General Election 2017 | Cabinet reshuffle: Hunt re-appointed Health Secretary for record third time

How do you intend to vote in the 2017 General Election if eligible?

  • Conservatives

    Votes: 80 14.5%
  • Labour

    Votes: 322 58.4%
  • Lib Dems

    Votes: 57 10.3%
  • Green

    Votes: 20 3.6%
  • SNP

    Votes: 13 2.4%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 29 5.3%
  • Independent

    Votes: 3 0.5%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 2 0.4%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 11 2.0%
  • Other (UUP, DUP, BNP, and anyone else I have forgotten)

    Votes: 14 2.5%

  • Total voters
    551
  • Poll closed .

Kentonio

Full Member
Scout
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
13,188
Location
Stamford Bridge
Supports
Chelsea
Corbyn is one removed from a parish priest. Take from the rich and give everything to the poor. Very honourable but what is the plan when there is no more to give? What is the plan when the tax-take plummets because business's bugger off to Ireland? What is the plan when Company's close because confidence disappears? How much money has he reserved in his 'calculations' for the massive upsurge in unemployment benefit?

This is populist rubbish that cannot be delivered without hocking the nation to the rafters in debt again. He has just reeled it out as eye-catching electioneering blurb without one jot of a clue as to how he can deliver on it. He couldn't even cite the numbers on his flagship Childcare policy. That is because the numbers don't matter - just sell the message. And it appears that loads on here have bought it.

Nice bloke, honourable sentiments and ideals.

Prime Minister?

You must be joking.
This is nothing more or less than traditional Tory mantra. I know this, because I used to vote for them. I stopped when I realized that their entire basis of economic theory is complete bullshit.

Without a healthy working/middle class with disposable income to spend, the economy is fecked basically. Companies from the tiny shop to the sprawling multinational corporation rely on a huge number of people spending money. If you condense the money to a few people at the top end, then the economy slows to a crawl. They've tried to get around that in the UK by increasing the opportunities for banks and lenders to allow the poor to go into debt so they can keep spending. Now we have a country full of people heavily in debt and with wages that are barely high enough to service that debt, let alone consume at a healthy rate.

As for companies going abroad, we've been hearing that since I was a child, and wierdly it never happens.

But go on, cast your vote for the people who have been running Britain into the ground on the basis of economic theory that doesn't work but just coincidentally happens to make them all millionaires.
 

Dobba

Full Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Messages
28,648
Location
"You and your paper can feck off."
They put it down to 19% a couple of years back and the take went up. This is because lower rates attract inward investment which creates more companies that employ more people. This is why we have the highest rate of employment for decades. There are problems with wage growth that given time should be addressed. But if you think that the answer to those sorts of problems is to turn it all upside and vote in a tax and spend government then you are wrong. It's been done and it has failed. I'm not saying the current model is perfect but it is far better than this proposed populist rubbish. It's nice and cosy and very humane but it's pie-in-the-fecking-sky. Don't be duped.
Yeah, people on zero hours contracts or interns who are paid such shit wages you also need benefits or even foodbank handouts in order to survive, just give the Tories time. Stop with your pie-in-the-fecking-sky nonsense about being paid a wage that means you can live rather than just survive, they'll get around to fixing it eventually. Luckily there is absolutely no big political decisions just around the corner that might put your genuine concerns down the pecking order.

'Honest' John. It's like a George Orwell wet dream :lol:
 

Full bodied red

Full Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2014
Messages
2,370
Location
The Var, France
Is the Tory Brexit team really preferable though?

We are talking David Davis, Boris Johnson and Liam Fox. Career politicians who will be looking to score political points and spouting jingoistic and nationalist crap at every turn. Together they repeatedly made hostile statements directed at the EU members last summer which will no doubt have got their backs up. Lead by Teresa May, who can't think on her feet and whose face falls apart every time she's put under pressure.

