rugbyunion
Latest News:

The COML Message Board

The place for discussion, debate and nonsense about Bath Rugby.

Join our new Facebook Group today!

New visitors please read the house rules before posting

Test your prognostications at our Prediction League


Goto Page: Previous123Next
Current Page: 2 of 3
 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
21 April, 2017 19:43
'Holding the Tories to account over Brexit'... riiiiight.

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
21 April, 2017 20:33
"Ban companies based in tax havens bidding for government contracts" - So that's mainly British companies then...

"£10 minimum wage for all workers over the age of 18" - Tricky when you are in the European Union and living costs are increasing.

"All rented accommodation to be fit for human habitation" - Err, is that a policy or an obvious statement? What is for for human habitation - do we need to employ a department for Human Habitation.

"Renationalise the railways" - Could work if done well, Labour wouldn't do it well.

"Renationalise the NHS" - It is nationalised.

"Free school meals" - Why tax the rich to subsidise the slightly less rich? Poor families already get free meals.

"Create a National Education Service" - Quite possibly the worst policy idea ever.

"Scrap tuition fees" - why subsidise those who will likely earn more unless linked to national industrial strategy?

"Restore NHS Bursaries" - why are those who work in the public sector any more deserving of cheaper education than those who don't?

"Increase the carers allowance" - Fine but needs paying for.

"Create a National Investment Bank" - So state-funded infrastructure spending led by a Labour-biased quango. Sounds awful...

"End the public sector pay freeze" - That's probably fair.

"End sweetheart tax deals between HMRC and massive corporations" - and replace it with what?

"Stop major corporations ripping off their suppliers" - great but how?

"Reverse the Tory corporation tax cuts" - Wait and see if it works first. It isn't doing Ireland any harm.

"Defend Human Rights" - Really?

"Zero Hours Contracts ban" - what about those who want one?

"Holding the Tories to account over Brexit" - setting arbitrary targets to be met (clearly with the intention to block the final deal) yet relying entirely on Opposition rebels.

"Housebuilding" - every government promises this, no government delivers.

"Combat inequality" - another vague aspiration. Care to say how?

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
21 April, 2017 21:22
Arguable about the NHS. A lot of it has been/is being privatised.

 
MESSAGES->author
TCM2007 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
21 April, 2017 22:10
Quote:
hasta
Arguable about the NHS. A lot of it has been/is being privatised.

Define "privatised". If you mean some services are provided by independent contractors that's been the case since 1945.

For me, I couldn't give a stuff about the ownership of the clinic buildings or whose payroll the nurses and doctors are on so long as there is a high quality, efficient service provided to free at the point of delivery to all who need it, funded by general taxation. THAT's the NHS, not demanding that the staff are civil servants.



Stuart

Former ed.

 
Bath Supporter Jack

Re: O/T Election?
21 April, 2017 22:53
Could someone tell me how it's all going to be paid for?

As I mention above there is a rather inconvenient thing called Laffer's Curve. What this means is that beyond a certain point as you increase taxes you collect less revenue. Labour in 2010 increased top rate tax from 40% to 50%. The number of people declaring £1m of revenue was 15,000 people in 2009. At the higher rate only 6,000 declared this amount in 2010.

Strange that Labour had managed with a tax rate of 40% for 13 years from 1997 but had to change it for the last three weeks of their tenure.

When OSBORNE reduced the rate to 45% the number of people declaring £1m of income went up to 11,000.

 
OBinexile
OBinexile (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 02:38
Great,

At least we're talking about Labours policies - and not the made up concepts found in most of the press.

I'll pick out three - cos this will get too long else.

1. "Ban companies based in tax havens bidding for government contracts" - So that's mainly British companies then...

Don't understand what you're trying to say. You're happy that companies that don't pay tax can outcompete companies that do pay tax when bidding for a government grant? Why would you call a company British if its registered to pay tax in, eg, the Cayman Islands? to be honest I'd go much further.


2. "Free school meals" - Why tax the rich to subsidise the slightly less rich? Poor families already get free meals.
Because the evidence indicates a) that kids are much more likely to eat school meals if there is no stigma involved, and b) that kids who regularly eat school meals at lunchtime show a measurable improvement in their attainment compared with kids who don't. Now I know tories dont' trust evidence - but I'm assuming you're not in that category.


3. "Create a National Investment Bank" - So state-funded infrastructure spending led by a Labour-biased quango. Sounds awful...
Seems to work in those socialist states like, err, Germany and Luxembourg. Indeed Luxembourgs NIB is funding aspects of UK universities, utilities and private sector even now (but not after Brexit one suspects). So, might be a good idea to replace something that we have decided to disassociate from.

Happy to carry on

OBinExile

 
OBinexile
OBinexile (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 03:14
Oh and just for fun.

Does this sound about right as the set of policies of the party currently in government?

– Severe cuts in immigration. Teresa May is convinced she can bring it down to 5 figures.

– Leaving the EU. In process.

– Bringing back grammar schools. Top of Teresa Mays home based priorities it seems.

– Increased military spending. Ah yes, we're going to need this to stir up the globe.

– More “security” and “strong leadership”. If TM said this once she said it 100 times
in her first speech at the stump.

– Foreign policy driven by “British national interest” not human rights. Sound familiar?

– Reduce development aid. Appears to be on the cards - Bill Gates and UN seem to have got
wind of it - so the idea is clearly being floated, even if its not confirmed policy.


The thing is - all of these were the policies of the British National Party in 2005.
At the time we all agreed that the BNP was the Lunatic fringe.
We're now being told by the government that they are policies of the establishment.

You are living in scary times.


OBinExile

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 07:23
Quote:
OBinexile
1. "Ban companies based in tax havens bidding for government contracts" - So that's mainly British companies then...

Don't understand what you're trying to say. You're happy that companies that don't pay tax can outcompete companies that do pay tax when bidding for a government grant? Why would you call a company British if its registered to pay tax in, eg, the Cayman Islands? to be honest I'd go much further.

Well there is difference between registered in a tax haven and being based in one. Tax avoiders, as declared by Diane Abbott: KPMG, pwc, Deloitte, EY.

The majority of those are based in the EU - so not sure if we can discriminate - but how do you stop them anyway. Make them close their office in the British Virgin Isles? Then they're OK?

Quote:
OBinexile
2. "Free school meals" - Why tax the rich to subsidise the slightly less rich? Poor families already get free meals.
Because the evidence indicates a) that kids are much more likely to eat school meals if there is no stigma involved, and b) that kids who regularly eat school meals at lunchtime show a measurable improvement in their attainment compared with kids who don't. Now I know tories dont' trust evidence - but I'm assuming you're not in that category.

It seems the co-author of the report, referenced by Angela Raynor, obviously doesn't trust her own evidence...

"Questioned on whether she believed the report justified rolling out the scheme nationally, Ms Dearden said: "It would be overstating it by quite a bit and in the report we said this is very, very expensive to roll out nationally..."

But no, I disagree with the idea that the State needs to spend vast sums determining what children should eat, especially when that should be the responsibility of the parent. If they don't get the 'evidence' and don't want better attainment for their children then why should we reward the middle class who do and can pay for it?

Quote:
OBinexile
3. "Create a National Investment Bank" - So state-funded infrastructure spending led by a Labour-biased quango. Sounds awful...
Seems to work in those socialist states like, err, Germany and Luxembourg. Indeed Luxembourgs NIB is funding aspects of UK universities, utilities and private sector even now (but not after Brexit one suspects). So, might be a good idea to replace something that we have decided to disassociate from.

They're proposing nothing like Luxembourg's NIB. This is purely for UK infrastructure and, if following the German model, won't be allowed to compete with the private sector.

The fact that he has already singled out the North-east shows it is clearly not intended to be independent from Labour's direction.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 22/04/2017 07:24 by Substitute.

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 07:31
Quote:
OBinexile

– Reduce development aid. Appears to be on the cards - Bill Gates and UN seem to have got
wind of it - so the idea is clearly being floated, even if its not confirmed policy.

