what if they are just coming for the hand-outs?

 

[Ifwecouldjust.......]

But what if they are just coming for the hand-outs?

Lowest welfare payments , sickness benefits and state pensions in Europe .... if they wanted handouts they could stop and claim asylum anywhere before the UK and be better off.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Lowest welfare payments , sickness benefits and state pensions in Europe .... if they wanted handouts they could stop and claim asylum anywhere before the UK and be better off.

Good point! Although I wonder if that is completely accurate? I can quite believe we are relatively ungenerous, but are we really the worst?

Worse than e.g. France I can understand, but worse than Albania, or Greece?

Anyway, I agree with your point in principle.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I would definitely go down the ID card route. Given the size of the UK black market economy these days, I suspect there is likely to be a bigger public uptake on the idea. Especially if it is brought in with a combined approach of crackling down on on illegal working.

Yes, I'd support that as well.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Neither, obviously. That you think they are the choices is a good example of the way we seemingly think about the issue and politics in general too as a society nowadays.

Everything’s going increasingly binary, which ironically is simultaneously having the effect of killing the two party system we’ve had for so long.

Of course the ideal answer is neither. But there was no neither option.

I posed the question because I think - unfortunately - it is the reality. Clearly (a) is not ideal, but equally clearly (b) is worse.

Even more unfortunately, there are those in the Labour Party who would prefer (b), fuelled by a deep resentment of people who are very rich. For example, preferring to take £300 WFA off someone on £11k a year than having to also give it to someone on £1m a year.

It's strange how these socialist tendencies don't seem to get much traction amongst football supporters when it comes to players' wages. I don't hear many saying "Couldn't we pay Haaland a bit less so we could pay the tea lady more".

 

[Chippy_boy]

its projected to cost £32bn and Farage hasn't said how he would fund it- He couldn't do it out of general taxation because it reduces the amount of tax paid. Fancy another Iceberg moment do you?

??? What a bizarre post.

"He couldn't do it out of general taxation because it reduces the amount of tax paid"???

I think perhaps you had a brain fart? Changing the basic rate from 20p to 25p would pay for Farage's commitment easily.

What iceberg?

 

[Gray]

I think we can all agree that these illegal crossings will be a very big issue at the next general election.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I think we can all agree that these illegal crossings will be a very big issue at the next general election.

Quite possibly the defining issue. If somehow Labour have managed to fix the issue, they may even get back in again. I think it could well be that important in terms of GE result.

 

[hampshireblue]

This got me thinking :

How would people on here feel about a £20k personal allowance and 25p basic income tax rate?

No-one earning less than £20k pays any tax at all.

Anyone earning under £30k takes home more than they do now.

Anyone earning over £30k pays a bit more. Only a tiny bit more obvs if you are earning say £35k. And the maximum extra anyone would have to pay is £1,000. And that's for someone on £50k a year.

I'd say that was pretty fair myself and I would vote for it. I would have to pay the £1k btw.

What do YOU think?

What happens to those over £50k-do you really suggest it should be limited to £1000 extra?

 

[bluethrunthru]

??? What a bizarre post.

"He couldn't do it out of general taxation because it reduces the amount of tax paid"???

I think perhaps you had a brain fart? Changing the basic rate from 20p to 25p would pay for Farage's commitment easily.

What iceberg?

You clearly haven't read nor understood the whole proposal from Farage - look at what his proposals for the top rate are - cutting tax receipts by billions for his mates hence the tax take would be massively down

Truss

 

[Chippy_boy]

What happens to those over £50k-is it really limited to £1000 extra?

Yes, because the 20p band finishes at incomes of circa £50k.

However, very embarrassingly, I have to confess I have cocked my numbers up! (That will teach me to do it in my head after a beer or two!) The reality is the break-even point would be much higher than £30k... nearer £50k in fact, which implies the 20p to 25p increase would not raise enough money. On the other hand the publicly available data suggests than 1p of basic rate income tax rise, generates about £6bn or £7bn in additional tax, but that's obviously reduced if the personal allowance goes up. I'd better go and hide ;-)

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

You clearly haven't read nor understood the whole proposal from Farage - look at what his proposals for the top rate are - cutting tax receipts by billions for his mates hence the tax take would be massively down

I suspect Farage and co are doing what most if not all politicians do when not in power. Promise the earth without any detail.

This is very similar if not the same as what Labour did before the last GE , infact all political parties do it.

Then if and when they get in, they conveniently forget many of their promises and do something different, like put up taxes, squeeze the welfare budget and scrap the winter fuel allowance ?

Nothing changes with politicians im affraid, they are all cut from very similar cloth when it comes to not being honest with the electorate.

There is also the small issue that all new Governments struggle with, it's much easier to be in opposition than to be in power.

You have to take everything they say in opposition with a pinch of salt.

