Snap General Election?

[Smollet]

cookie118 said:

Just a quick question for leave and Tory voters.

What do you think about the fact that the Tories seem to basically be employing project fear as their election campaign?

I think if Labour get in then the fear is well founded as we've seen the damage they're capable of from their previous soujourns in power.

[Vaud]

cookie118 said:

Just a quick question for leave and Tory voters.

What do you think about the fact that the Tories seem to basically be employing project fear as their election campaign?

I think Labour are delivering their own fear. I have hardly heard the Tories say anything yet.

That said, I look forward to reading the manifestos and costings.

[FiF]

Smollet said:

cookie118 said:

Just a quick question for leave and Tory voters.

What do you think about the fact that the Tories seem to basically be employing project fear as their election campaign?

I think if Labour get in then the fear is well founded as we've seen the damage they're capable of from their previous soujourns in power.

The difference from the Referendum Project Fear is that in that case the Fear amounted to a set of predictions which were invented around an event that had never occurred before.

In the case of Project Fear re a Labour government, well just in my lifetime I've seen Labour completely screw the economy in many ways several times. It's always possible to pick specific issues to try and prove that Labour had some fiscal integrity somewhere, but picking these apart it generally boils down to a response of "But Fatcha...." So in the case of a Labour, and one might argue any Lib Dem / SNP, involvement in government the fear is very real and rightly so.

HTH

[98elise]

Welshbeef said:

What labour should do to tackle unaffordable housing is to have a policy that principle primary residence is not capital gain tax free....

That would yield vast sums of tax but also stop rampant house price inflation.

Personally I'd be livid with it as I'd lose out hugely IF I ever sold but it's one way to solve the UK houseing market.

It does not fix the market. There are still too many people chasing too few houses. Creating a new tax just makes it more expensive than ever to put a roof over your head.

[Stickyfinger]

cookie118 said:

Just a quick question for leave and Tory voters.

What do you think about the fact that the Tories seem to basically be employing project fear as their election campaign?

One was guess work worded to generate fear, the other is (multiple times in my life) evidenced based.

[robemcdonald]

Stickyfinger said:

robemcdonald said:

I said I wasn't going to post on this thread again, but I genuinely hope you are right.
With a majority like the ones being forecast the Conservatives will be free to do pretty much whatever they want for as long as they'd want. The cuts will be coming and sooner or later. It will be something that directly effects you or I.

So you are worried that your fictional magic money tree may be uprooted ?

What are you on about?

[sidicks]

robemcdonald said:

What are you on about?

Why do you think there will be cuts?

Why do you think there might need to be cuts?

[anonymous-user]

PurpleMoonlight said:

The trouble is we aren't much of a democracy if there is only one party that can win.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha this is brilliant stuff from a man who doesn't vote!

[sidicks]

PurpleMoonlight said:

The trouble is we aren't much of a democracy if there is only one party that can win.

Any party can win if they get enough votes.

If the majority of people want to vote for the same party, isn't that democracy in action?

[Troubleatmill]

cookie118 said:

Just a quick question for leave and Tory voters.

What do you think about the fact that the Tories seem to basically be employing project fear as their election campaign?

Given that the Labour leader is an IRA sympathiser.

Revealed: Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell's close IRA links
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Co...
|https://thumbsnap.com/bhLgI7Rv[/url]

Night Jeremy Corbyn stood in honour of dead IRA terrorists
http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/night-jeremy-corb...

'Tell that to the people of Enniskillen': Fury as Corbyn pays warm tribute to IRA killer Martin McGuinness as a 'great family man' and praises his 'immeasurable role' in peace process
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4334446/Co...

Reports claim the new Labour leader attended pro-IRA events for a number of years
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jere...


And... he is strong on defence too.
Jeremy Corbyn refuses to commit to backing Nato allies with troops if they are invaded by Russia
https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/politics/jerem...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/18/party-s...