Ah, Bill Gates... A man who has avoided millions in tax telling us about the benefits of... Tax.

Putting that aside, it has been scorched, but why shouldn't it be up for debate. Must we imply that everyone who questions (Cameron's) foreign aid commitment is somehow a fascist, xenophobe.

Quote:
OBinexile
The thing is - all of these were the policies of the British National Party in 2005.
At the time we all agreed that the BNP was the Lunatic fringe.
We're now being told by the government that they are policies of the establishment.

Were they really?

Or are you deliberately trying to conflate the BNP's overtly far-right policies with those of the Conservatives? Presumably to stifle debate...

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 07:55
Thank you OBinexile, at last there is the start of serious debate about the merit of Labour's policies under Corbyn rather than a blinkered, ignorant repetition of the Mail, Sun and Telegraph

Let's add just a couple more:

Scrap tuition fees - as opposed to generations of young people facing the burden of £40k debt and rising annually (currently 4.6% pa) even though they have no job or income - simply leading to a widespread accepted view that big personal debt is now normal at best and serious mental health issues [and no doubt some suicides] through the inevitable despair and feelings of hopelessness at worst

Restore NHS bursaries - many successful private sector businesses offer bursaries as a strategy to recruit high calibre candidates to specialist professional groups critical to the business. This is no different - it is a business like perception of training and development as a long term investment for an essential service that is facing a recruitment and retention crisis in crucial professions

Ban Zero Hours Contracts - why would someone [other than the likes of Sports Direct CEO] want a system whereby the employer can a) call you in without notice and discipline you if you don't attend and b) leave you hanging, hoping for some small scrap of income with no commitment or obligation to provide any work at all and c) use this system in order to avoid paying sickness, maternity, paternity entitlements?

But no that is all clearly lunatic as opposed to committing a minimum of £320m on the grammar school folly that even the DfE's data shows will only benefit richer families when every Head and teacher knows that the big budget cuts all maintained schools are facing and the consequent inability to recruit and train good teachers and other education professional are the real problems that need funding

Want to go on ...

And I'm no fan of Corbyn at all but please can we have an intelligent debate

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 08:19
Quote:
gaz59
Scrap tuition fees - as opposed to generations of young people facing the burden of £40k debt and rising annually (currently 4.6% pa) even though they have no job or income - simply leading to a widespread accepted view that big personal debt is now normal at best and serious mental health issues [and no doubt some suicides] through the inevitable despair and feelings of hopelessness at worst

You don't pay the student loan if you are out of employment and if you are in employment it is at a fixed rate of repayment. Most graduates earn more than their non-graduate peers. Study a more in-demand degree and you will likely be paid more.

If we can't distinguish between the mechanisms by which various loans work and most resort to the most extreme case in all examples, maybe people need to take some responsibility for their actions rather than scrapping loans?

Quote:
gaz59
Restore NHS bursaries - many successful private sector businesses offer bursaries as a strategy to recruit high calibre candidates to specialist professional groups critical to the business. This is no different - it is a business like perception of training and development as a long term investment for an essential service that is facing a recruitment and retention crisis in crucial professions.

The public sector is not the private sector. Trying to compete and compare with the private sector is unattainable, distortionary and had done nothing to boost efficiency of the sector.

If a company wants to spend millions of its own money to recruit people, so be it. If the public sector wants to spend millions of taxpayers money, that is a different matter.

Quote:
gaz59
Ban Zero Hours Contracts - why would someone [other than the likes of Sports Direct CEO] want a system whereby the employer can a) call you in without notice and discipline you if you don't attend and b) leave you hanging, hoping for some small scrap of income with no commitment or obligation to provide any work at all and c) use this system in order to avoid paying sickness, maternity, paternity entitlements?

I knew plenty of students who wanted such flexibility, fully aware of the downsides that come with such an arrangement.

Is there much evidence that these 1-2mil people are being coerced into Zero-Hour contracts?

Quote:
gaz59
But no that is all clearly lunatic as opposed to committing a minimum of £320m on the grammar school folly that even the DfE's data shows will only benefit richer families when every Head and teacher knows that the big budget cuts all maintained schools are facing and the consequent inability to recruit and train good teachers and other education professional are the real problems that need funding

I'm not convinced by grammar schools but I do believe in selection in some form.

I wouldn't be so quick to agree with the DfE, who even through the Blair years, managed to do a pretty appalling job with our schools.

Teachers get, on paper, good terms. Yet they don't want to teach in our schools. I think the problem is strategic not about buying them off with bigger salaries just for them to complain again in two years time.

 
annie blackthorn
annie blackthorn (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 08:59
OB - i think you left some out!

Doesn't really matter how long the list is, coz it won't happen!
Not with Corbyn 'in charge' (Sm23)and his mates (McCluskey/McDonnell/ and of course Comrade Milne) making them up as they go along. Then getting Abbott and Butler to explain them all on Question Time or whatever vehicle is used! (Sm128)

p.s. for those dissing/rubbishing Mrs May, obviously none of you have been canvassing on the doorsteps and discovered how astonishingly popular she is personally!



Adoptee for 2017/18 James Phillips - newly arrived and bringing a wealth of experience in the Prem!

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 09:49
Substitute, open your eyes if not your mind

Whether you are in employment or not your student loan still keeps rising

The NHS is obviously unable to compete with the private sector on salary but it has to find successful strategies to persuade good professional graduates to come and work in the public sector and bursaries is just one obvious way of recruiting and ensuring retainment to realise the investment

Ask those same students would they have preferred to have had a contract that had a guaranteed minimum number of hours so they could plan and budget - then ask the same to everyone else who is forced to accept the terms that go with the Zero Hours Contracts 'offered' by the likes of Sports Direct but hey so long as a few students seem not bothered what's the problem

And don't get me started on the problems with a selection system of education - though here in Kent it has stimulated a few jobs in the tutoring sector as middle class parents desperately seek test-teaching and spend the summer holidays frantically practising tests with their precious to avoid them having to go to the local seriously under-funded secondary school with all the rough kids in the town

 
OBinexile
OBinexile (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 09:51
BNP Policy 2005

I wasn't sure whether you were questioning the legitimacy of the policies I attributed to the BNP in 2005 or not. The link, via the bbc (I wouldn't want to link to the BNP website - if there is one!), shows what Nick Griffins policies were then. I think the move from Cameron to May is in a direction towards where BNP campaigned in 2005 - ie clearly further to the right. For me that is a more insidious and extreme movement than the swing from Blair/Brown to Corbyn - despite how people paint Corbyn.

I do have huge reservations about Corbyn as a leader - but those reservations are more than matched by the current leader of the Conservative party. The nature of our democracy (1st past the post - a 2 party system) means that there has to be parliamentary debate from people with varying views. That appears to be under threat - or is it just the media who have called anybody opposed to the Tory Brexit approach as saboteurs?.

Anyway, I am pleased that we're not discussing and dismissing made up policies, attributed to the labour party. I don't think the policies are lunatic, I accept that they increase government involvement - rather than decrease which I accept other folk don't agree with.

Hoping that when I wake up tomorrow theres a W on the Bath site.

OBinExile

 
OBinexile
OBinexile (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 10:11
Annie,

I believe that they are the policies that labour are presenting for this election. Yes of course its a bit shambolic at the moment, the announcement was a bit of a surprise after all. I suspect it will be shambolic for most of the election - one of the big worries about JC. BUT I raised them because, earlier in the thread, Labours policies were derided as lunatic, and then a number of policies that had been made up elsewhere were being showcased as if they were labour policies to justify the lunatic tag. I just think its worth presenting the facts as best you can. If you can point to a better link then great.

My family live in Scotland - no love whatsoever for TM up there. Also I am a 'prisoner' of my social media which provides me with a very different view (and is equally scathing of the Tories and Labour - and indeed all the major parties in England and Scotland). This 'venture' into an alternative reality (on a rugby website ffs!) is quite a novelty for me. I'm trying not to troll and trying not to be too confrontational - but it doesn't always work.


