Discussion
crankedup said:
His job is to represent the M.O.P. that elected him and the wider group that voted Labour. That is what Democracy is all about! By using questions directly from his 'supporters' this is a positive move forward imo. He clearly selects pertinent questions. When he uses the MOP name he also mentions the number of people who have emailed in. For me its so much better than the old Tory method, so many planted questions from the PM's backbenchers it makes me question as to whether these MP's have constituents at all.
Reading through old posts on this forum makes it clear that D.C. has hammered the middle upper classes regards taxation, and yet we never hear of the Tory backbencher raising this issue in Parliament.
I'm not a J.C. supporter but I do wish to see his political style develop and hope it continues.
So you think there actually is a Matthew who emailed Jeremy Corbyn with a seemingly perfect question from the hundreds of others that could be read out in PMQs? Reading through old posts on this forum makes it clear that D.C. has hammered the middle upper classes regards taxation, and yet we never hear of the Tory backbencher raising this issue in Parliament.
I'm not a J.C. supporter but I do wish to see his political style develop and hope it continues.
Gargamel said:
crankedup said:
Ah! real World Social problems are not important enough then? Housing in crisis, under achievers will lose the state 'leg-up'. Yup, hardly matters 
Surely the "state leg up" should be the £11,000 tax free income they have. Not charging them tax on one hand, and then "crediting" some back as a depedency. Tax credits were around £1bn in the year they were introduced. This year they will cost taxpayers £31bn.
Did anyone actually starve back before they were introduced in 2003?
In any event, I think I broadly agree they are a subsidy to large employers trying to avoid paying living wages.
k me... We need to stop this utterly pointless, expensive and wasteful exercise of taking money from people in taxes only to give it back to them as 'tax credits' or 'low income top-up' minus the (huge) cost of the public sector people to process all this stuff.Osborne has it right I think (and as I understand it):
- upping the tax-free allowance to let people keep more of the money they earn which means...
- ...you don't need to give it back to them as 'credits'
- reduce corp. tax going forward to offset companies having to pay 'living wages' which means...
- ...you don't have to subsidise low wages (effectively bankrolling businesses) through taxpayer-funded credits
I'm sure cleverer people than me have run the numbers but I'm sure the drop in taxes received vs. taxes paid back out as credits stacks up, plus you can remove entire layers and departments of bureaucracy...
Gargamel said:
Well it is so far so predictable for Corbyn, his rebel roots have left him unable to control a hugely divided Labour Party. Last nights vote on the Bill to prevent Governments running a budget deficit, was a shambles - and the debate about the merits of the bill has been completely lost in the reporting of the Labour leadership crisis.
Osborne set a (reasonably obvious) trap and Corbyn and McDonnell spotted it, asked the Labour Conference to support them not opposing the bill, and then later they realised that Osborne would be claiming a significant victory in economic and politic terms, so they changed to oppose it, and failed to carry 37 of their MPs with them.
Plus Corbyn failed to use the whip effectively at the first signs of trouble. I notice that the junior labour party members referred to the bill as "Tory cuts charter" if that is the quality of the debate they should be ashamed of themselves.
An absolute fiasco and the slow motion train wreck that is the Labour party under Corbyn rumbles on.
A fair summary, I think. Osborne set a (reasonably obvious) trap and Corbyn and McDonnell spotted it, asked the Labour Conference to support them not opposing the bill, and then later they realised that Osborne would be claiming a significant victory in economic and politic terms, so they changed to oppose it, and failed to carry 37 of their MPs with them.
Plus Corbyn failed to use the whip effectively at the first signs of trouble. I notice that the junior labour party members referred to the bill as "Tory cuts charter" if that is the quality of the debate they should be ashamed of themselves.
An absolute fiasco and the slow motion train wreck that is the Labour party under Corbyn rumbles on.
W124 said:
...
On another note. PH does confuse me a bit sometimes. It's a bit sixth form common room now and again. It is possible for those of opposite political persuasion to be right occasionally. We are in real danger of drifting down the ghastly US route of totally binary politics. It's not true that all Socialists are greedy and envious and want to drag the successful down and milk them for every penny. Nor is it true that all conservatives are selfish, careless bds. Careful what you wish for.