And... guess who is giving a rip roaring speech




We could talk about unarmed submarines, his refusal to defend the UK if attacked, his refusal to be seen to commemorate those fallen in battle his support for Hamas etc etc

[robemcdonald]

sidicks said:

robemcdonald said:

What are you on about?

Why do you think there will be cuts?

Why do you think there might need to be cuts?

Cuts to the Police are already happening, prison service is at breaking point, and The government have recently floated the idea about certain medicines no longer being available on the NHS. That's just for starters.

Cuts are needed as we are told there isn't enough money. This makes sense until you remember there's no problem with Boris wasting £50m of tax payers money on a vanity project for Joanna Lumley. The whole thing stunk of corruption, but some on here would see him as a potential PM.
But I suppose it's easier to get money by cutting benefits and squeezing public services than to get companies like Facebook (who paid less tax than I paid NI contributions in 2014) to pay what they should really.

[sidicks]

robemcdonald said:

Cuts to the Police are already happening, prison service is at breaking point, and The government have recently floated the idea about certain medicines no longer being available on the NHS. That's just for starters.

Cuts are needed as we are told there isn't enough money. This makes sense until you remember there's no problem with Boris wasting £50m of tax payers money on a vanity project for Joanna Lumley. The whole thing stunk of corruption, but some on here would see him as a potential PM.
But I suppose it's easier to get money by cutting benefits and squeezing public services than to get companies like Facebook (who paid less tax than I paid NI contributions in 2014) to pay what they should really.

1) it sounds as though you don't understand the amount of the deficit and how this has changed since Labour was in power
2) It sounds as though you don't understand how companies are taxed. Facebook didn't make much of a profit in the Uk, so it didn't pay much tax, which doesn't seem unreasonable. Of course if you understood why it didn't make a profit then you'd see the flaw in your comments!

[Mrr T]

robemcdonald said:

But I suppose it's easier to get money by cutting benefits and squeezing public services than to get companies like Facebook (who paid less tax than I paid NI contributions in 2014) to pay what they should really.

So what tax should FB pay and what would it be based on?

I like the idea of a FB user tax. Every time someone makes a stupid post about a sandwich they would have to pay a one off £1 idiot tax.

[sidicks]

Mrr T said:

So what tax should FB pay and what would it be based on?

He doesn't appear to understand that Corporation tax is paid on profit!

Mrr T said:

I like the idea of a FB user tax. Every time someone makes a stupid post about a sandwichanything they would have to pay a one off £1 idiot tax.

Edited by sidicks on Sunday 30th April 13:38

[BigMon]

turbobloke said:

Exactly, it's not really a line of thinking it's a line of moaning.

There was no whining like that when Bliar conned his way into No 10 in 1997, winning a large majority, then again in 2001 and 2005.

Failed left-liberalism is on the way out, boo hoo for left liberals.

I see more centrist people on here (with whom I would identify) concerned about the fact there stands a good chance of being almost no effective opposition.

It's the way it is due to the utter ineptness of the opposition parties. I don't think it's a good thing regardless of whether the dominant party is Conservative, Labour or Monster Raving Looney.

[robemcdonald]

sidicks said:

1) it sounds as though you don't understand the amount of the deficit and how this has changed since Labour was in power
2) It sounds as though you don't understand how companies are taxed. Facebook didn't make much of a profit in the Uk, so it didn't pay much tax, which doesn't seem unreasonable. Of course if you understood why it didn't make a profit then you'd see the flaw in your comments!

I'm just an average guy. I'm certain that you have a much better understanding of the UK finances than me. It's just when you read that Facebook pay less in corporation tax than me (a guy on a reasonable salary) pay in NI contributions there is a reasonable explanation. I would have thought if there profit were so low they would leave the U.K.
I see that Teresa May is now so certain of victory she "isn't ruling out" (I.e. Definitely going to) put in a tax raise for the middle and upper income brackets. So when we are all paying more tax will you be quite so happy that corporations don't appear to be paying their fair share?

In terms of the deficit again I concede you will have a better grasp on this than me. I can only go with the figures on-line (which I'm sure someone will tell me are wrong) but it looks like the government has almost got borrowing back down to the levels of 2007-08, but nowhere near the levels of Tony Blairs government.

Despite what you might think I have never voted labour and as yet haven't decided how I am going to vote (I thought I might wait to see the manifestos first). I just think if the Conservatives win the majority everyone expects most of us are going to be worse off somewhere down the line.

[sidicks]

robemcdonald said:

I'm just an average guy. I'm certain that you have a much better understanding of the UK finances than me. It's just when you read that Facebook pay less in corporation tax than me (a guy on a reasonable salary) pay in NI contributions there is a reasonable explanation. I would have thought if there profit were so low they would leave the U.K.
I see that Teresa May is now so certain of victory she "isn't ruling out" (I.e. Definitely going to) put in a tax raise for the middle and upper income brackets. So when we are all paying more tax will you be quite so happy that corporations don't appear to be paying their fair share?

They only "don't appear to be paying their fair share", if you've not bothered to understand what profit they made and why their profit was so low.

robemcdonald said:

In terms of the deficit again I concede you will have a better grasp on this than me. I can only go with the figures on-line (which I'm sure someone will tell me are wrong) but it looks like the government has almost got borrowing back down to the levels of 2007-08, but nowhere near the levels of Tony Blairs government.

Blair's government hid expensive borrowing, so the figures aren't directly comparable.
Blair's government had record tax receipts (due to a growing economy fuelled by cheap credit) so the economic situations aren't directly comparable.

Borrowing is still significant (and hence cuts need to be made) - where would you save £60bn?

robemcdonald said:

Despite what you might think I have never voted labour and as yet haven't decided how I am going to vote (I thought I might wait to see the manifestos first). I just think if the Conservatives win the majority everyone expects most of us are going to be worse off somewhere down the line.

Hence the comment about 'magic money trees'...

Edited by sidicks on Sunday 30th April 14:07

[AstonZagato]

loafer123 said:

Welshbeef said:

What labour should do to tackle unaffordable housing is to have a policy that principle primary residence is not capital gain tax free....

That would yield vast sums of tax but also stop rampant house price inflation.

Personally I'd be livid with it as I'd lose out hugely IF I ever sold but it's one way to solve the UK houseing market.

In the long term, maybe, but in the short-medium term homeowners wouldn't move ever move house because the next house would have to be cheaper than the one they own now.

PS - housing crisis is mainly in London. It is perfectly possible to buy a house in much of the UK for build cost plus a very modest plot value plus a normal profit for the developer.

I think a property tax is inevitable. Personally, I'd not enjoy it at all. I think it wold be reasonable if:

• All properties taxed (not a mansion tax)
• First properties were offset against income tax
• Transitional arrangements for pensioners

Would reduce foreign demand for PCL and ensure that older people trade down in later life, creating liquidity.

That said, no government would ever do that and it would just turn into another "soak the rich" left-wing wkfest.

[kiethton]

Welshbeef said:

What labour should do to tackle unaffordable housing is to have a policy that principle primary residence is not capital gain tax free....

That would yield vast sums of tax but also stop rampant house price inflation.

Personally I'd be livid with it as I'd lose out hugely IF I ever sold but it's one way to solve the UK houseing market.

How would that work though?

I've spent 13% of the value of my flat doing it up, moving stuff about and fitting new everything. As a result I've "made" a 32% profit but that includes the 13% I've spent...why should I be taxed for taking a risk with my own capital on my own only residence to try and improve my lot?

[sidicks]

kiethton said:

How would that work though?

I've spent 13% of the value of my flat doing it up, moving stuff about and fitting new everything. As a result I've "made" a 32% profit but that includes the 13% I've spent...why should I be taxed for taking a risk with my own capital on my own only residence to try and improve my lot?

Presumably these improvements were made from money which has already been taxed?