The Labour team on the other hand will be lead by a well regarded lawyer who will have experience in negotiating and is only entering politics towards the end of his career. He'll will be backed up by career politicians who may have supported Remain but who are likely to get a warmer reception at the negotiating table.

On top of that, supposedly Corbyn wants to remove himself from the negotiations and instead direct the team from London taking out the 'Macron/Merkel vs Corbyn' angle. Surely that's far more appropriate than the bullsh!t show of strength May and her team will be looking to put on.

You may be right, you may be wrong....

What I was saying is that the only way Corbyn can be PM is in a coalition - with LibDems and SNP.

As half the Labour Party would still opt out of BREXIT if there is a chance, and ALL the LibDems and SNP would still opt out of BREXIT if there is a chance, there would be an enormous risk of the UK's negotiators being able to say little more than ' Yes, sir..No,sir..How much do you want, sir' to the EU's negotiators if their Political Leaders and Political Parties back home see a chance to reverse BREXIT...Or even worse, cave in to EU demands and come back with ' We told you so...'
 

Mciahel Goodman

Worst Werewolf Player of All Times
Staff
Joined
Apr 27, 2014
Messages
30,017
That seems to have turned around again, all of a sudden. What did I miss?
ICM has remained fairly consistent. Their last poll showed an 11% gap.

The Sun and Opinium show 4% and 7% respectively from 4th-6th June. Yougov's final poll will be worth keeping an eye on tonight. If they show a widening gap, then I'd take that as meaning bad news for Labour as Yougov has been consistently optimistic.
 

Fergies Gum

Full Member
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
13,582
Has there ever been such a wide gap between the various polls before?

I dont remember there being these kind of gaps in previous elections.

Maybe the people clued up on polls have an answer @Ubik
 

Damien

Self-Aware RedCafe Database (and Admin)
Staff
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
97,276
Location
Also won Best Gif/Photoshop 2021
Got a leaflet through from this fella yesterday, thinking of voting for him:

http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co...-stand-in-maidenhead-at-general-election.html

Not sure about the 3rd runway thing, I don't actually have a problem with that.
:lol: The number of candidates (13). Didn't know Laud Hope was standing there.

One of the other candidates is an activist https://www.givemebackelmo.co.uk

I'm not sure on the "take it in the face" quote. Brings up uncomfortable mental images.

 

Damien

Self-Aware RedCafe Database (and Admin)
Staff
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
97,276
Location
Also won Best Gif/Photoshop 2021
Has there ever been such a wide gap between the various polls before?

I dont remember there being these kind of gaps in previous elections.

@Ubik
After Brexit and other elections of late, some of the pollsters are experimenting this election with different methods to see what might end up reflecting reality.
 

Fergies Gum

Full Member
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
13,582
After Brexit and other elections of late, some of the pollsters are experimenting this election with different methods to see what might end up reflecting reality.
If you had to pick one, which polls would you trust the most.
 

finneh

Full Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
7,318
Not only is IHT a totally flawed tax due to the geographical issues, but it is duplication too. A property has already been subject to tax, both at the time of purchase and every month since.
Every tax is at least a duplication, though. I pay income on money I've already paid corporation tax on. I then pay Fuel/Alcohol/Property/Inheritance/VA tax on money I've already paid both income and corporation tax on. Then there's NI tax of course.

If you're paying a tax that is only a duplicate then you're doing pretty damn well.

Jesus christ, do you actually believe that? :eek:
Do I believe that people whose only vested interest is getting elected want to do the most amount they can for the most amount of voters they can? Naturally. People are inherently self serving so a Government's only goal becomes the attainment of more power (vote share) for themselves and people with a similar opinion.

The reality of Government means that any party in power only ends up with one real goal: increasing tax receipts as much as possible so that they can then spend this tax receipt (inefficiently) on the most amount of people in order to get re-elected. Their goal is for as many voters as possible to say "party X is fantastic because they've done Y for me". Therefore the Tories are already trying to get the most amount of tax out of the economy as they can. This is illustrated by the tax to GDP ratio being at about 38% which apart from times of recession/depression is about as high as you're going to extract from our current economy.

