The General Election - June 8th 2017
Comments
-
It isn't a policy.cafcpolo said:3% LVT may be bollocks now but it's something that will only increase, surely?
What about all the small businesses in the city who not only will be having their corporation tax increased but then also have this to deal?
What about the farms who will see an increase? Potentially a huge one. Who's going to feel the hit on that one? Us.
I don't like the fact there is so little information on it in the manifesto, seems a bit sneaky to me.7 -
To an extent it would offset some (if you assume those parents wouldn't say to their son/daughter to take the loans), but that doesn't help people find the extra 20% for the potential 13 years of primary & secondary education now on the basis they'd get some back 13-16 years down the line.seth plum said:
Would the VAT on school fees be offset by free University education?
Why do people assume those earning £80k plus have this pot of spare cash sloshing around that they don;t know what to do with? My experience is they don't, most people spend to their earnings.0 -
Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election0
-
This is one policy I disagree with Labour on. All it would do is price out ordinary middle class parents who have virtually no choice of schools in their area due to decades of neglect and buck-passing by local authorities and governments alike and make private education exclusively the preserve of millionaires.
There needs to be a more holistic policy, including opening up more places at private schools to children from disadvantaged backgrounds - a lot of private schools are nowhere near the 30-child a limit and a lot are under 20 kids per class. A couple of extra children in each class could make a huge difference in itself, but there needs to be a gradual phasing out of private education and these private schools ought to be brought into the fold. No child should get an advantage just because their parents inherited a load of wonga.0 -
What if they earned a lot of wonga as opposed to inherit it?Fiiish said:This is one policy I disagree with Labour on. All it would do is price out ordinary middle class parents who have virtually no choice of schools in their area due to decades of neglect and buck-passing by local authorities and governments alike and make private education exclusively the preserve of millionaires.
There needs to be a more holistic policy, including opening up more places at private schools to children from disadvantaged backgrounds - a lot of private schools are nowhere near the 30-child a limit and a lot are under 20 kids per class. A couple of extra children in each class could make a huge difference in itself, but there needs to be a gradual phasing out of private education and these private schools ought to be brought into the fold. No child should get an advantage just because their parents inherited a load of wonga.0 -
DamoNorthStand said:
Running the economy I expect. I bet Corbyn wishes Abbott had gone missing, but no such luck.....seth plum said:
Phillip Hammond too.Chizz said:
The mood music used to be 'at least the Tories are good with money if nothing else'. Well he is the Chancellor, one of the great offices of state. Where has he been during this campaign?
Actually, it looks like he's been sidetracked after repeatedly clashing with May's two chief of staff - Nick Timothy & Fiona Hill. To the extent that Hammond & Timothy swapped expletives (always funny when posh boys try swearing) and Hammond's team described the team in No.10 (May, Rudd, Davis, Johnson as well as Timothy and Hill) as "economically illiterate"!!
Sounds like Hammond is using the "Comey Defence", having made sure he has notes for every meeting he's had. Looks like there'll be a bit of dirty laundry being aired whatever the outcome on Thursday.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chancellor-faces-sack-amid-call-for-pms-aides-to-be-reined-in-zfd8r2j990 -
Same difference really. Why should a kid whose dad is a hedge fund manager have much better life chances than a kid whose single mother cannot work and survives on benefits? Neither child has done anything to deserve a better or worse education.newyorkaddick said:
What if they earned a lot of wonga as opposed to inherit it?Fiiish said:This is one policy I disagree with Labour on. All it would do is price out ordinary middle class parents who have virtually no choice of schools in their area due to decades of neglect and buck-passing by local authorities and governments alike and make private education exclusively the preserve of millionaires.
There needs to be a more holistic policy, including opening up more places at private schools to children from disadvantaged backgrounds - a lot of private schools are nowhere near the 30-child a limit and a lot are under 20 kids per class. A couple of extra children in each class could make a huge difference in itself, but there needs to be a gradual phasing out of private education and these private schools ought to be brought into the fold. No child should get an advantage just because their parents inherited a load of wonga.1 -
Whilst I don't agree with their politics, I do usually read the Times/Sunday Times as I like to understand different viewpoints.
The political editor, Tim Shipman, has really scraped the bottom of the barrel with this tweet though. My subscription is finished when I get in tomorrow.
0 -
Again? Must have lost it 5 times now.newyorkaddick said:Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
8 -
It reads like something someone would say as a joke to parody typical anti-Corbyn mouthbreathers on Twitter.0
- Sponsored links:
-
What did she do/say this time?newyorkaddick said:Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
0 -
newyorkaddick desperately trying to spin the same line over and over again 'surely Labour has lost' with every post. Smells like fear.
