UK Politics Thread (Part 4)

On TAN? Are you drunk again?

3 Likes

Think you may have a chip on your shoulder there.

As far as I can tell, @Noo_Noo did not misquote you. It was just pointed out to you that your statement was misleading at best, incorrect at worst. I was pointing out to you that @Noo_Noo never mentioned anything about you saying that Labour wouldn’t increase taxes about individuals, but was instead pointing out what Labour’s promises were precisely, something that you noted in the post I quoted.

To put it bluntly, there is a fiscal hole. How will it be filled? They have to raise the money somehow. I’d argue that they should have implemented a wealth tax and imposed capital restrictions to prevent the capital base from fleeing the country, but that’s just my opinion.

And I am not blaming employers at large. Small businesses will inevitably bear the burden of that, and have much less flexibility. But I will not let the businesses reporting record profits while squeezing their employees get away without any blame.

That’s precisely what I’m saying. You can blame them for that ambiguity, for being ā€œtypical slimy politiciansā€ or whatever it is that’s cool to say in enlightened centrism, but if the Conservatives could point out during the campaign that Labour did not rule out increases of the tax of employer NI contributions, then it is not logical to say that Labour did promise they wouldn’t increase that tax.

If it was the Tories, I’d still have the same reaction, of WHERE IS THE WEALTH TAX?

I think it’s quite clear that while politicians on both sides may do that, it’s only a systemic problem on one particular side of the political aisle, no matter what you may choose to believe. That is not to say that Labour does not have its own systemic issues, like a former Director of the CPS choosing to prioritise personal ties instead of treating everyone in the party equally. But to suggest that the behaviour is the same is false equivalence.

1 Like

Cameron stepped down because he was about to be challenged by a brexiteer for the party leadership and had little chance of surviving it.

Odd that you think that this makes him guilty of the biggest ā€˜lie’ around Brexit.

1 Like

That’s funny. You’ve spent the last 8 years telling us all that they did have a mandate because they won the vote.

Still a slime ball though.
He’s another one I have an unhealthy level of disdain for.

2 Likes

Absolutely.

2 Likes

Being honest it’s a technicality. They haven’t increased taxes for working people. Will some people lose out down the line, yes probably through slower wage increases. The interesting bit is how those on lower incomes are potentially shielded with the higher min. wage. Small businesses too with the NI threshold.

Technically they not gone back on a pre election pledge.

For me, the UK needs to get moving. We’ve stagnated, we’re not building, or fixing anywhere near enough. We’vecalso got a huge technical skills shortage now and getting worse. Nowhere near enough doctors, nurses, dentists, engineers, trades and do on.

2 Likes

The knock on effect from it though, which will affect people on lower incomes the worst.
Being reported that Sainsbury’s and M&S are about to transfer the cost of NI increases to the shopper

Yeah i would expect that, and i dont know how to counter it. These lot always have their cake and eat it. Tax them harder, they increase the price of milk. Increase their NI liability, bread goes up, increase wage costs, cornflakes gets more expensive.

Organisations like this are always after growth (sales and profit) and everyone pays for it.

The response of shop around is pretty weak too.

Depends. Food retail is quite competitive, so companies may push up prices. They may also swallow some of the additional cost or find ways to cut out some additional costs instead. We won’t really know until they do it.

1 Like

Physics.
Shit flows downhill.
Fact of life.

Like having a more efficient workforce?

We are constantly told that productivity has stalled but no-one appears to know what to do about it. Maybe making workers cost more might focus minds a bit more.

2 Likes

Are you talking about GDP here?

This explains it, or at least partly. We arent building, its not that everyone got lazy over the last decade or two

@RedWhippet isnt suggesting laziness is a factor.

It’s probably more a question of whether firms have hired or held onto labour because it has been cheaper to do so than investing in technology.

1 Like

Not everyone, no

1 Like

I didn’t think so but that is certainly the message from certain quarters and i wanted to cut that off before it got started.

Not sure I’ll achieve that. :grimacing:

3 Likes

A classic example of dismissing my point by questioning my character.

So the response tried to pull me up on something I didn’t say, yes or no?
Where did it point out my post was misleading or incorrect with fact, especially when the point was not in direct correlation to mine.
Taking your logic, you would have to accept that Noo_Noo response was misleading.

Anyhow, I have noticed @Noo_Noo has responded to your post and drawn a line underneath it so I will leave it as that. :+1:t2:

I concur.

What me directly???

So who succeeded DC……. Oh, that’s right Theresa May. Can you enlighten me as to whether she was Leave or Remain?