 

[Chippy_boy]

You clearly haven't read nor understood the whole proposal from Farage - look at what his proposals for the top rate are - cutting tax receipts by billions for his mates hence the tax take would be massively down

Truss

To be fair, no, I haven't. I don't think his £20k personal allowance pledge is affordable without a hike in rates. But it's complex - putting more money in peoples' pockets mean they spend more and you get some back in increased VAT and stimulus to the economy generally - higher corporation tax etc. It would have to be carefully modelled - unlike my earlier ham-fisted attempt, LOL ;-)

 

[Chippy_boy]

I suspect Farage and co are doing what most if not all politicians do when not in power. Promise the earth without any detail.

This is very similar if not the same as what Labour did before the last GE , I fact all political parties do it.

Then if and when they get in they conveniently forget many of their promises and do something different, like put up taxes, squeeze the welfare budget, scrap the winter fuel allowance for example.

Nothing changes with politicians im affraid they are all cut from very similar cloth when it comes to not being honest with the electorate.

There is also the small issue that all new Governments struggle with, it's much easier to be in opposition than to be in power.

You have to take everything they say in opposition with a pinch of salt.

Probably why Labour actually said very little in their manifesto. They knew they would win anyway, so why make crazy promises they knew they would probably not be able to stick to.

With that in mind, I suspect Reeves bitterly regrets her promise not to raise income tax, employees NI or VAT. They would have won without such a restricting promise but having repeatedly made it, she is in quite a hole.

 

[meltonblue]

Of course the ideal answer is neither. But there was no neither option.

I posed the question because I think - unfortunately - it is the reality. Clearly (a) is not ideal, but equally clearly (b) is worse.

Even more unfortunately, there are those in the Labour Party who would prefer (b), fuelled by a deep resentment of people who are very rich. For example, preferring to take £300 WFA off someone on £11k a year than having to also give it to someone on £1m a year.

It's strange how these socialist tendencies don't seem to get much traction amongst football supporters when it comes to players' wages. I don't hear many saying "Couldn't we pay Haaland a bit less so we could pay the tea lady more".

I’m not sure that’s the best example to be fair, outside of those very embossed in current party politics, wanting to shrink the welfare state in a way like that is traditionally a conservative view, I certainly wouldn’t argue it as socialist.

 

[BigJoe#1]

I suspect Farage and co are doing what most if not all politicians do when not in power. Promise the earth without any detail.

This is very similar if not the same as what Labour did before the last GE , infact all political parties do it.

Then if and when they get in, they conveniently forget many of their promises and do something different, like put up taxes, squeeze the welfare budget and scrap the winter fuel allowance ?

Nothing changes with politicians im affraid, they are all cut from very similar cloth when it comes to not being honest with the electorate.

There is also the small issue that all new Governments struggle with, it's much easier to be in opposition than to be in power.

You have to take everything they say in opposition with a pinch of salt.

As both major parties do and have done to probably a lesser degree in the past.

There was a commentator that said the other day... The reason politicians struggle today as opposed to in the past is that whilst they've always been unpopular disliked but today, the volume of dislike and mistrust, courtesy of social media, is much louder and much more clear. Whereas in the past it was much easier to ignore, today it is not.

One of the few benefits of social media I guess?

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

As both major parties do and have done to probably a lesser degree in the past.

There was a commentator that said the other day... The reason politicians struggle today as opposed to in the past is that whilst they've always been unpopular disliked but today, the volume of dislike and mistrust, courtesy of social media, is much louder and much more clear. Whereas in the past it was much easier to ignore, today it is not.

One of the few benefits of social media I guess?

Is that a benefit? I'm not so sure.

 

[BigJoe#1]

Is that a benefit? I'm not so sure.

The fact that politicians can be exposed and called out is for me beneficial, else they keep on lying and burying bad news which cannot be good - can it?

 

[BobKowalski]

Is that a benefit? I'm not so sure.

I’m not sure either. The more polarised and factional politics becomes in a country then it becomes more difficult to build consensus and if there is no consensus across party lines then long term projects and objectives become impossible rather than difficult and the country slowly degrades.

Clean energy, high speed transport links, trade relations with Europe etc anything that requires cross party agreement is instead used as weapon to further individual political ambition and that ambition is elevated above what is good for the country.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Throwing Labour a bone here, I also think that the predicament we find ourselves in, is as challenging - if not more so - as it has ever been.

We have unsustainable levels of debt already; record high taxes which would likely hinder the economy not help it if raised further; an underperforming and under funded NHS; workers who feel they haven't had adequate pay increases for 10 years, on the brink of strikes; greater demands for defence spending; and immigration system out of control; stubborn inflation and resultingly high interest rates; pitiful/no growth; global headwinds with Presidents of both Russia and the US who are bonkers; a welfare bill that's completely unsustainable; and fewer people of working age, working than not.

It's completely fucked. I don't want to detract from this by getting into a "who's fault is that debate". As a conservative, even I blame to Tories in large part.

But we are where we are and god only knows what we can do to get out of this mess. I confess I am stumped. We can't cut taxes without risking a Truss style collapse; We can't borrow more; We can't raise taxes without spiralling down further, depressing growth even more.

As Sully said a few moments before impact: "Have you got any ideas"?