All the best

OBinExile

 
MESSAGES->author
Which Tyler (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 11:00
Quote:
OBinexile
Annie,
I believe that they are the policies that labour are presenting for this election. Yes of course its a bit shambolic at the moment, the announcement was a bit of a surprise after all. I suspect it will be shambolic for most of the election - one of the big worries about JC. BUT I raised them because, earlier in the thread, Labours policies were derided as lunatic, and then a number of policies that had been made up elsewhere were being showcased as if they were labour policies to justify the lunatic tag. I just think its worth presenting the facts as best you can. If you can point to a better link then great.

My family live in Scotland - no love whatsoever for TM up there. Also I am a 'prisoner' of my social media which provides me with a very different view (and is equally scathing of the Tories and Labour - and indeed all the major parties in England and Scotland). This 'venture' into an alternative reality (on a rugby website ffs!) is quite a novelty for me. I'm trying not to troll and trying not to be too confrontational - but it doesn't always work.


All the best

OBinExile
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=267 Absolute, the list of lies parading as labour policies was amongst the worst of "fake news".

Please note, I have no idea about James Haskell's views on politics; and rather suspect that he's a tory supporter. I personally don't support any of the major parties, but I AM a fan of facts and information, and subjecting oneself to these before making a decision. As opposed to sitting in whatever little bubble you have, only hearing the positives for your side, and the negatives (and outright falsehoods) for your opponents, and making a decision based on.... well, pretty much nothing at all. And yes, I know my view is becoming ever more outdated, but damn it, I will hold it to the end.



A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=377
RAEBURN SHIELD

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 12:50
Quote:
gaz59
Whether you are in employment or not your student loan still keeps rising

Of course, as mine does (most scandalous is when you receive overtime or a bonus) . But you don't pay anything at all until you have a reasonable salary and, I guess, it is still time limited. And the amount you pay is linked to what you earn.

Quote:
gaz59
The NHS is obviously unable to compete with the private sector on salary but it has to find successful strategies to persuade good professional graduates to come and work in the public sector and bursaries is just one obvious way of recruiting and ensuring retainment to realise the investment

Well it has no problem attracting good professional people into medicine (doctors). The problem is that if you increase the pay of nurses and control the flow of nurses you end directing money away from service expenditure. A bursary is a short term way of doing that and isn't going to solve their workplace environment or keep them happy in 10-15 years.

Quote:
gaz59

Ask those same students would they have preferred to have had a contract that had a guaranteed minimum number of hours so they could plan and budget - then ask the same to everyone else who is forced to accept the terms that go with the Zero Hours Contracts 'offered' by the likes of Sports Direct but hey so long as a few students seem not bothered what's the problem

68% of those on zero hours contracts did not want more hours - we can presume they were happy with the number they had (fullfact.org). Thus coincides with my anecdotal evidence. Sure, some companies may exploit it but let's not present them as the norm, rather than the exception.

And let's not ban a practice outright that suits many. Restrict and control but don't ban.

Quote:
gaz59

And don't get me started on the problems with a selection system of education - though here in Kent it has stimulated a few jobs in the tutoring sector as middle class parents desperately seek test-teaching and spend the summer holidays frantically practising tests with their precious to avoid them having to go to the local seriously under-funded secondary school with all the rough kids in the town

The funny thing is, where I live, Calderdale and Kirklees have grammar provision. Leeds and Bradford do not. The overall educational in Calderdale and Kirklees far outstrips Bradford (even excluding grammars). To get into the best schools people move to Calderdale or Kirklees (where house prices or low) or if rich enough, move to Menston, Ilkley or Otley (where house prices es are high.

I know which one sounds fairer...

(Though I agree, selection should not be something you can be coached into succeeding.)

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 13:09
Quote:
OBinexile
BNP Policy 2005
I wasn't sure whether you were questioning the legitimacy of the policies I attributed to the BNP in 2005 or not. The link, via the bbc (I wouldn't want to link to the BNP website - if there is one!), shows what Nick Griffins policies were then. I think the move from Cameron to May is in a direction towards where BNP campaigned in 2005 - ie clearly further to the right. For me that is a more insidious and extreme movement than the swing from Blair/Brown to Corbyn - despite how people paint Corbyn.

The policy of migration in the 10 000's was also Cameron's.

Leaving the EU was decided by a referendum and the Conservative party are implementing this.

International aid is remaining as a prescribed target.

The rest is barely a 'lurch to the right'.

The funny thing is that her biggest lurch to the right (authoritarianism) passed with barely a blink i.e. The Snoopers Charter

Quote:
OBinexile
I do have huge reservations about Corbyn as a leader - but those reservations are more than matched by the current leader of the Conservative party. The nature of our democracy (1st past the post - a 2 party system) means that there has to be parliamentary debate from people with varying views. That appears to be under threat - or is it just the media who have called anybody opposed to the Tory Brexit approach as saboteurs?.

The idea that debate is under threat is highly questionable. Living through the Blair years was equally polarising and much of the media was equally, if not more, cosy to the ruling party.

The definition of sabotage is to obstruct something. Given there are clearly many trying to obstruct the Conservatives implementing Brexit (which is fine), then calling them saboteurs is entirely valid.

 
MESSAGES->author
OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 20:55
Tories appear to be abandoning their usual low taxation policies, be interesting to see how many votes that will cost them.



Jack Wilson - Adopted player 2017/18



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 22/04/2017 21:06 by OutsideBath.

 
DanWiley
DanWiley (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 21:02
Don't people with a levels generally get paid more than those that didn't do them? Why do we draw the line at 18? Generally more education does bring more to the country, why start charging at 18?

 
Boldngrey
Boldngrey (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 21:23
Roofers, plumbers and brickies earn very good wages and rarely have A levels.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 22/04/2017 21:25 by Boldngrey.

 
MESSAGES->author
CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 21:32
Westminster voting intention:

CON: 50% (+4)
LAB: 25% (-)
LDEM: 11% (-)
UKIP: 7% (-2)

(via ComRes)

Scottish #GE2017 Survation poll for @Sunday_Post
SNP 43.1% (50% in 2015)
Tories 27.9% (14.9%)
Labour 17.8% (24.3%)
Lib Dems 8.8% (7.5%)



http://zdgzqa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p7Mwi7pLXeM89TY2KFdDQ-UUDGSv1FKNdhYdrW-koAuRN3tsqCPfE3onFxuO-3cZ0057Tom1uJai3vjkz3dvY_Q/1998%20Euro%20Champs.jpg http://zdgzqa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pFul9UAV5zEXOzeRc1kmmlgDKXTYTIlTnGoQzYelH6KzdCeU-exN0IGo74QN2OGvlSoEiVjzAESvHx9BFlBsNFA/Bath%202008.jpg

 
annie blackthorn
annie blackthorn (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 22:15
p.s. OB in Exile

Don't think your survey data is correct re. TM and the Tories being persona non grata north of the border - but because of rabid bullying nature of the SNP, most of them keep their political opinions to themselves and are quiet about it. I may indeed by a Tory, but even I have been impressed by the canvas returns - but then if the question asks who would you prefer to be Prime Minister i.e. the person in charge of the country during the Brexit negotiations over the next few years - Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn - its a no brainer!!!



Adoptee for 2017/18 James Phillips - newly arrived and bringing a wealth of experience in the Prem!

 
OBinexile
OBinexile (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
22 April, 2017 23:16
Hahaha. Annie - I'm trying to minimise the perceptions generated by the media (although I'll accept that my perception of TMs popularity in Scotland was driven by my social media bubble). It'll be interesting to see whether the SNPs commitment to making Scottish Labour irrelevant has resulted in them taking their eyes off the return of the Scottish tories.

I think rabid bullying by the SNP is only in the heads of folk from the south. I am not an SNP supporter - I voted against independence. There has been some comments - but what nastiness there has been is at least as much from the Unionists as the SNP.