This is why when anyone says to me "increase taxes" to spend on x, I laugh. Taxes are already at damn close to a maximum level for the UK economy. If they weren't near maximum then they'd have already been increased in order to pay for something which would make a party look better to the electorate. Every single Tory minister would tax the top 1% another £50b and spend it on the NHS if it were possible - it would be the biggest gain of votes for any party ever at the cost of an inconsequential minority.

Taxing the richest few % is fantastic as you get the maximum amount of money for the minimum amount of offended parties. Do you know the problem though? You can't tax them at a higher level than they already pay; you either tax fewer of them more, or a greater number of them less (the 1% particularly pay the level of tax that they decide is fair and suitable for them).

Likewise the bottom 20% tend to vote in far fewer numbers, so there is a reduced incentive for any party to create policies that take from people who do vote and give to people who don't. An illustration of this is Labour's policy on tuition fee's. The bottom 20% don't tend to go to university so don't benefit from it, but they don't vote so who cares. The taxes from this are supposedly taken from the top 5% but we know they aren't going to take a drop in lifestyle; so consequently they either a) maneuver their taxes so they don't pay anymore; or their companies increase the cost of their goods which is essentially a tax on everyone else.

Scenario a) creates a black hole in finances which has to be paid by someone. Again the middle classes vote so you don't want to piss them off too much so some of it will fall on the non-voting bottom 20% inc young people who also don't vote. Scenario b) taxes the purchasers of goods which is essentially the same as increasing VAT which is seen as a regressive tax.

This is the reason why the only way the poorest will be better off is through private initiatives and private technological advances; because there is a huge disincentive from taking money from voters and giving it to non-voters.
 

rcoobc

Not as crap as eferyone thinks
Joined
Jul 28, 2010
Messages
41,702
Location
C-137
Not only is IHT a totally flawed tax due to the geographical issues, but it is duplication too. A property has already been subject to tax, both at the time of purchase and every month since.
Hows this then? Does a council tax not pay for council services? Didnt realise it paid for the upkeep of the house.

Of course IHT is a duplication. You think other taxes arent??

You earn a wage. You pay income tax and national insurance, but keep the remainder (say 60%)

Of that 60% you buy something and pay vat of 20 %. Or you purchase some shares and pay capital gains tax on profits (lets say 20%). Or you buy a house and pay stamp duty (lets say 10%).

Pretty much all taxes are duplications.

But inheritance isnt earned. No one is born better than anyone else. If there is anything fair in the world, its taxing inheritance

Edit - or if you are a business owner, pay corporation tax on profits (19%) then dividends tax (7.5% - 38.1%), then vat/stamp duty/ etc as you go to buy stuff.

All tax is duplicated. Rich folk complaining about being rich
 
Last edited:

montpelier

Full Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2011
Messages
10,637
Diane Abbott by Jack Monroe

https://cookingonabootstrap.com/2017/06/07/we-need-to-talk-about-diane-abbott-now-explicit-content/

WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT DIANE ABBOTT.

Right one of us political writer people needs to do this and it looks like it’s me. Grab a seat. I wanna talk about Diane.
Diane was first elected as an MP in 1987, the year before I was born. She has been dedicated to serving the British public for longer than I have even been alive. Hold that thought. Understand it.
Diane was the first black woman to have a seat in the House of Commons. She MADE HISTORY. Her father was welder, her mother a nurse. How many working class kids do we have in politics these days? feck all, really.
Diane went to Cambridge University to study history. IN THE SEVENTIES. In 2017 only 15 black kids went to Cambridge. Sit down and listen.
Diane worked for the Home Office in 1976. She was so smart they put her on a course to fast-track her career. (I’m just getting started.)
Diane was Race Relations Officer at the National Council for Civil Liberties from 1978 to 1980. (Big fecking job. Bet you couldn’t do it.)
Diane was a TV researcher and reporter from 1978 to 1985. I know a lot of those. They’re fast thinkers, avid fact hounds, brilliant minds.
Diane’s political career began in 1982, on Westminster City Council. Then in 1987, I’ll say it again, she became the first black female MP.