We should post this up at the door of every thread in N,P&E.On another note. PH does confuse me a bit sometimes. It's a bit sixth form common room now and again. It is possible for those of opposite political persuasion to be right occasionally. We are in real danger of drifting down the ghastly US route of totally binary politics. It's not true that all Socialists are greedy and envious and want to drag the successful down and milk them for every penny. Nor is it true that all conservatives are selfish, careless b
ds. Careful what you wish for. Breadvan72 said:
W124 said:
...
On another note. PH does confuse me a bit sometimes. It's a bit sixth form common room now and again. It is possible for those of opposite political persuasion to be right occasionally. We are in real danger of drifting down the ghastly US route of totally binary politics. It's not true that all Socialists are greedy and envious and want to drag the successful down and milk them for every penny. Nor is it true that all conservatives are selfish, careless bds. Careful what you wish for.
We should post this up at the door of every thread in N,P&E.On another note. PH does confuse me a bit sometimes. It's a bit sixth form common room now and again. It is possible for those of opposite political persuasion to be right occasionally. We are in real danger of drifting down the ghastly US route of totally binary politics. It's not true that all Socialists are greedy and envious and want to drag the successful down and milk them for every penny. Nor is it true that all conservatives are selfish, careless b
ds. Careful what you wish for. (Sorry I just couldn't help myself)
Wierdly JC does have some good points about inequality, it is his solutions I can't agree with.
crankedup said:
Housing in crisis...
Crisis crisis crisis!Why is every socieltal problem, whether great or small, referred to by the Left as a "crisis"? Take your pick from housing/homelessness/NHS/pensions/unemployment/fuel poverty/you-name-it, it's in perpetual crisis.
And why does the solution always appears to be more state intervention and "an end to vicious Tory austerity"?
Do these people not realise the overuse and abuse of such stock words has led to their diminution, or that the greater population have become fatigued of such hackneyed phrases?
Gargamel said:
Breadvan72 said:
W124 said:
...
On another note. PH does confuse me a bit sometimes. It's a bit sixth form common room now and again. It is possible for those of opposite political persuasion to be right occasionally. We are in real danger of drifting down the ghastly US route of totally binary politics. It's not true that all Socialists are greedy and envious and want to drag the successful down and milk them for every penny. Nor is it true that all conservatives are selfish, careless bds. Careful what you wish for.
We should post this up at the door of every thread in N,P&E.On another note. PH does confuse me a bit sometimes. It's a bit sixth form common room now and again. It is possible for those of opposite political persuasion to be right occasionally. We are in real danger of drifting down the ghastly US route of totally binary politics. It's not true that all Socialists are greedy and envious and want to drag the successful down and milk them for every penny. Nor is it true that all conservatives are selfish, careless b
ds. Careful what you wish for. (Sorry I just couldn't help myself)
Wierdly JC does have some good points about inequality, it is his solutions I can't agree with.
JC buries a few good ideas in among all his claptrap, but he is still dire overall. Cameron and Osborne have some good ideas too, in amongst some stuff that I regard as a bit dodgy.
Gargamel said:
crankedup said:
Ah! real World Social problems are not important enough then? Housing in crisis, under achievers will lose the state 'leg-up'. Yup, hardly matters
Surely the "state leg up" should be the £11,000 tax free income they have. Not charging them tax on one hand, and then "crediting" some back as a depedency. Tax credits were around £1bn in the year they were introduced. This year they will cost taxpayers £31bn.
Did anyone actually starve back before they were introduced in 2003?
In any event, I think I broadly agree they are a subsidy to large employers trying to avoid paying living wages.
Agree, some employers are being subsidised by the tax payer, a long running source of irritation for me.
Nobody, so far as I know, has actually starved to death since 2003, anybody who may have cannot blame Government or various charities. In the 3rd or 4th richest economy so nobody should.
The tax allowance is too broad-brush in identifying the truly poorer working people. Those on MW with high transport cost for example. Tax allowance is very valuable of course but not the full answer perhaps.
Yup, we largely do agree with just a few 'around the edges' differences.
Gargamel said:
Andy Zarse said:
"an end to vicious Tory austerity"?
