UK General Election 2015

[pingu393]

Every election from now on will be more and more interesting as social media (such as this) allows individuals to be influenced by potentially thousands of opinions.

Pre-internet, I would only have been influenced by parents, friends, workmates, newspapers and a bit of telly. Double figures and most would have been the same or similar. The few dissenters would have been shouted down and not been heard, or ignored for being "one of them".

Now there are hundreds of varying opinions all with a voice that can be read. The days of being able to pin a rosette on a donkey to get people to vote for them are gone - and that must scare the politicians stless .

[Welshbeef]

Bluebarge said:

Welshbeef said:

Well just in the news HSBC is seriously looking to move its HQ out of London and out of the UK party due to the bank levy which last year cost them £750m which is increasing from 0.156% to 0.21% already announced in the budget. This change on like for like would mean this year it would be £1.01billion for 2015/16.

So if it leaves the Labour Party are aiming to increase the bank levy even further.... Possibly enough to push them over the edge and go (also said they are concerned about possible EU exit).


So labours fully costed plans will have to be revised and assume no HSBC and a hole of £1billon plus whatever extra they intend to add to that.....
Guess labour supporters will think they are bluffing or not understand what it means.

Rather selective reporting there WB. HSBC actually said one of the greatest factors for a potential exit was the uncertain business environment caused by a potential Brexit following the EU referendum. So the HSBC review of their options is more down to Tory policy.

I included that in the post - however the press statement doesn't say the greatest factor was an EU exit nice attempt at spinning there

[Scuffers]

Welshbeef said:

Bluebarge said:

Welshbeef said:

Well just in the news HSBC is seriously looking to move its HQ out of London and out of the UK party due to the bank levy which last year cost them £750m which is increasing from 0.156% to 0.21% already announced in the budget. This change on like for like would mean this year it would be £1.01billion for 2015/16.

So if it leaves the Labour Party are aiming to increase the bank levy even further.... Possibly enough to push them over the edge and go (also said they are concerned about possible EU exit).


So labours fully costed plans will have to be revised and assume no HSBC and a hole of £1billon plus whatever extra they intend to add to that.....
Guess labour supporters will think they are bluffing or not understand what it means.

Rather selective reporting there WB. HSBC actually said one of the greatest factors for a potential exit was the uncertain business environment caused by a potential Brexit following the EU referendum. So the HSBC review of their options is more down to Tory policy.

I included that in the post - however the press statement doesn't say the greatest factor was an EU exit nice attempt at spinning there

and since when is Hong Kong in the EU?

I imagine they are eyeing up what new banking levies and taxes are being dreamed up both here and in the EU

[JagLover]

Esseesse said:

Why is Cameron warning that Labour would mean a return to open door immigration? What the hell does he think we have now?

Without all the changes the Tories introduced immigration could easily be hundreds of thousands more a year than it is now.

Only scrapping the human rights act and changing the terms of our membership of the EU would bring it down to 1990s levels it is true but it could easily be very much higher under Labour.

[Axionknight]

JagLover said:

Without all the changes the Tories introduced immigration could easily be hundreds of thousands more a year than it is now.

Only scrapping the human rights act and changing the terms of our membership of the EU would bring it down to 1990s levels it is true but it could easily be very much higher under Labour.

Hundreds of thousands a year? Care to support that claim with informstion on these Tory laws that are stopping us from sinking under the weight of such vast numbers?

[Welshbeef]

Scuffers said:

and since when is Hong Kong in the EU?

I imagine they are eyeing up what new banking levies and taxes are being dreamed up both here and in the EU

Who said it was?

That is one possible location of it moves it's HQ

[JagLover]

Axionknight said:

Hundreds of thousands a year? Care to support that claim with informstion on these Tory laws that are stopping us from sinking under the weight of such vast numbers?

Labour opened the floodgates with stealth changes that wouldn't draw notice.

Student Visas became a popular way to bypass immigration controls with the "student" often staying on to work and then achieve residency. These were often not university students, but those entering colleges or foreign language colleges that were often bogus. Tightening up the criteria led to a 46% reduction in the numbers from overseas entering those institutions.

Almost as soon as Labour came to power it abolished the "primary purpose" rule which tried to prevent those who sought to use family reunification VISAs to bypass immigration controls. It terms of long term migration family reunification VISAs are very important as by default those using them are here to stay. The Tories brought in a minimum income requirement of £18,600 in order to sponsor such an application that has had a significant impact on numbers.