In 2008, her speech on civil liberties in the counterterrorism debate won Parliamentary Speech Of The Year in the Spectator awards.

That speech is here. Watch it, and then come back. https://t.co/qNMvtilMa1

She founded the Black Child initiative, to raise educational achievements among black kids. She shared her damn platform.

She’s been the Shadow Minister for Public health, working tirelessly to tackle Tory cuts to children’s services, maternity care, all of it.

In September 2011, the Telegraph called her ‘one of Labours best frontbench performers’. The same Telegraph now monsters her for clicks.

Diane was one of 16 MPs to write to Miliband in 2015 asking him to commit to opposing further austerity measures. She did that for all of us. Diane was one of a tiny handful of MPs to defy the Labour whip and vote AGAINST Tory austerity cuts. Those cuts are KILLING people.

Diane has consistently voted against a reduction in spending on benefits. She has consistently voted for and campaigned for higher benefits over longer periods for people unable to work due to illness/disability.

In March she raised the issue of cuts to domestic violence services, in the House of Commons: “women and children are turned away daily”.

Diane has campaigned to help unaccompanied migrant children travelling from Greece and Italy.

Diane is a skilled orator, a quick thinker, a glorious debater, a genuine public servant and a thoroughly decent woman. I mean reading through Hansard right now is a delight, some of her points and comebacks are glorious. And brilliant. And strong.

31st Jan 2017 – demanding to know why ESOL funding was being cut while the immigration debate focused on the importance of integration…

She has spoken on Leveson, terrorism, education, poverty, welfare, illness, disability, refugees, child sexual abuse, pro-choice abortion. Her campaigns include legal aid, civil liberties, fighting crime, sickle cell thallasemia, public transport, improving education. She has given speeches at Harvard University, for Christ’s sake. Have you? She has travelled to Kenya, China, Uganda, all over the world, representing the Government. Representing Britain.
 

Badunk

Shares his caf joinday with Dante
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Messages
12,956
Location
Occupied Merseyside
This is nothing more or less than traditional Tory mantra. I know this, because I used to vote for them. I stopped when I realized that their entire basis of economic theory is complete bullshit.

Without a healthy working/middle class with disposable income to spend, the economy is fecked basically. Companies from the tiny shop to the sprawling multinational corporation rely on a huge number of people spending money. If you condense the money to a few people at the top end, then the economy slows to a crawl. They've tried to get around that in the UK by increasing the opportunities for banks and lenders to allow the poor to go into debt so they can keep spending. Now we have a country full of people heavily in debt and with wages that are barely high enough to service that debt, let alone consume at a healthy rate.

As for companies going abroad, we've been hearing that since I was a child, and wierdly it never happens.

But go on, cast your vote for the people who have been running Britain into the ground on the basis of economic theory that doesn't work but just coincidentally happens to make them all millionaires.
:drool::drool::drool::drool:
 

Fergies Gum

Full Member
Joined
May 23, 2011
Messages
13,582
I can't imagine how nervous I'm going to be for the exit poll tomorrow.
I remember the 2015 one very well.

We were all waiting for the exit poll to show a close race and then everyone stunned at 10pm with a lot of us thinking it had to be false and they ended up doing even better than the poll predicted.
 

NinjaFletch

Full Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
19,818
I can't imagine how nervous I'm going to be for the exit poll tomorrow.
Think I'm going to bed at 9 tomorrow. Sick of staying up and being disappointed and I couldn't stomach another Yougov Brexit farce.
 

DOTA

wants Amber Rudd to call him a naughty boy
Joined
Jul 3, 2012
Messages
24,504
I remember the 2015 one very well.