I think that the rhetoric from Tories since Brexit has really fuelled a them and us situation. In my view the adversarial approach is not the way to get the best deal with EU (or any civilised organisation), particularly where most of the trump cards are with the other side. Given that, I would much prefer to see a significant change of tack on the part of the incoming UK government.

OBinExile

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 06:33
Quote:
OBinexile

I think that the rhetoric from Tories since Brexit has really fuelled a them and us situation. In my view the adversarial approach is not the way to get the best deal with EU (or any civilised organisation)...

Then what is best approach in your opinion and where are the examples it works? Worth noting that the EU have been pretty adversarial...

Quote:
OBinexile
...particularly where most of the trump cards are with the other side.

What trump cards?

If you're not afraid of leaving and you stick to your principles then there are no trump cards.

 
MESSAGES->author
TCM2007 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 07:49
Quote:
CoochieCoo
Westminster voting intention:
CON: 50% (+4)
LAB: 25% (-)
LDEM: 11% (-)
UKIP: 7% (-2)

(via ComRes)

Scottish #GE2017 Survation poll for @Sunday_Post
SNP 43.1% (50% in 2015)
Tories 27.9% (14.9%)
Labour 17.8% (24.3%)
Lib Dems 8.8% (7.5%)

Tory resurgence in Scotland won't make much/any difference to the number of SNP MPs. That Labour figure is stunning.

Nationally when a party goes through 50% and an opposition goes below 25% all kinds of unpredictably stuff happens, as many "safe" seats come into play, and there is very little historical modelling data about them.



Stuart

Former ed.

 
MESSAGES->author
OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 07:50
Latest opinion pole shows Tory lead halved after their tax and pension betrayal.

Ignoring their core support by hiking taxes and reducing pensions isn't too clever.



Jack Wilson - Adopted player 2017/18

 
Boldngrey
Boldngrey (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 08:04
Vince Cable and the Libs have said higher taxes are inevitable.

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 09:49
Quote:
OutsideBath
Latest opinion pole shows Tory lead halved after their tax and pension betrayal.
Ignoring their core support by hiking taxes and reducing pensions isn't too clever.

Sticking to their core support does the country on the whole no good.

I am glad the Tories are brave enough to grasp the nettle - though I think the alternatives have similar ideas.

 
MESSAGES->author
CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 10:00
Latest ICM poll on Peston states Tories 22 points ahead!



http://zdgzqa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p7Mwi7pLXeM89TY2KFdDQ-UUDGSv1FKNdhYdrW-koAuRN3tsqCPfE3onFxuO-3cZ0057Tom1uJai3vjkz3dvY_Q/1998%20Euro%20Champs.jpg http://zdgzqa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pFul9UAV5zEXOzeRc1kmmlgDKXTYTIlTnGoQzYelH6KzdCeU-exN0IGo74QN2OGvlSoEiVjzAESvHx9BFlBsNFA/Bath%202008.jpg

 
annie blackthorn
annie blackthorn (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 10:26
This is not me being sarcastic.
Just watched Andrew Marr intervewing Mr Corbyn.
(I feel so sorry for him that I am internally egging him on to give a sensible related to the real world answer). He is the Leader of the Opposition remember, has access to all sorts of very secret national security i.e. our safety, information etc.
I give up.

Marr asked him point blank.
"So, you have been elected Prime Minister - one of the first things that will happen as you walk into No. 10 is that a very senior civil servant will tap you on the shoulder (here my exact words recall fails me) and take you to the room where you will be asked to see the message to the four Captains of the Nuclear Submarines in the event of an imminent nuclear threat to the UK. What will your command message be? 'Fire' or 'Don't fire'. Answers on a postcard to Mr Corbyn as from his convoluted evasive reply, he hasn't a clue what he would do - probably tell the civil servant "you choose" or say 'I will have to phone a friend'! I



Adoptee for 2017/18 James Phillips - newly arrived and bringing a wealth of experience in the Prem!

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 13:40
In all fairness Annie that is an impossible question to give a straight "fire" or "don't fire" answer

The question as reported here refers to a "threat" now how any PM responds depends entirely on the nature of the threat in scale and possible escalation to attack

It may well be a threat but one that could be reduced through negotiation or other intervention - simply take a preemptive knee-jerk strike action and it could escalate into an unnecessary destruction of the planet

Had the question been framed as an imminent nuclear attack, well that would expect a very different and clear cut answer

But it exactly demonstrates the problem for Labour and Corbyn, the interpretation of his responses will inevitably be predetermined

Once again time for a more measured, intelligent approach to politics or we will end up with the Homeland scenario [and if you haven't seen the most recent series you really should]

 
The Oilman
The Oilman (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 16:17
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it McDonald from labour who first said he would raise taxes, admittedly those with the broadest shoulders? (70k p.a.)
Going to be a big tax rate to cover all the promises he is making.
Wealth taxes are the real frighteners.

 
MESSAGES->author
OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 16:22
Quote:
The Oilman
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it McDonald from labour who first said he would raise taxes, admittedly those with the broadest shoulders? (70k p.a.)
Going to be a big tax rate to cover all the promises he is making.
Wealth taxes are the real frighteners.

Believe you are right, for some strange reason he called people earning £70k rich.



Jack Wilson - Adopted player 2017/18

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 17:04
Quote:
OutsideBath
Quote:
The Oilman
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it McDonald from labour who first said he would raise taxes, admittedly those with the broadest shoulders? (70k p.a.)
Going to be a big tax rate to cover all the promises he is making.
Wealth taxes are the real frighteners.

Believe you are right, for some strange reason he called people earning £70k rich.

Here we go again with another Sun/Mail knee-jerk myth - this is not McDonnell's definition it is data from the HRMC that the top 5% ile in the UK earn over £70k

It is not unreasonable for a political party whose aim is for equality and to support low earners to consider a progressive tax system that places a higher burden on the top 5% income earners

Obviously there are some problems with that if implemented as a blanket policy with no regard to variably cost of living across the country and ignores the income v wealth issue but as a starting point for a tax policy it does have a fairly sound rationale I would suggest unless you just digest and regurgitate the Sun or Mail or Express without any individual thought or analysis

 
MESSAGES->author
OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 17:11
Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
OutsideBath
Quote:
The Oilman
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it McDonald from labour who first said he would raise taxes, admittedly those with the broadest shoulders? (70k p.a.)
Going to be a big tax rate to cover all the promises he is making.
Wealth taxes are the real frighteners.

Believe you are right, for some strange reason he called people earning £70k rich.


Here we go again with another Sun/Mail knee-jerk myth - this is not McDonnell's definition it is data from the HRMC that the top 5% ile in the UK earn over £70k

It is not unreasonable for a political party whose aim is for equality and to support low earners to consider a progressive tax system that places a higher burden on the top 5% income earners

Obviously there are some problems with that if implemented as a blanket policy with no regard to variably cost of living across the country and ignores the income v wealth issue but as a starting point for a tax policy it does have a fairly sound rationale I would suggest unless you just digest and regurgitate the Sun or Mail or Express without any individual thought or analysis

Actually he called people earning £70-80k a year rich in an interview on radio 4.



Jack Wilson - Adopted player 2017/18

 
MESSAGES->author
Which Tyler (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 18:29
Out of interest, what definition of "rich" doesn't include people earning 3 times the average wage, and belonging in the top 5% or earners?

I'm not entirely sure what this would be controversial (barring individuals earning that much, and not feeling rich)



A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=377
RAEBURN SHIELD

 
The Oilman
The Oilman (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 18:33
Quote:
OutsideBath
Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
OutsideBath
Quote:
The Oilman
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't it McDonald from labour who first said he would raise taxes, admittedly those with the broadest shoulders? (70k p.a.)
Going to be a big tax rate to cover all the promises he is making.
Wealth taxes are the real frighteners.

Believe you are right, for some strange reason he called people earning £70k rich.