Labours "highly skilled" immigration VISAs had tens of thousands a year who wouldn't have met any such description under an Australian style points system. It included numerous people who ended up working in kebab shops, Taxi firms, petrol stations, newsagents etc. Changes made by the Tories increased the number refused VISAs under this regime from 2 per cent to 37 per cent.

Labour's approach was basically to facilitate mass migration while having the pretence of controls being in place. There are genuine controls now but a drastic shift would be required to fully curtail mass migration.

[Scuffers]

Welshbeef said:

Scuffers said:

and since when is Hong Kong in the EU?

I imagine they are eyeing up what new banking levies and taxes are being dreamed up both here and in the EU

Who said it was?

That is one possible location of it moves it's HQ

OK, name the other options?

Singapore is about the only other one, and it's arguably not a big enough financial centre.

realistically, they choice is almost certainly going to be HK of they do actually jump ship.

if they do, say goodbye to some £3Bn tax revenue and on top of that the loss of city jobs associated with it (and all their tax money).

Apparently, Standard Chartered are looking to jump ship too, nothing to do with Brexit.

[Mojocvh]

Zod said:

Guam said:

Zod said:

Look, it's a bit of a rubbish policy, but the HAs will be compensated, so it's hardly confiscation. It's also a minor thing, unlike the Labour and SNP plans to borrow their way to another big bust.

Its no different to land grabs by countries like zimbabwe where the owners are paid "compensation"

Its redistribution of wealth is it not?

Are you really going to keep deluding yourself that there are no Marxist principles in this policy?

You are being silly. The compensation will not be Zimbabwe style. You know that. It is not remotely Marxist to offer social housing tenants the right to buy the properties in which they live at a subsidised price.

But it is immoral.

[edh]

Welshbeef said:

Well just in the news HSBC is seriously looking to move its HQ out of London and out of the UK party due to the bank levy which last year cost them £750m which is increasing from 0.156% to 0.21% already announced in the budget. This change on like for like would mean this year it would be £1.01billion for 2015/16.

So if it leaves the Labour Party are aiming to increase the bank levy even further.... Possibly enough to push them over the edge and go (also said they are concerned about possible EU exit).


So labours fully costed plans will have to be revised and assume no HSBC and a hole of £1billon plus whatever extra they intend to add to that.....
Guess labour supporters will think they are bluffing or not understand what it means.

But the Tory plans won't need to be revised to account for this prospect?

It's all a game of bluff anyway - where would they go?

[Bluebarge]

Welshbeef said:

Bluebarge said:

Welshbeef said:

Well just in the news HSBC is seriously looking to move its HQ out of London and out of the UK party due to the bank levy which last year cost them £750m which is increasing from 0.156% to 0.21% already announced in the budget. This change on like for like would mean this year it would be £1.01billion for 2015/16.

So if it leaves the Labour Party are aiming to increase the bank levy even further.... Possibly enough to push them over the edge and go (also said they are concerned about possible EU exit).


So labours fully costed plans will have to be revised and assume no HSBC and a hole of £1billon plus whatever extra they intend to add to that.....
Guess labour supporters will think they are bluffing or not understand what it means.

Rather selective reporting there WB. HSBC actually said one of the greatest factors for a potential exit was the uncertain business environment caused by a potential Brexit following the EU referendum. So the HSBC review of their options is more down to Tory policy.

I included that in the post - however the press statement doesn't say the greatest factor was an EU exit nice attempt at spinning there

It's in there
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32443930
That, plus the bank levy, which was Osborne's idea

[Salgar]

Esseesse said:

Why is Cameron warning that Labour would mean a return to open door immigration? What the hell does he think we have now?

Erm, things have changed a huge amount in the last 5 years, it is almost impossible for a normal person coming from outside the EU to get in to the UK without holding a specific highly qualified job. I have friends trying to get out of South Africa but they can not come here anymore because all of the possible Visa types have been removed.

[Mojocvh]

Salgar said:

Esseesse said:

Why is Cameron warning that Labour would mean a return to open door immigration? What the hell does he think we have now?