We were all waiting for the exit poll to show a close race and then everyone stunned at 10pm with a lot of us thinking it had to be false and they ended up doing even better than the poll predicted.
I just stared in horror and then exclaimed to my then girlfriend 'we're fecked'.
 

Kentonio

Full Member
Scout
Joined
Dec 16, 2013
Messages
13,188
Location
Stamford Bridge
Supports
Chelsea
This is why when anyone says to me "increase taxes" to spend on x, I laugh. Taxes are already at damn close to a maximum level for the UK economy. If they weren't near maximum then they'd have already been increased in order to pay for something which would make a party look better to the electorate. Every single Tory minister would tax the top 1% another £50b and spend it on the NHS if it were possible - it would be the biggest gain of votes for any party ever at the cost of an inconsequential minority.
You're performing some absolutely incredible mental gymnastics in that post. You are aware that we used to tax high rate taxpayers at about double what we do now, right?
 

Ubik

Nothing happens until something moves!
Joined
Jul 8, 2010
Messages
18,940
2015 can only be described as my 'Nam, very much a before/after moment in how I looked at politics :lol: 2016 then proceeding to be my Watergate.

Has there ever been such a wide gap between the various polls before?

I dont remember there being these kind of gaps in previous elections.

Maybe the people clued up on polls have an answer @Ubik
2001 was pretty wide-ranging, but because they all pointed to a massive Labour win it wasn't really an issue (and they still actually overstated it in % terms, though the seats remained basically the same).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_general_election,_2001 - Within 2 weeks of polling day there were leads from 11% to 30%
 

ThierryHenry

wishes he could watch Arsenal games with KM
Joined
Feb 8, 2009
Messages
13,721
Location
London Town
I remember the 2015 one very well.

We were all waiting for the exit poll to show a close race and then everyone stunned at 10pm with a lot of us thinking it had to be false and they ended up doing even better than the poll predicted.
The ringing bells of Big Ben followed by Dimbleby's surprised voice. 316 for the Conservatives. Chilling. That night was beyond awful. Can't imagine how tough '92 must have been.

At least with Brexit it was only a slow realisation on the night!
 

Ubik

Nothing happens until something moves!
Joined
Jul 8, 2010
Messages
18,940
The ringing bells of Big Ben followed by Dimbleby's surprised voice. 316 for the Conservatives. Chilling. That night was beyond awful. Can't imagine how tough '92 must have been.

At least with Brexit it was only a slow realisation on the night!
Still so peeved I didn't make an absolute mint from betting that night.
 

Nick 0208 Ldn

News 24
Joined
Mar 10, 2004
Messages
23,721
Hows this then? Does a council tax not pay for council services? Didnt realise it paid for the upkeep of the house.

Of course IHT is a duplication. You think other taxes arent??

You earn a wage. You pay income tax and national insurance, but keep the remainder (say 60%)

Of that 60% you buy something and pay vat of 20 %. Or you purchase some shares and pay capital gains tax on profits (lets say 20%). Or you buy a house and pay stamp duty (lets say 10%).

Pretty much all taxes are duplications.

But inheritance isnt earned. No one is born better than anyone else. If there is anything fair in the world, its taxing inheritance

Edit - or if you are a business owner, pay corporation tax on profits (19%) then dividends tax (7.5% - 38.1%), then vat/stamp duty/ etc as you go to buy stuff.

All tax is duplicated. Rich folk complaining about being rich
The point there, was that the state is already getting its share, and will continue to do so under new ownership. The purchaser has accepted and serviced those costs, and should be able to dispose of them without additional interference. Now you can make people homeless if that is your want, but i think we can be fairer with our methods of taxation. If we are concerned about the stockpiling of property by individuals, then you consider a levy on empty homes or acquisition beyond a certain point.

Moreover, IHT fails to take into account the disparity in the market. It is essentially a London/SE focused tax, with the amassing of wealth in other places being of little relevance.