Here we go again with another Sun/Mail knee-jerk myth - this is not McDonnell's definition it is data from the HRMC that the top 5% ile in the UK earn over £70k

It is not unreasonable for a political party whose aim is for equality and to support low earners to consider a progressive tax system that places a higher burden on the top 5% income earners

Obviously there are some problems with that if implemented as a blanket policy with no regard to variably cost of living across the country and ignores the income v wealth issue but as a starting point for a tax policy it does have a fairly sound rationale I would suggest unless you just digest and regurgitate the Sun or Mail or Express without any individual thought or analysis

Actually he called people earning £70-80k a year rich in an interview on radio 4.

I heard it as well, in fact John Humphries challenged him on it and he repeated it. So it has nothing to do with the Sun or Mail.
It has been proven time and time again that high rates of income tax are regressive, problem is that Labour have never understood it. High taxation is in their DNA.

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 19:37
A lot missing the essence of the point here

Mcdonnell certainly referred to those earning £70k+ as in the category of "having the broadest shoulders" and therefore should be paying disproportionately more tax but the 'definition' of rich being those in the top 5% comes from HRMC data and this level equates to £70k on 2015 stats

What research has proven this system time and time again to be regressive? Are you sure you understand the term? Its primary weakness is in the difference between high income and wealth but that is where checks and balances would need to be brought in as with any intelligent, multi- layered tax system

Labour actually does get it but has frequently shied from it because the Sun effect is that many people will tell pollsters that they want strong, high quality public services but then when they get into the discreet ballot box will vote for the party that they think will make them better off

What is regressive is a tax system is a tax based on spending especially essential every day goods and services which disproportionately hits the lower incomes .. in other words VAT

Now I'm certainly no fan of Mcdonnell - his track record on high office chancellorship type role is far from impressive but the guy does understand economics far, far better than some of those posting on ere by the evidence

 
MESSAGES->author
OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 20:29
Quote:
Which Tyler
Out of interest, what definition of "rich" doesn't include people earning 3 times the average wage, and belonging in the top 5% or earners?
I'm not entirely sure what this would be controversial (barring individuals earning that much, and not feeling rich)

Before I decided to give up on the work lark and make better use of my time I was in this bracket, but certainly never considered myself rich.

Bruce Craig's level of wealth is what I would define as rich.



Jack Wilson - Adopted player 2017/18

 
OBinexile
OBinexile (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 20:38
In response to oilman (edited to make more sense - as it took me so long to check this out!) this is the thing. There is no evidence from the last 25 years to support this comment. Since 1990 (ie encompassing both Tory and Labour governments) there has been no increase in the higher rate of income tax, it has remained at 40% throughout.

What has happened is that the eligibility for paying higher income tax has changed over time. That eligibility increased year on year from 20,700 in 1990 to 37,400 in 2009. Since then it has declined and its back at 32,000 at the moment.

Clearly the last labour government neither increased the high rates of income tax or increased the number of people eligible to pay high rates. That is in contrast with the current and previous government.

I will accept that a 'very high rate' of tax - 50% of all income over 150,000 - was introduced in 2010/11, I presume by the outgoing labour government. That is still in place today, although the rate has declined to 45%.

I will also accept that labour were rather more 'creative' at raising taxes. But that is not what you accuse them of.

This is all easily analysable using Income tax changes since 1990

So, if you're going to accuse a party of being congenitally incapable of acting in some way then please justify it.

OBinExile

OBinExile



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 24/04/2017 06:22 by OBinexile.

 
DanWiley
DanWiley (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 20:41
I guess rich can be a relative term. I don't have a problem with someone suggesting that someone on 70k is rich. I feel that i have access to a life style beyond that of most of the country : holidays, cars, houses and the like. That seems at least a fair definition of rich. I'm certainly in a category, whatever label you want to put on it, where i am happy to contribute more in tax terms.

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
23 April, 2017 21:12
It probably depends where you live, income compared to cost of living. 70k as a basis for mortgage would get you a nice place in many parts of the country. Not so much in London.

If you build that factor in it certainly seems like top 5% is reasonable. But income distribution in this country is not a bell curve and has a very fat tail. I'd rather focus on the lack of corporation tax paid by multinationals myself.

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 09:05
Whenever labour (or other) politicians talk about 'the rich' paying more tax, its almost as if they don't think that that isn't already the case, because tax is paid as a percentage, not a fee.

Clearly someone on £100K pays massively more income tax both in absolute and relative terms than someone on the average wage.

The top 1% now pay 27% of total income tax - which is the clear opposite of what John Mcdonnel says.

[www.telegraph.co.uk]

This isn't to say that people over 70K shouldn't pay a higher rate of income tax, that's up for debate, but let's not allow people to start the argument from a position of nonsense.

 
MESSAGES->author
CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 09:09
We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
— Winston Churchill



http://zdgzqa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p7Mwi7pLXeM89TY2KFdDQ-UUDGSv1FKNdhYdrW-koAuRN3tsqCPfE3onFxuO-3cZ0057Tom1uJai3vjkz3dvY_Q/1998%20Euro%20Champs.jpg http://zdgzqa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pFul9UAV5zEXOzeRc1kmmlgDKXTYTIlTnGoQzYelH6KzdCeU-exN0IGo74QN2OGvlSoEiVjzAESvHx9BFlBsNFA/Bath%202008.jpg

 
MESSAGES->author
Which Tyler (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 09:38
Quote:
OutsideBath
Quote:
Which Tyler
Out of interest, what definition of "rich" doesn't include people earning 3 times the average wage, and belonging in the top 5% or earners?
I'm not entirely sure what this would be controversial (barring individuals earning that much, and not feeling rich)

Before I decided to give up on the work lark and make better use of my time I was in this bracket, but certainly never considered myself rich.

Bruce Craig's level of wealth is what I would define as rich.
So, one of those individuals....
My point there was the difference in perception when applying these terms to oneself rather than looking at the bigger picture. Obviously, it does still depend on where you live and the cost of living there; but I'm sure it's really easy to spend basically all of a salary of £70; but you'd be (presumably, and depending on location) talking about a debate on whether to afford a second nice car rather than utalitarian; or 3 weeks abroad instead of 2 (or a holiday home in Portugal instead of France).
As someone who's spent the last decade building my salary up from -£6k to +£12k my concerns have been which to pay between elecricity or rent; can afford to buy a bike, can I afford to take 3 days off to go camping. It's a different level entirely; and I, and many minimum wagers, or even average UK salaried would certainly consider anyone on £70k to be rich (including my father - hell, even my brother [a teacher] has a tax bill larger than my total earnings. Neither of them consider themselves to be "rich" of course); even if they live in central London.

Now I've build up to +£12k, I consider myself to be comfortably off, and actually think that the income tax allowance is in broadly the right place right now - a bit low for those without children, a bit high for those with.

The Bruce Craig's of the world have a category of super-rich all to themselves.



A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=377
RAEBURN SHIELD




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 24/04/2017 09:44 by Which Tyler.

 
P G Tips
P G Tips (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 11:20
As a few above have said, it all depends how you define "rich".

An annual salary of £70,000 can be earned by:

A headteacher, Police Supt, Commander RN, Accountant, GP, middle manager in IT.

- these people would not I suspect consider themselves "rich". Well off, perhaps -certainly not financially precarious, but hardly among the wealthy of our society.


PG

 
MESSAGES->author
jayeatman (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 11:44
Tuition fees:

The problem with the existing system is it's a graduate tax masquerading as a loan. Moreover unlike even the dodgiest payday load, it's one where the government can and has changed the interest rate and the installments at a whim AFTER you've taken it out. It's also costly writing off unpaid loans and expensive to administer.

Wouldn't it be far more honest, simpler and cheaper to adminster to just have a graduate tax? But hang on, if graduates earn more anyway, don't they already pay more tax?

 
DanWiley
DanWiley (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 11:49
I disagree, I think those that have lived among the poor of our society really would consider themselves rich.

Mind you, what we're arguing about here is the lexical semantics of the word rich. Whether rich means in the top 5% of earners or in the top 0.1% of earners really isn't the point. Is someone earning £70k wealthy enough to pay a but more tax than someone earning £40k?

I think its fair that some people would see someone on £70k as "rich", but he label you put on that person really isn't important.

 
MESSAGES->author
hemington (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 11:57
Also depends on where you live - 70k in London will buy you a lot less (housing, food, drink etc) and will therefore give you far less 'disposable' cash for a tax increase! &0 k in somewhere like Newcastle will give you a lot more 'disposable' income

 
MESSAGES->author
TCM2007 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 13:02
I think the semantics of using "rich" are difficult. Richness is defined by wealth not income, which most politicians struggle with.

People who earn over £70k already pay more tax, both in absolute and, once they go through £100k, relative terms. It's reasonable to argue that that should be even more pronounced.

But politically probably not clever. While the 5% who earn over that are probably not as a rule Labour voters, there are much larger numbers who aspire to reaching that level, and you are worrying them too.



Stuart

Former ed.

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 13:14
The aspirational point is very key there. Targeting 100k plus seems way more sensible. As should, frankly, corporation tax for multinationals.

 
MESSAGES->author
Which Tyler (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 13:16
Quote:
Stuart Anderton
I think the semantics of using "rich" are difficult. Richness is defined by wealth not income, which most politicians struggle with.
People who earn over £70k already pay more tax, both in absolute and, once they go through £100k, relative terms. It's reasonable to argue that that should be even more pronounced.

But politically probably not clever. While the 5% who earn over that are probably not as a rule Labour voters, there are much larger numbers who aspire to reaching that level, and you are worrying them too.
Fair point, well made.
For myself, my interjection was about some considering the label "rich" not to apply to those earning £70k+; without getting drawn in to whether those should pay more tax; if I were to get drawn in to that, then I'd say that the current tax brackets are broadly correct; though I'd be in favour of many more bands; and based on %age of the average wage.
Mind, I also favour higher taxation in general, including for myself; but then, I'm poor(ish) so I would wouldn't I.



A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=377
RAEBURN SHIELD

 
Rucking Carl
Rucking Carl (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 13:41
Having read a lot of the other politics thread; this thread is far better. People are being respectful of opposing opinions.

Any chance we can see this level of actual debate continue for the next 6+ weeks?

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 14:51
It is a very slow incremental tax hit for those on £100k plus, Stuart, and only up to £123k until you get to £150k

Unnecessarily bureaucratic - would be far simpler and cheaper to implement to bring the current highest threshold lower to, say £100k and introduce a higher super-tax rate at, say £250k per year

But there needs to be a rigorous overhaul of the regulations because at these income levels serious Tax experts are brought in to minimise the liability, within the law but exploiting loopholes and imaginative tax avoidance systems

 
MESSAGES->author
TCM2007 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 16:00
Quote:
gaz59
It is a very slow incremental tax hit for those on £100k plus, Stuart, and only up to £123k until you get to £150k

No it's not. Marginal rate over £100k-£120k is about 60%. (They sneakily take away your personal allowance over £100k)



Stuart

Former ed.

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 18:14
Stuart, we both know the personal allowance is reduced by £1 for every £2 earned over £100k so how does that work out to a 60% hit

I'm no stats or maths expert but even to me if someone is earning £105k say I don't see how that gets to a marginal rate of 60% for the extra £5k declared.

Possibly by the time you hit £123k or close though no doubt there is a tax expert ere that can illuminate

 
MESSAGES->author
TCM2007 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
24 April, 2017 19:35
That extra £5k is taxed at 40% - £2k.

You lose £2.5k of personal allowance, so that amount is now taxed at 40% - £1k.

Total tax paid on the £5k = £3k = 60%



Stuart

Former ed.

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 07:05
Well, glad I got my numerical illiteracy defence in first Stuart! I would ask why the heck doesn't the government/HRMC have a more transparent, simpler description of the tax rules at the higher end much as you've set it out so that people like me can understand it so much better but the cynic in me knows the answer!

So, yeah agree the only focus for increasing personal taxation must be at the 'super-rich' end of the income scale with examination of more tax on the seriously wealthy [though that is so difficult to do]

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 08:10
Depending on where the 'super rich' are on the income scale, as per the laffer curve, the higher up the scale you go the more pronounced it is. These people are the most able to @#$%& off somewhere else.

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 08:40
It's not even that they naff off elsewhere, more that they benefit from taking professional advice to take advantage of the tax code complexity, whereas at a lower pay, there are fewer loop holes and less benefit from an accountant.

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 08:44
yes that and also, when you put these higher tax levels in it reduces the incentive to earn. For example, I'm essentially self employed, once i get into the higher tax band and its approaching the end of the year I start to reduce my income and wait for it in the next year. I will probably end up paying the same, but possibly not.

 
Bath Supporter Jack

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 08:49
Its actually even simpler than that in that they can decide not to take any pay from their companies and live of their cash deposits for a while, which of course are earning them no interest at the moment........and then wait for the realisation of the impact of Laffer's curve to bite on tax revenues and for common sense to reassert itself.

Gordon Brown/Alistair Darling introduce 50% tax on revenues above £150,000.......actual tax revenues collected from this segment goes down!

George Osborne cuts 50% to 45% actual tax revenue received goes up.......simples!

 
MESSAGES->author
Which Tyler (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 08:56
That seems a rather risky game of chicken to play with a government with 5 years left.

My instinct tells me that most of Laffer's Curve would be explained by rich people with expensive accountants exploiting looph-holes in the tax code. Loop-holes that are mostly there specifically because rich people tend to get their way in political debate; so there's no political will to close them.
I'd be in far greater approvial of closing tax loop-holes than in just increasing the tax rate (though I'd favour both together; if the former is done successfully, it may well mean that the latter iss no longer necessary).

I very much doubt that all those people who had been earning £150k+ suddenly weren't earning that much - they were just filtering it differently.



A man who cannot change his mind, cannot change anything
http://www.rugbyrebels.co/board/download/file.php?id=377
RAEBURN SHIELD




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 25/04/2017 08:59 by Which Tyler.

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 09:07
Well until Osborne started messing about with pension allowances (yearly and total) you could shove tons of your income in there, it's still not bad.

People always go on about tax loopholes and accountants, but some of its just common sense. If you are 50 years old you can stick £40K per year of your income into a pension, if you can afford it (and you haven't gone over a million). In 5 years you have had £200K in tax free income, you can have 25% of it at 55 tax free.

 
DorsetBoy
Dorset Boy (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 10:10
And the add in the use of VCTs and EISs to further reduce tax liability etc. although such schemes are then reinvesting in the economy.

On the multi-nationals side of things there is a very simple solution - put in place a turnover tax on those companies rather than a tax on their manipulated profits, (or have both). Obviously the turnover tax will be at a far lower rate than the current corporation tax rates!

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 13:14
Open Britain Attack List Of Brexit-Backing MPs Drawn Up Ahead Of General Election
Iain Duncan Smith is on it.

6 targets in the SW:


[www.huffingtonpost.co.uk]

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 13:21
Quote:
Dorset Boy
Obviously the turnover tax will be at a far lower rate than the current corporation tax rates!

Well,it depends how you mean to implement your turnover tax (i.e. on revenues, or on production), but both sound horrible.

As far as I can tell, the first potentially taxes companies making a loss and rewards those with low input expenditure (services as opposed to manufacturers). The other is basically VAT, which is inflationary and hits the poor harder.

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 13:33
Quote:
woodpecker
Open Britain Attack List Of Brexit-Backing MPs Drawn Up Ahead Of General Election
Iain Duncan Smith is on it.

6 targets in the SW:


[www.huffingtonpost.co.uk]

Haven't a number of high-profile, Remain-voting Tories left the group because of its support for Lib Dems in marginal seats with Remain-voting Tories?

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 13:34
Yes, not surprisingly as they were almost all tories

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 13:39
Quote:
woodpecker
Yes, not surprisingly as they were almost all tories

I thought the intention of the group was to support Remain-voting MPs and reduce the number of Leave voters, not serve as a campaigning fund for the Lib Dems?

 
DorsetBoy
Dorset Boy (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 13:43
Quote:
Substitute
Quote:
Dorset Boy
Obviously the turnover tax will be at a far lower rate than the current corporation tax rates!

Well,it depends how you mean to implement your turnover tax (i.e. on revenues, or on production), but both sound horrible.

As far as I can tell, the first potentially taxes companies making a loss and rewards those with low input expenditure (services as opposed to manufacturers). The other is basically VAT, which is inflationary and hits the poor harder.

At the moment you have multi-nationals manipulating where they make profit by creating 'loans' between sub-companies - so Coffee co worldwide has its Luxembourg subsidiary make loans to it's UK subsidiary , and the 'loan' repayments mean the UK subsidiary makes very little profit on a massive turnover. As a result of this manipulation they pay very little UK tax giving them an unfair advantage over the independent coffee co.
Most of the multi-nationals are doing this which is why taxing their profits isn't working, a tax system set up long before there were multinationals.

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 13:52
Quote:
Dorset Boy
At the moment you have multi-nationals manipulating where they make profit by creating 'loans' between sub-companies - so Coffee co worldwide has its Luxembourg subsidiary make loans to it's UK subsidiary , and the 'loan' repayments mean the UK subsidiary makes very little profit on a massive turnover. As a result of this manipulation they pay very little UK tax giving them an unfair advantage over the independent coffee co.
Most of the multi-nationals are doing this which is why taxing their profits isn't working, a tax system set up long before there were multinationals.

I understand how it works and I share you sentiments about the unfairness surrounding it.

Maybe the problem isn't the model of taxation, because corporation tax is more suitable than a revenue or turnover tax, if the finances are declared correctly. Maybe the problem is the ability for companies to move their finances so easily between borders?

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 14:21
OK, this tax issue has been given a fair amount of air time, how about switching discussion to the issue for today: Brexit

Which party has the position on Brexit that will best serve the country in the long term?

Party A: Whatever the deal the people should decide with another referendum

Party B: Talk tough, strong negotiating position invoking images of war and conflict to show implacable, single-minded determination to get the best for our country with no deal a strong possibility if all other EU countries don't see sense

Party C: Talk the language of partnership, give reassurance to existing EU nationals residing in the UK, expect reciprocal rights for UK people living in EU countries and make trade and customs agreement with EU a priority objective

Vote now!

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 15:18
Maybe re-phrase the stances:

Party A: Don't accept result and want to block leaving.

Party B: Genuinely negotiate terms with EU.

Party C: Ignore the meaningful reasons why people would have voted to leave the EU, and instead go for 'technically' leaving.

In which case, I choose Party B. What is the point of entering a negotiation unwilling to negotiate. After all, it takes two to tango and I'm tired of all the saintly portrayals of the EU.

Why have they not unilaterally declared they will protect the rights of UK nationals living in EU countries?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 25/04/2017 15:19 by Substitute.

 
Trev's Big Tackle
Trev's Big Tackle (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 16:31
Quote:
Substitute
Party C: Ignore the meaningful reasons why people would have voted to leave the EU, and instead go for 'technically' leaving.


No-one knows why anyone voted leave. £350 million a week for the NHS or was it because they were sick of straight bananas?

 
OBinexile
OBinexile (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 19:02
Sub

Maybe you should elaborate on what you think are the meaningful reasons that such a high proportion of people voted to leave - and how you might resolve that (using current Tory policies as examples) - having left?

It seems to me that the EU, and what it stood for, became the scapegoat for the 'ills of society'. When we remove the scapegoat - these same people are going to need another one - unless we try to do something for them.


Cheers

OBinExile

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 19:27
Immigration, Jurisdiction of Supranational Court, Eu funding commitments, policy decisions made at the supranational level, an alien PR parliamentary system, National Sovereignty and freedom, ever closer union...

People may have voted for any combination of those reasons (and others). They will quite possibly be disappointed on some counts.

But I don't think anyone voted Leave with the expectation that the government to not attempt to negotiate at all, or seek no fundamental change in our relationship.

There are many ills in society (and they can be no more credited for victory than immigration or any other reason. Euroscepticism has always been strong in this country (in fact the pre-referendum polling was lower than seen in earlier years).

However,why does nobody pause to ask if unconstrained cheap labour, remittances etc. have contributed to the ills of this country? [www.theguardian.com]

 
fat lock
fat lock (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 21:19
Quote:
Dorset Boy
Quote:
Substitute
Quote:
Dorset Boy
Obviously the turnover tax will be at a far lower rate than the current corporation tax rates!

Well,it depends how you mean to implement your turnover tax (i.e. on revenues, or on production), but both sound horrible.

As far as I can tell, the first potentially taxes companies making a loss and rewards those with low input expenditure (services as opposed to manufacturers). The other is basically VAT, which is inflationary and hits the poor harder.

At the moment you have multi-nationals manipulating where they make profit by creating 'loans' between sub-companies - so Coffee co worldwide has its Luxembourg subsidiary make loans to it's UK subsidiary , and the 'loan' repayments mean the UK subsidiary makes very little profit on a massive turnover. As a result of this manipulation they pay very little UK tax giving them an unfair advantage over the independent coffee co.
Most of the multi-nationals are doing this which is why taxing their profits isn't working, a tax system set up long before there were multinationals.

I think the whole concept of taxing income needs to be re thought, for business and citizens. Basically those with the means can avoid tax by manipulating their income. Tax on consumption would be easier to administer, and harder to avoid. It could deter spending and so slow the economy - but when we are driving the economy with artificially cheap debt so slowing consumer spending might be good.It also has the advantage of not taxing savings (income) so encouraging savings.

 
gaz59
gaz59 (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 21:21
Quote:
Substitute

Why have they not unilaterally declared they will protect the rights of UK nationals living in EU countries?

Because quite simply that is in the power of the EU only

But by committing to the rights for EU nationals living here it gives the best chance that the EU will reciprocate

Hence the emphasis on an approach based on partnership and not conflict

 
MESSAGES->author
CoochieCoo (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 21:43
Quote:
woodpecker
Depending on where the 'super rich' are on the income scale, as per the laffer curve, the higher up the scale you go the more pronounced it is. These people are the most able to @#$%& off somewhere else.

...and take jobs they created here somewhere else as well!



http://zdgzqa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1p7Mwi7pLXeM89TY2KFdDQ-UUDGSv1FKNdhYdrW-koAuRN3tsqCPfE3onFxuO-3cZ0057Tom1uJai3vjkz3dvY_Q/1998%20Euro%20Champs.jpg http://zdgzqa.bay.livefilestore.com/y1pFul9UAV5zEXOzeRc1kmmlgDKXTYTIlTnGoQzYelH6KzdCeU-exN0IGo74QN2OGvlSoEiVjzAESvHx9BFlBsNFA/Bath%202008.jpg

 
Bath Supporter Jack

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 21:48
Not sure they are that good at avoiding tax with the top 1% paying 30% of all tax.

Half of people don't pay any tax.

 
annie blackthorn
annie blackthorn (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 22:17
Que?

50% are below the minimum tax i.e. 11,500? Is that what you meant?



Adoptee for 2017/18 James Phillips - newly arrived and bringing a wealth of experience in the Prem!

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 23:41
Quote:
gaz59
Quote:
Substitute

Why have they not unilaterally declared they will protect the rights of UK nationals living in EU countries?

Because quite simply that is in the power of the EU only

But by committing to the rights for EU nationals living here it gives the best chance that the EU will reciprocate

Hence the emphasis on an approach based on partnership and not conflict

Unilateral declarations are not a partnership. Who are we dealing with here? A tyrant?

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
25 April, 2017 23:46
Quote:
annie blackthorn
Que?
50% are below the minimum tax i.e. 11,500? Is that what you meant?

I'm guessing that 50% of people receive more than pay in taxes. The alternative is crazy - everyone pays taxes in some for or another.

The real structural weakness is the Tax Credits system. Well meaning but just distorts the market and incentivises companys to just pay less (where they can).

Hard to fix though.

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 08:21
Quote:
an alien PR parliamentary system

Hilairs. So previously we had the lie that the EU was not democratic, now it's just 'not the right kind' (i.e. more) democratic?

 
MESSAGES->author
OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 08:36
Quote:
OBinexile
Sub
Maybe you should elaborate on what you think are the meaningful reasons that such a high proportion of people voted to leave - and how you might resolve that (using current Tory policies as examples) - having left?

It seems to me that the EU, and what it stood for, became the scapegoat for the 'ills of society'. When we remove the scapegoat - these same people are going to need another one - unless we try to do something for them.


Cheers

OBinExile

The real problem with the EU was in my opinion the UK's faceless senior civil servants and the way they applied EU laws/rules. The French, Italiens, Spanish etc just ignore the rules that don't work for them where as we took them all on board regardless of their affect on the UK.

If only we'd ignored the rules we didn't like the EU could actually have worked for us.



Jack Wilson - Adopted player 2017/18

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 08:50
Im in a seat where it went from Lib to Con in the last election, its usually lib. In the referendum it was remain 56%, the tory MP was a remainer.

I would like a nice soft comfy brexit (or no brexit really).

Now do I vote for the lib dems or do I vote for the tory. I think on balance having more non mental tories in the government will have a better outcome than having 20 lib dems in parliament.

I still think Theresa is not a nutter - fingers crossed

 
Substitute
Substitute (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 09:16
Quote:
hasta
Quote:
an alien PR parliamentary system

Hilairs. So previously we had the lie that the EU was not democratic, now it's just 'not the right kind' (i.e. more) democratic?

PR is not more (or less) democratic.

The horse-trading and convention that governs the selection of, for example, the leader of the European Parliament is not democratic (in that it is not a decision the people can make, or are aware of when deciding).

We have a long history of uninterrupted parliamentary democracy. Despite it's confrontational and decisive nature it has never fallen to Authoritarianism and has never been removed by absolutism or revolution.

It gives decisive government, makes it easy to remove them and has vindicated in it's trust of MPs as guardians (rather than an inbuilt political inertia).

You may desire a different form of representation, but don't diminish the fact that history has led the UK to a very different understanding of how democracy should be implemented and justifiably so.

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 09:24
The horse trading and convention that selects a prime minister is not democratic. FPTP is not democratic. The favours and appointments to the House of Lords are extreeeeeemly not-democratic.

If FPTP is so wonderful and decisive, why are we having another election so soon? Why was the last government a coalition? Why do no new electoral systems use it? If we trust MPs as guardians - why have referendums? Why do you not trust MEPs as guardians?

I'm not saying it's terrible, nor would I particularly change it (at least for the Commons). But holding the EU as undemocratic is the pot calling the kettle black.

 
Bath Hammer
Bath Hammer (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 09:31
Quote:
woodpecker
Im in a seat where it went from Lib to Con in the last election, its usually lib. In the referendum it was remain 56%, the tory MP was a remainer.
I would like a nice soft comfy brexit (or no brexit really).

Now do I vote for the lib dems or do I vote for the tory. I think on balance having more non mental tories in the government will have a better outcome than having 20 lib dems in parliament.

I still think Theresa is not a nutter - fingers crossed

Totally agree. The liberals are in disarray & I'm not sure that voting one or two in under their present leader will help the "soft Brexit" cause one jot.

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 09:42
I guess that if your tory MP is a headbanger like IDS, Cash Redwood, Rees-mogg and the Lib dem has a chance, then get rid of them.

 
MESSAGES->author
hasta (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 09:49
Disarray may be a bit strong for it. They've clearly had a bunch of victories, particularly in local and bi-elections in the last 12 months and are on the rebound from their absolute trouncing in 2015. They rather lack talent at the top though.

 
MESSAGES->author
OutsideBath (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 09:52
Quote:
hasta
Disarray may be a bit strong for it. They've clearly had a bunch of victories, particularly in local and bi-elections in the last 12 months and are on the rebound from their absolute trouncing in 2015. They rather lack talent at the top though.

If you're not going to vote Tory then Liberal is the only realistic option with the Labour party being run by a bunch of left wing nutters.



Jack Wilson - Adopted player 2017/18

 
annie blackthorn
annie blackthorn (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 09:53
Astonishing news isn't it that two of the southwest Liberal candidates have already thrown in the towel! Bath and Yeovil - with the sort of well thought through reasoning that my 4 year old grandson would come up with if caught pinching his sisters sweets! (Sm2).

However, we will see who 'they' might helicopter in to Bath and Yeovil amongst the 50 or so ex-MP's they have to choose from? All good fun!



Adoptee for 2017/18 James Phillips - newly arrived and bringing a wealth of experience in the Prem!

 
Trev's Big Tackle
Trev's Big Tackle (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 10:12
It appears that the EU wants to guarantee the rights of UK citizens living in the EU, if the UK reciprocate. And the UK want to guarantee the rights of EU citizens living in the UK, if the EU reciprocate. That we have somehow turned this situation into an argument does not bode well for when the real negotiations begin on matters where there is an actual difference of opinion.

 
Bath Supporter Jack

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 10:16
Because I don't know how to do a link thing I have cut and paste the article below from 2016




Almost half of Britons pay no income tax while the richest are now shouldering the biggest burden on record, a new analysis has found.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies said that the proportion of working-age adults who do not pay income tax has risen from 34.3 per cent to 43.8 per cent, equivalent to 23million people.

Over the same period the amount of income tax paid by the richest 1 per cent has risen from 24.4 per cent to 27.5 per cent, meaning that 300,000 people pay more than a quarter of the nation's income tax.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies said that the change has been driven by George Osborne's policies of tax cuts for low earners and hikes for those who earn the most.

Mr Osborne has repeatedly highlighted the fact that the richest pay more while those on lower incomes pay less as part of his bid to rebrand the Conservatives as the "worker's party".

Under Mr Osborne the personal allowance has risen from £6,475 to £10,600, lifting millions of people out of the basic rate of income tax entirely.


The proportion of income tax paid by the top 1 per cent has risen significantly under George Osborne

The proportion of income tax paid by the top 1 per cent has risen significantly under George Osborne


Over the same period 1.6million people have been dragged into paying the higher rate of income tax after the Chancellor repeatedly froze the threshold for the 40p rate.

Labour introduced the 50p rate of income tax for higher earners, which Mr Osborne cut to 45p, while pensions tax relief has also been cut significantly.

The IFS said: "The recent increase in the share of tax coming from the top 1% of taxpayers was driven by a series of policy changes.

"Some, notably the large increase in the personal tax allowance, took many low earners out of tax while also reducing payments for lower to middle taxpayers.

"While the personal allowance was increased, the higher-rate threshold was cut.



"Meanwhile, those on the highest incomes did not gain at all from the increase in the personal allowance, since a new policy introduced in 2010 means that it is gradually withdrawn once incomes rise above £100,000.

 
Bath Hammer
Bath Hammer (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 10:24
Quote:
woodpecker
I guess that if your tory MP is a headbanger like IDS, Cash Redwood, Rees-mogg and the Lib dem has a chance, then get rid of them.

Why is IDS a headbanger. Okay, he is pro Brexit which is surely a perfectly plausible view even if you don't share it. Is that all that makes him a headbanger???

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 10:25
BFJ,

Clearly as John Mcdonald said, the tories make poor people pay all the tax and rich people just avoid it.

 
MESSAGES->author
woodpecker (IP Logged)

Re: O/T Election?
26 April, 2017 10:41
Quote:
Bath Hammer
Quote:
woodpecker
I guess that if your tory MP is a headbanger like IDS, Cash Redwood, Rees-mogg and the Lib dem has a chance, then get rid of them.

Why is IDS a headbanger. Okay, he is pro Brexit which is surely a perfectly plausible view even if you don't share it. Is that all that makes him a headbanger???

He's been poisoning the tory party since the days of major

Goto Page: Previous123Next
Current Page: 2 of 3

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?