I don't think anyone here is expecting a Labour win but anything that isn't Theresa May increasing her stranglehold on the country would be a victory for the British people. Especially given the events of the last two weeks that have manifestly demonstrated she has comprehensively failed in her basic capacity to keep the country and its people safe from harm.5 -
Struggling to find anything contentious there.TelMc32 said:Whilst I don't agree with their politics, I do usually read the Times/Sunday Times as I like to understand different viewpoints.
The political editor, Tim Shipman, has really scraped the bottom of the barrel with this tweet though. My subscription is finished when I get in tomorrow.0 -
Poe's law strikes again.SantaClaus said:
Struggling to find anything contentious there.TelMc32 said:Whilst I don't agree with their politics, I do usually read the Times/Sunday Times as I like to understand different viewpoints.
The political editor, Tim Shipman, has really scraped the bottom of the barrel with this tweet though. My subscription is finished when I get in tomorrow.0 -
He has though, that article you shared doesn't once have him being for the policy. He says he's not happy with it and he says of course he'd like more people out there on the street. He avoids the question essentially. He has U-turned a lot but people aren't picking him up on itCallumcafc said:Corbyn never bloody u-turned on "shoot to kill".
Re: the land tax. Labour has only pledged to reform council tax and business rates in their manifesto. They gave a land value tax as one such example that they would look at. Here is the quote from the manifesto:
"A Labour government will give local
government extra funding next year.
We will initiate a review into
reforming council tax and business
rates and consider new options
such as a land value tax, to ensure
local government has sustainable
funding for the long term"0 -
I didn't expect you to @SantaClaus. Thankfully, I stopped believing in you a bloody long time ago!!SantaClaus said:
Struggling to find anything contentious there.TelMc32 said:Whilst I don't agree with their politics, I do usually read the Times/Sunday Times as I like to understand different viewpoints.
The political editor, Tim Shipman, has really scraped the bottom of the barrel with this tweet though. My subscription is finished when I get in tomorrow.4 -
Choose Tory. Choose austerity. Choose health insurance. Choose tripling the National Debt. Choose 5 more years of crushing Tory cuts. Choose selling your parents house after they die to pay for their care. Choose cuts in education and a 6.8p breakfast for your child. Choose governmental controls on the internet. Choose the Naylor Report. Choose the sell off of the NHS with £10bn of 'incentives' thrown in. Choose tax cuts for the rich. Choose falling living standards. Choose more cuts to the police and army. Choose more terminally ill to be declared 'fit for work' then dying in days. Choose cuts to disabled services. Choose 5 more years of May's fucking face on TV telling what she thinks is best for us. Choose a no deal BREXIT because the EU knows May's a blowhard. Choose fucking fox hunting.....
I choose not to choose Tory. I choose something else. I choose to cut and paste!17 -
It was more what she didn't sayRob7Lee said:
What did she do/say this time?newyorkaddick said:Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
0 -
I thought your modelling had them to lose anyway?newyorkaddick said:Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
Incidentally, if you're so sure of it, do you bet on the spread?0 -
I usually vote LibDem - a bit late for fear :-)Fiiish said:newyorkaddick desperately trying to spin the same line over and over again 'surely Labour has lost' with every post. Smells like fear.
I don't think anyone here is expecting a Labour win but anything that isn't Theresa May increasing her stranglehold on the country would be a victory for the British people. Especially given the events of the last two weeks that have manifestly demonstrated she has comprehensively failed in her basic capacity to keep the country and its people safe from harm.0 - Sponsored links:
-
I'll give you some of those, but run by me the top tax cuts for the rich? Is it the removal of the personal allowance? The removal of up to £30k that can be payable into pension and receive tax relief on? Or is it the tax payable to repay the child allowance receivable? The only one I can think of is the drop from 50p to 45p which had shown to raise little extra tax (at 50p).Friend Or Defoe said:Choose Tory. Choose austerity. Choose health insurance. Choose tripling the National Debt. Choose 5 more years of crushing Tory cuts. Choose selling your parents house after they die to pay for their care. Choose cuts in education and a 6.8p breakfast for your child. Choose governmental controls on the internet. Choose the Naylor Report. Choose the sell off of the NHS with £10bn of 'incentives' thrown in. Choose tax cuts for the rich. Choose falling living standards. Choose more cuts to the police and army. Choose more terminally ill to be declared 'fit for work' then dying in days. Choose cuts to disabled services. Choose 5 more years of May's fucking face on TV telling what she thinks is best for us. Choose a no deal BREXIT because the EU knows May's a blowhard. Choose fucking fox hunting.....
I choose not to choose Tory. I choose something else. I choose to cut and paste!