Do they not realise, more people employed than ever before, deflationary pricing, lowest interest rates, rising wages and longer lives. Literally never had it so good !
andy-xr said:
crankedup said:
His job is to represent the M.O.P. that elected him and the wider group that voted Labour. That is what Democracy is all about! By using questions directly from his 'supporters' this is a positive move forward imo. He clearly selects pertinent questions. When he uses the MOP name he also mentions the number of people who have emailed in. For me its so much better than the old Tory method, so many planted questions from the PM's backbenchers it makes me question as to whether these MP's have constituents at all.
Reading through old posts on this forum makes it clear that D.C. has hammered the middle upper classes regards taxation, and yet we never hear of the Tory backbencher raising this issue in Parliament.
I'm not a J.C. supporter but I do wish to see his political style develop and hope it continues.
So you think there actually is a Matthew who emailed Jeremy Corbyn with a seemingly perfect question from the hundreds of others that could be read out in PMQs? Reading through old posts on this forum makes it clear that D.C. has hammered the middle upper classes regards taxation, and yet we never hear of the Tory backbencher raising this issue in Parliament.
I'm not a J.C. supporter but I do wish to see his political style develop and hope it continues.
Andy Zarse said:
crankedup said:
Housing in crisis...
Crisis crisis crisis!Why is every socieltal problem, whether great or small, referred to by the Left as a "crisis"? Take your pick from housing/homelessness/NHS/pensions/unemployment/fuel poverty/you-name-it, it's in perpetual crisis.
And why does the solution always appears to be more state intervention and "an end to vicious Tory austerity"?
Do these people not realise the overuse and abuse of such stock words has led to their diminution, or that the greater population have become fatigued of such hackneyed phrases?
Plenty of high quality private rented accommodation that are affordable to the average family or individuals?
Lets pick an alternative word to crisis, how about catastrophic.
Gargamel said:
Andy Zarse said:
"an end to vicious Tory austerity"?
Do they not realise, more people employed than ever before, deflationary pricing, lowest interest rates, rising wages and longer lives. Literally never had it so good !
Employment rising is great news, but I still believe that many new jobs are MW low quality work. Zero hours contracts, short term contracts. Better than nothing of course.
Deflation is not a good thing.
Low interest rates have damaged tens of thousands of older folks savings interest payments.
Rising wages, about time after seven years without a pay rise for tens of thousands of workers.
Longer lives
Never had it so good? for myself I am not complaining.
Breadvan72 said:
Gargamel said:
Breadvan72 said:
W124 said:
...
On another note. PH does confuse me a bit sometimes. It's a bit sixth form common room now and again. It is possible for those of opposite political persuasion to be right occasionally. We are in real danger of drifting down the ghastly US route of totally binary politics. It's not true that all Socialists are greedy and envious and want to drag the successful down and milk them for every penny. Nor is it true that all conservatives are selfish, careless bds. Careful what you wish for.
We should post this up at the door of every thread in N,P&E.On another note. PH does confuse me a bit sometimes. It's a bit sixth form common room now and again. It is possible for those of opposite political persuasion to be right occasionally. We are in real danger of drifting down the ghastly US route of totally binary politics. It's not true that all Socialists are greedy and envious and want to drag the successful down and milk them for every penny. Nor is it true that all conservatives are selfish, careless b
ds. Careful what you wish for. (Sorry I just couldn't help myself)
Wierdly JC does have some good points about inequality, it is his solutions I can't agree with.
JC buries a few good ideas in among all his claptrap, but he is still dire overall. Cameron and Osborne have some good ideas too, in amongst some stuff that I regard as a bit dodgy.
jmorgan said:
I still say he is Farages clone...
Farage, you say? Hmmm, rings a bell. Trying to place the chappy. Nope, sorry, can't remember who that is.One thing that I will say for Cameron et al is that they appear to have consigned UKIP to the dustbin of transient political phenomena. No doubt there will be a mild resurgence in purpleness when the Referendum happens, but even chickens can walk about when dead.
I reckon, BTW, that Merkel's possibly hasty reaction to events over the summer may just have pushed the voting mass onto the Brexit side. I will start the referendum campaign sitting on the fence with my legs dangling slightly on the In side, but I might fall over onto the Out side. I await the arguments with real interest. I am not sure if JC has figured out what to say on that subject yet.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff