Tories - Lying about Labour's tax plans.
Discussion
Shock horror, Tory claims that Labour will cost everyone £3k was a "guess", I'd say that's another for a lie, really.
www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
MarshPhantom said:
Shock horror, Tory claims that Labour will cost everyone £3k was a "guess", I'd say that's another for a lie, really.
www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
Its an estimate! And to be fair it's the only explanation for the Labour claims about 'removing the deficit', as they refuse to explain where else the money magically appears from?www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
(Unless of course the banker's bonus tax really will bring in eleventy trillion pounds....)
sidicks said:
MarshPhantom said:
Shock horror, Tory claims that Labour will cost everyone £3k was a "guess", I'd say that's another for a lie, really.
www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
Its an estimate! And to be fair it's the only explanation for the Labour claims about 'removing the deficit', as they refuse to explain where else the money magically appears from?www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
(Unless of course the banker's bonus tax really will bring in eleventy trillion pounds....)
MarshPhantom said:
Shock horror, Tory claims that Labour will cost everyone £3k was a "guess", I'd say that's another for a lie, really.
www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
The only thing that I know is that every Labour government, since 1945, has left office with higher unemployment than when they took office.www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
They are clearly the party of the "non-working" man.
don4l said:
MarshPhantom said:
Shock horror, Tory claims that Labour will cost everyone £3k was a "guess", I'd say that's another for a lie, really.
www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
The only thing that I know is that every Labour government, since 1945, has left office with higher unemployment than when they took office.www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
They are clearly the party of the "non-working" man.
MarshPhantom said:
Shock horror, Tory claims that Labour will cost everyone £3k was a "guess", I'd say that's another for a lie, really.
www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
Shock,horror, Op is outraged that a political party is making unfounded claims about another parties alleged plans.www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
There all a bunch of fairy story tellers anyway, it's just a question of who spins the most magical tales.
MarshPhantom said:
Shock horror, Tory claims that Labour will cost everyone £3k was a "guess", I'd say that's another for a lie, really.
www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
No more or less a lie than Labour's VAT increase claim.www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2015/mar/30/elec...
Surely OP and the Guardian is missing the point.
I think its actually a very shrewd move - why? If its wrong Labour will come out and state what the real position is if not they keep quiet.
Torys forcing Labour to show their hand - guardian totally missing the point & also if they do believe not 100% true why omit the Labour omission on the exact same day?
Odd.
I think its actually a very shrewd move - why? If its wrong Labour will come out and state what the real position is if not they keep quiet.
Torys forcing Labour to show their hand - guardian totally missing the point & also if they do believe not 100% true why omit the Labour omission on the exact same day?
Odd.
To be fair (and I speak as someone intending to vote Tory): the claim had worse aspects than being an estimate. In particular they used what I believe is an underhand trick or rolling up the cost over several (4) years into one number so that everyone assumed it was the amount in one year. They aren't they first to do this (nor is it the first time they have done) it. I think I can remember Labour and UKIP doing something similar. I don't remember Lib Dems or Greens doing it, but who pays attention to what they say anyway?
And NicD
Every govt since 1945 of every party has left office with unemployment higher than when they first took power
Though there is of course a risk that this govt breaks the pattern in a big way with unemployment well down on when they took over and the polls looking very iffy
And NicD
Every govt since 1945 of every party has left office with unemployment higher than when they first took power
Though there is of course a risk that this govt breaks the pattern in a big way with unemployment well down on when they took over and the polls looking very iffy
JustAnotherLogin said:
To be fair (and I speak as someone intending to vote Tory): the claim had worse aspects than being an estimate. In particular they used what I believe is an underhand trick or rolling up the cost over several (4) years into one number so that everyone assumed it was the amount in one year. They aren't they first to do this (nor is it the first time they have done) it. I think I can remember Labour and UKIP doing something similar. I don't remember Lib Dems or Greens doing it, but who pays attention to what they say anyway?
And NicD
Every govt since 1945 of every party has left office with unemployment higher than when they first took power
Though there is of course a risk that this govt breaks the pattern in a big way with unemployment well down on when they took over and the polls looking very iffy
Its that absolute number of unemployed or the % unemployed of the workforce - the latter should be the only one used to eliminate population growth. And NicD
Every govt since 1945 of every party has left office with unemployment higher than when they first took power
Though there is of course a risk that this govt breaks the pattern in a big way with unemployment well down on when they took over and the polls looking very iffy
Welshbeef said:
JustAnotherLogin said:
To be fair (and I speak as someone intending to vote Tory): the claim had worse aspects than being an estimate. In particular they used what I believe is an underhand trick or rolling up the cost over several (4) years into one number so that everyone assumed it was the amount in one year. They aren't they first to do this (nor is it the first time they have done) it. I think I can remember Labour and UKIP doing something similar. I don't remember Lib Dems or Greens doing it, but who pays attention to what they say anyway?
And NicD
Every govt since 1945 of every party has left office with unemployment higher than when they first took power
Though there is of course a risk that this govt breaks the pattern in a big way with unemployment well down on when they took over and the polls looking very iffy
Its that absolute number of unemployed or the % unemployed of the workforce - the latter should be the only one used to eliminate population growth. And NicD
Every govt since 1945 of every party has left office with unemployment higher than when they first took power
Though there is of course a risk that this govt breaks the pattern in a big way with unemployment well down on when they took over and the polls looking very iffy
Fallen from approx 8% to 5.7% under this govt
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/une...
Big fall really
MarshPhantom said:
What does that have to do with this exactly?
Possibly that their very name is now in fact a lie? Their core vote does not labour that's for bloody sure.If Millibland and BallsUp could offer a half way reasonable explanation of their deficit reduction plans, no VAT increase, no NI, no Income Tax, remember these?, then perhaps George could offer a reasonably more accurate assessment of where they're proposing to pay for things.
I wouldn't hold your breath.
They were incompetent under bliar and now the glorious leader looks out of place in a lower sixth debating society. Back stabbing little st that he clearly is.
ellroy said:
Possibly that their very name is now in fact a lie? Their core vote does not labour that's for bloody sure.
If Millibland and BallsUp could offer a half way reasonable explanation of their deficit reduction plans, no VAT increase, no NI, no Income Tax, remember these?, then perhaps George could offer a reasonably more accurate assessment of where they're proposing to pay for things.
I wouldn't hold your breath.
They were incompetent under bliar and now the glorious leader looks out of place in a lower sixth debating society. Back stabbing little st that he clearly is.
Exactly - and to add over the last 12-18 months Ballsup now and again has been comin up with ideas which if they deliver save at most £400m OVER a parliment. Each time the interviewer days well great now what about the £84.6billion you need to save what's the plan? If Millibland and BallsUp could offer a half way reasonable explanation of their deficit reduction plans, no VAT increase, no NI, no Income Tax, remember these?, then perhaps George could offer a reasonably more accurate assessment of where they're proposing to pay for things.
I wouldn't hold your breath.
They were incompetent under bliar and now the glorious leader looks out of place in a lower sixth debating society. Back stabbing little st that he clearly is.
Answer better economic growth will deliver it... Um that means its irrelevant who's in power as if Labour did win they would be rolling for 2+ years with the work this govt is doing/has achieved.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff