Election 2019

[borcy]

turbobloke said:

borcy said:

Jaaws said:

If this ever happened they'd just shift the loss o NHS Patient Charge Revenue onto the other two 'treatment band' charges, so no overall loss to the Exchequer. Free check ups but treatment cost rises.

From what I've read and how i interpret it they'd provide new money so it would be the same cost for more expensive treatments.

New money, does that translate as today's students paying for it with higher taxes when they get to earn a decent salary, in order to fund it while servicing the loan interest?

No idea. I did read 50% already receive free dental care though.

[230TE]

digimeistter said:

More free stuff from Corbyn - scrap NHS dental check up fees!

Hurrah!

The biggest problem with NHS dentistry is getting access to it. Very few dentists around here are currently accepting new NHS patients and it has been like that for many years. The only thing anyone could come up with that would make the situation worse would be to swamp it with even more would-be patients, some of whom won't have seen a dentist in 30 years, demanding their free checkups. Which is exactly what Labour are proposing. Genius.

[borcy]

Earthdweller said:

Some leaks this morning on the Marxist manifesto :

A Right to Food Act that could be used to control some food prices;

A windfall tax on oil companies that risks pushing up petrol prices;

A widespread nationalisation programme of trains, energy firms and broadband providers;

The effective abolition of academies and free schools, with all educational institutions bought back under local council control;

A milkshake tax, with a massive expansion of the sugar levy;

Abolition of local NHS Clinical Commissioning Groups;

A new Cabinet Minister for Women and new laws to make misogyny a hate crime, which one critic claimed would amount to outlawing wolf-whistling.

2, not a massive surprise, i think governments of all flavours have done or kept something similar.

4, should have been done years ago.

[jakesmith]

borcy said:

2, not a massive surprise, i think governments of all flavours have done or kept something similar.

4, should have been done years ago.

Agree with 4. It is not something that seems right to me.

[turbobloke]

For some cynical reason these 'freebie' Labour policies look like bribes. A big surprise after last time (!)

If it needs to be rolled in a ton of glitter it must be large and smell bad.

[anonymous-user]

Yeah, more free stuff!
I assume the Labour Party must think their voters are thick.

[JagLover]

Update on polls

So far offers of "free" goodies (that will have to someday be paid back with interest) have had little to no effect on Labour support. In fact since TBP dropped out of a number of seats Tories consistently polling in low forties rather than high thirties.

https://politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties...

Debates coming up, and launch of manifestos, so all still subject to change.

[turbobloke]

Presumably all pollsters are doing the same of YouGov these days and asking respondents what their constituency is, then only offering options for the Parties actually standing in that constituency. This will help to take the Brexit Party decision not ton contest Tory seats into account. YouGov polling to 12 Nov show a bigger Conservative lead partly as a result, as per JagLover's post.

Edited by turbobloke on Sunday 17th November 12:00

[JagLover]

Tories give details of their immigration proposals

100K target limit on numbers is gone
Migrants will need to wait five years before claiming benefits
Some form of Australian points style immigration system to be brought in.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50449039

Edited by JagLover on Sunday 17th November 11:14

[Helicopter123]

JagLover said:

Tories give details of their immigration proposals

100K target limit on numbers is gone
Migrants will need to wait five years before claiming benefits
Some from of Australian points style immigration system to be brought in.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50449039

Remarkably light touch still on immigration despite the usual tough talking?

This is actually quite welcome and a lot more lenient than I thought we might see.

Looks like the end of the "hostile environment" at least.

Edited by Helicopter123 on Sunday 17th November 10:58

[98elise]

JagLover said:

Tories give details of their immigration proposals

100K target limit on numbers is gone
Migrants will need to wait five years before claiming benefits
Some from of Australian points style immigration system to be brought in.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50449039

That sounds very sensible. I want immigration controls, but not a cap. You can't turn off that taps just because you hit a number. You either need people or you don't.

A points system that treats people from all countries the same is also far more fair.

I hope the salary boundary goes though. If we need care workers as much as doctors then that should be reflected in the points system, not restricted by salary expectation.

[gooner1]

Helicopter123 said:

JagLover said:

Tories give details of their immigration proposals

100K target limit on numbers is gone
Migrants will need to wait five years before claiming benefits
Some from of Australian points style immigration system to be brought in.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50449039

Remarkably light touch still on immigration despite the usual tough talking?

This is actually quite welcome and a lot more lenient than I thought we might see.

Looks like the end of the "hostile environment" at least.

Edited by Helicopter123 on Sunday 17th November 10:58

"Hostile environment". Brainchild of a Remainer IIRC.

[crankedup]

98elise said:

JagLover said:

Tories give details of their immigration proposals

100K target limit on numbers is gone
Migrants will need to wait five years before claiming benefits
Some from of Australian points style immigration system to be brought in.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50449039

That sounds very sensible. I want immigration controls, but not a cap. You can't turn off that taps just because you hit a number. You either need people or you don't.

A points system that treats people from all countries the same is also far more fair.

I hope the salary boundary goes though. If we need care workers as much as doctors then that should be reflected in the points system, not restricted by salary expectation.

Agreed, it’s about time we had the introduction of a sensible measured and fair (to everybody) system. I cannot see any reason why this proposal should attract hostility from political opponents.

[bitchstewie]

An interesting read depending on your opinion of whether you think social media can influence your views on things.

https://bylinetimes.com/2019/11/12/how-i-fell-down...

[Tuna]

bhstewie said:

An interesting read depending on your opinion of whether you think social media can influence your views on things.

https://bylinetimes.com/2019/11/12/how-i-fell-down...

If you want to be led by the nose to a conclusion, I guess... (you do realise that by posting it, you're showing you're being manipulated by social media??)

I have every sympathy with a mentally vulnerable person struggling with social groups pressuring them into voting a certain way. Go follow some of the pro-Corbyn groups on Twitter (or, to be fair, pro-LibDem or pro-Tory). Herd mentality is an ugly thing.

But the point of the article isn't about social media manipulating people, is it? It's an attempt by the author to distance themselves from Brexit, which they believe is a "right wing" thing. Not only is that demonstrably wrong, it shows a very shallow understanding of the politics of the situation.

The icing on the cake is the nonsensical conclusion - the direct linking of Boris with hard/alt-right groups. The irony being that Theresa May actually pursued significantly more authoritarian and illiberal policies than Boris.

Still, never let the truth get in the way of a heart tugging tale, eh?

[Bullett]

Facebook and social media is interesting, I'm in Bracknell constituancy, very safe tory seat. Yet all the local FB groups, not political ones but the usual complaining about kids, noise, why's the taffic bad, recommend me a builder type site you see most posts about "evil tories" and that Labour are the second coming. You can't argue with them, it's like shouting into the wind. Offer up a fact and you get ignored or accused of stamping on kittens for a hobby. You'd think from the pages that Labour will walk it but they won't even get close.

[bitchstewie]

Tuna said:

If you want to be led by the nose to a conclusion, I guess... (you do realise that by posting it, you're showing you're being manipulated by social media??)

I have every sympathy with a mentally vulnerable person struggling with social groups pressuring them into voting a certain way. Go follow some of the pro-Corbyn groups on Twitter (or, to be fair, pro-LibDem or pro-Tory). Herd mentality is an ugly thing.

But the point of the article isn't about social media manipulating people, is it? It's an attempt by the author to distance themselves from Brexit, which they believe is a "right wing" thing. Not only is that demonstrably wrong, it shows a very shallow understanding of the politics of the situation.

The icing on the cake is the nonsensical conclusion - the direct linking of Boris with hard/alt-right groups. The irony being that Theresa May actually pursued significantly more authoritarian and illiberal policies than Boris.

Still, never let the truth get in the way of a heart tugging tale, eh?

I just thought it was an interesting read.

Not entirely a surprise that you think you know more about the bloke that wrote it than the bloke who wrote it.

[Tuna]

bhstewie said:

I just thought it was an interesting read.

Not entirely a surprise that you think you know more about the bloke that wrote it than the bloke who wrote it.

Don't misrepresent what I said. I drew no conclusions about the guy himself - apart from what he said in his article - that he was mentally vulnerable.

The rest of my comments were on the message of the article itself. It was emotionally loaded and politically biased - I'm surprised you find it so hard to acknowledge that.

[bitchstewie]

Tuna said:

Don't misrepresent what I said. I drew no conclusions about the guy himself - apart from what he said in his article - that he was mentally vulnerable.

The rest of my comments were on the message of the article itself. It was emotionally loaded and politically biased - I'm surprised you find it so hard to acknowledge that.

Apologies as I didn't initially read it and think the author sounded "mentally vulnerable" but in fairness reading it again I can see he infers as much.

Personally when I read it I saw some parallels with this place which is why it was such an interesting read.

I think you're a bit off the mark with suggesting it's drawing a direct link between Boris and far right groups as I don't think it does that.

I think it simply points out that Boris seems to attract people who wouldn't have gone to bat for May or Cameron, which seems difficult to dispute given his endorsement by Farage and Tommy Robinson.

[MiniMan64]

The social media influencing is just a modern reflection of the real world though isn’t it?

If you’re only online contact came through PH you’d be predicting a Tory landslide. If you’re only online contact came through Twitter you’d be predicting a Corbyn landslide.

But likewise if my only contact in the real world was student union groups I’d probably think a Lib Dem revolution was on the cards.

Anybody in a very closed social circle (online or real world) is going to have a skewered version of their beliefs.