Also, on the selling of your parents house after they die to pay for care, how is that exactly different to now? If they are a sole owner they will have to sell their house NOW to pay for care, if the house is jointly owned a charge will be taken on the house to be repaid upon the 2nd death.0 -
Excuse me?!Cordoban Addick said:So @DamoNorthStand have I got this right, your current concern about Labour is that they may introduce something that is only referenced in their manifesto as "We will initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options such as a land value tax."
But you are prepared to believe an article in the Daily Express that says otherwise, an article that changes the name of LVT "hereafter called the garden tax" and suggests it will be at 3% of the value of the land. That is despite no numbers being mentioned for a policy that does not exist.
If that is the case I think it reflects badly on you. Previously you have used evidence based reasoning to back your claims but this is frankly bollocks.
I asked a question and stated I was after information as I didn't understand it. I was offered some links and was concerned it was a bit woolly and had potential to hit my family financially and some of the security and comfort I have fought to secure.
It is fair enough to have concern whilst I wait for clarity. I haven't even read a daily express article.
Whether I reflect badly on you has piss all impact on me. My main priority is looking after my family not your opinion of me.
And frankly up to now I am happy with how I have been able to look after my family.1 -
Err. Why? Corbyn came out about equal with May last time they were on the same program, but all the right wing press claimed he was humiliated. So now Abbott says something daft (I'll take your word it's so) and they run the same headlines. But here's a laugh, if she'd been great they'd do it anyway. Thats what happens when the press are so biased.newyorkaddick said:Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
1 -
His wording in 2015 perhaps wasn't careful enough - if he says he supports it, he's called a blood-thirsty murdering terrorist sympathiser and if he shows any kind of resistance to it, he's a pacifist that isn't suitable to keep our country safe. He's always been against "shoot to kill in general", I take it to mean that he wishes to avoid situations such as this https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/mar/30/jean-charles-de-menezes-your-questions-answeredGreenie Junior said:
He has though, that article you shared doesn't once have him being for the policy. He says he's not happy with it and he says of course he'd like more people out there on the street. He avoids the question essentially. He has U-turned a lot but people aren't picking him up on itCallumcafc said:Corbyn never bloody u-turned on "shoot to kill".
Re: the land tax. Labour has only pledged to reform council tax and business rates in their manifesto. They gave a land value tax as one such example that they would look at. Here is the quote from the manifesto:
"A Labour government will give local
government extra funding next year.
We will initiate a review into
reforming council tax and business
rates and consider new options
such as a land value tax, to ensure
local government has sustainable
funding for the long term"
Corbyn has always supported shoot to kill where the policy is absolutely necessary, such as in the situation in London most recently.0 -
Again I stress it was what she didn't say - it was pure car crash tv.ken_shabby said:
Err. Why? Corbyn came out about equal with May last time they were on the same program, but all the right wing press claimed he was humiliated. So now Abbott says something daft (I'll take your word it's so) and they run the same headlines. But here's a laugh, if she'd been great they'd do it anyway. Thats what happens when the press are so biased.newyorkaddick said:Diane Abbott on Sky News has surely just lost Labour the election
0 -
When the Times employed that Brexit turd Michael Gove late last year I phoned up to cancel my subscription and they were so desperate to keep me they offered me 6 months at half price (down from £26 per month to £13 per month). I accepted. I am a man with no principles!TelMc32 said:Whilst I don't agree with their politics, I do usually read the Times/Sunday Times as I like to understand different viewpoints.
The political editor, Tim Shipman, has really scraped the bottom of the barrel with this tweet though. My subscription is finished when I get in tomorrow.10 -
Commie? Certainly a fellow traveller.Fiiish said:
Poe's law strikes again.SantaClaus said:
Struggling to find anything contentious there.TelMc32 said:Whilst I don't agree with their politics, I do usually read the Times/Sunday Times as I like to understand different viewpoints.
The political editor, Tim Shipman, has really scraped the bottom of the barrel with this tweet though. My subscription is finished when I get in tomorrow.
Terrorist Loving? Never voted for a single piece of anti terror legislation and has an alarming habit of sharing platforms with multiple terror groups.
Unsuited to high office? Really? I understand you have all the passion of a newly converted religious zealot but do you see the serial rebel who has never held a single government job as a credible national leader. His defence, economic and law and order beliefs make him a bat shit crazy choice for PM.6 -
So he actually love terrorists? He was out there celebrating the day after Manchester? Utterly stupid and offensive sentiment to endorse given the last couple of weeks. Put some reality check goggles on.5
-
Make your own minds up;
Diane Abbott is not fit for high office. pic.twitter.com/xOvhVcPDcV
— Ben (@Jamin2g) June 5, 20170 -
Comparison of May and Corbyn on anti terror legislation. Does this make May a terrorist lover too?
3