Erm, things have changed a huge amount in the last 5 years, it is almost impossible for a normal person coming from outside the EU to get in to the UK without holding a specific highly qualified job. I have friends trying to get out of South Africa but they can not come here anymore because all of the possible Visa types have been removed.

I think he was relating to, you know, the ones that don't play by the rules.

[Axionknight]

Mojocvh said:

I think he was relating to, you know, the ones that don't play by the rules.

People do that?

Get away.

[Art0ir]

CapX explain why young people are so attracted to the Greens.

I think they may have a point.

http://www.capx.co/why-are-so-many-british-student...

[pingu393]

JagLover said:

Axionknight said:

Hundreds of thousands a year? Care to support that claim with informstion on these Tory laws that are stopping us from sinking under the weight of such vast numbers?

Labour opened the floodgates with stealth changes that wouldn't draw notice.

Student Visas became a popular way to bypass immigration controls with the "student" often staying on to work and then achieve residency. These were often not university students, but those entering colleges or foreign language colleges that were often bogus. Tightening up the criteria led to a 46% reduction in the numbers from overseas entering those institutions.

Almost as soon as Labour came to power it abolished the "primary purpose" rule which tried to prevent those who sought to use family reunification VISAs to bypass immigration controls. It terms of long term migration family reunification VISAs are very important as by default those using them are here to stay. The Tories brought in a minimum income requirement of £18,600 in order to sponsor such an application that has had a significant impact on numbers.

Labours "highly skilled" immigration VISAs had tens of thousands a year who wouldn't have met any such description under an Australian style points system. It included numerous people who ended up working in kebab shops, Taxi firms, petrol stations, newsagents etc. Changes made by the Tories increased the number refused VISAs under this regime from 2 per cent to 37 per cent.

Labour's approach was basically to facilitate mass migration while having the pretence of controls being in place. There are genuine controls now but a drastic shift would be required to fully curtail mass migration.

Good stuff if true, and I don't doubt it. But why are you telling us and not them telling us.

It annoys the hell out of me that there are plenty of examples of where the coalition made a difference, but they are not shouting it from the rooftops. It's almost as if they don't want to win.

[pingu393]

Things must be looking up, the personalised targeted advertising on this site has just popped up Rolls Royce Financial Services . Only 3.9%APR if I want a Wraith. Much better than the usual Wonga stuff .

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Oh please, let this election be over quickly. It should fall under the definition of unusual torture to be subjected to Natalie Bennett's nasal whinny grating voice for more than a second.

I would actually enjoy the comedy that is the green's "fully costed" policies, but it is spoiled by her remarkably irritating voice. The mute button is a wonderful option.

[Axionknight]

JagLover said:

Labour opened the floodgates with stealth changes that wouldn't draw notice.

Student Visas became a popular way to bypass immigration controls with the "student" often staying on to work and then achieve residency. These were often not university students, but those entering colleges or foreign language colleges that were often bogus. Tightening up the criteria led to a 46% reduction in the numbers from overseas entering those institutions.

Almost as soon as Labour came to power it abolished the "primary purpose" rule which tried to prevent those who sought to use family reunification VISAs to bypass immigration controls. It terms of long term migration family reunification VISAs are very important as by default those using them are here to stay. The Tories brought in a minimum income requirement of £18,600 in order to sponsor such an application that has had a significant impact on numbers.

Labours "highly skilled" immigration VISAs had tens of thousands a year who wouldn't have met any such description under an Australian style points system. It included numerous people who ended up working in kebab shops, Taxi firms, petrol stations, newsagents etc. Changes made by the Tories increased the number refused VISAs under this regime from 2 per cent to 37 per cent.

Labour's approach was basically to facilitate mass migration while having the pretence of controls being in place. There are genuine controls now but a drastic shift would be required to fully curtail mass migration.

So net migration has been stymied by "hundreds of thousands" (your words) a year compared to what it was under the Labour government? Any real proof of this since we are still at an all time high?

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/latest-immigration...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/26/net-m...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31638174

Edited by Axionknight on Friday 24th April 15:45

[chris watton]

Axionknight said:

So net migration has been stymied by "hundreds of thousands" (your words) a year compared to what it was under the Labour government?

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/latest-immigration...

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/26/net-m...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31638174

No offence, but I would hold the Guardian and BBC, even perhaps migration watch in the same regard as the Daily Mail - perhaps even the Sunday Sport - not the best if you want unbiased honesty..