UK Politics Thread (Part 4)

[Lynch04]

@redalways

@Lynch04

Also, I said Taxes, I didn’t specify on individuals - That is a fact.

You didn’t, but Labour did. That was their manifesto commitment. Anything else is just a stylistic difference, as much as I don’t like it.

My comment is in response to Noo_Noo misquoting me, followed by a hurrah from the usual crowd. I didn’t say putting up taxes up on the ‘working person’, but the response suggested I did.

@redalways

@Lynch04

In May Rachel Reeves said Labour had “no plans for increased taxes” - that is a fact.

And quite clearly they didn’t have any, until Reeves saw the state of the government’s finances. The fact that the OBR is now questioning the pre-election budget should say quite a lot about that.

Again, this was in response to Noo_Noo reiterating my original point.
You will also find that I have clearly stated (at least twice) that I understand why Reeves may have had to raise taxes for exactly the same reasons you have repeated.

@Lynch04

The OBR’s chief economic adviser, Davi Miles, added that estimates based on a range of studies showed three-quarters of the impact would fall on workers and just one-quarter in lower profits.

@redalways

This is not ideal, but the last part I think is quite revealing about who really has the economic power, and is the real problem, I would say.

“This is not ideal”, really?? So Labour raises NI on Employers and the OBR comes back saying that their estimates, forecast three quarters of the costs falling on the employee -or in Labour terms ‘the working person’. And your response is that it is not ideal? And follow it up by laying the blame on the employers!

@redalways

@Lynch04

It’s [also been noted] that during the election campaign the Conservatives themselves warned that [Labour had only ruled out rises to employee] not employer, NICs.

Isn’t that precisely what you’re arguing against now though? I would have thought this supports the counter-argument to what you’re trying to say.

I’m not sure I understand the point you are making. Could you explain please . This is a genuine request.

The point I was trying to make if you take into context the other points I raised is that, there has been a lot of scrutiny about the ambiguity of the statement Labour made about raising NI, Taxes, etc.
The Tories advised, that Labour - in their manifesto - had only ruled out NI rises to the employee. Furthermore, Rachel Reeves [told Sky News] on 28 May: “For the duration of the next parliament there will be no increases in income tax and national insurance.” This is misleading, is it not? If it was the Tories, you would all be in uproar, Stealth tax, hitting the poor, people having less money and yet all you can say is that it is not ideal.

This leads me full circle to the original, original point, made to @redfanman where I suggested/stated that ‘Leave’ did not have a mandate, so that did not have the power to implement any of their statements, they were not in Goverment - fact. Ironically, the PM, who was pushing for ‘Remain’ - the slim ball David Cameron - told the biggest lie to all of us by saying he would stay on and carry out the wishes of the “Public Vote” if it was to Leave.
And that additionally, contrary to the common perception held here, lying, speculation, over promising, misconduct is not a one party problem.

[Magnus]

You must allow people to voice their suspicions and speculations on a forum though, I think. We are sitting here, debating most things in this world, from football to politics and everything in between. I don’t think it’s truly fair to “arrest” anyone for speculating. If they are malicious, cruel in their specultions then that is very, very different, but to voice a suspicion that it could be terror related is just something people will do; I think. I personally doubt it was terror related, he doesn’t seem to fit the profile of a young jihadi and I suspect he was more interested in generally hurting/killing people. But I speculate too, not knowing enough like most of us.

On the other hand, I realise the special situation in the UK where you actually had actual race riots when blood was up after the murders, but I think enough time has now passed for spontanious rage and race riots to be less of an issue.

[Magnus]

Finally finished reading all those posts since Part 4 started. Many involving Gammon (insult) - Wikipedia

were quickly ignored after a fast google. Someone above said that the Gammon conversation was boring, and after googling, seeing the discourse, I agree, so skimmed 70 percent of the "is calling someone a gammon actually almost similar to calling someone a

Summary

nigger or a kike

", posts.

Otherwise interesting discussions.

[cynicaloldgit]

@Magnus

interesting discussions

On TAN? Are you drunk again?

[redalways]

@Lynch04

followed by a hurrah from the usual crowd

Think you may have a chip on your shoulder there.

@Lynch04

My comment is in response to Noo_Noo misquoting me

@Lynch04

I didn’t say putting up taxes up on the ‘working person’, but the response suggested I did.

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.

@Lynch04

“This is not ideal”, really?? So Labour raises NI on Employers and the OBR comes back saying that their estimates, forecast three quarters of the costs falling on the employee -or in Labour terms ‘the working person’. And your response is that it is not ideal? And follow it up by laying the blame on the employers!

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.

@Lynch04

I’m not sure I understand the point you are making. Could you explain please . This is a genuine request.

The point I was trying to make if you take into context the other points I raised is that, there has been a lot of scrutiny about the ambiguity of the statement Labour made about raising NI, Taxes, etc.

That’s precisely what I’m saying. You can blame them for that ambiguity, for being “typical slimy politicians” 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.

@Lynch04

If it was the Tories, you would all be in uproar, Stealth tax, hitting the poor, people having less money and yet all you can say is that it is not ideal.

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

@Lynch04

And that additionally, contrary to the common perception held here, lying, speculation, over promising, misconduct is not a one party problem.

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.

[redfanman]

@Lynch04

Ironically, the PM, who was pushing for ‘Remain’ - the slim ball David Cameron - told the biggest lie to all of us by saying he would stay on and carry out the wishes of the “Public Vote” if it was to Leave.

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 ‘lie’ around Brexit.

[redfanman]

@Lynch04

This leads me full circle to the original, original point, made to @redfanman where I suggested/stated that ‘Leave’ did not have a mandate, so that did not have the power to implement any of their statements, they were not in Goverment - fact.

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

[Noo_Noo]

@redfanman

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

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

[redfanman]

@Noo_Noo

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

Absolutely.

[Noo_Noo]

@redalways

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.

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.

[Dane]

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

[Noo_Noo]

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.

[redfanman]

@Noo_Noo

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.

[Dane]

Physics.
Shit flows downhill.
Fact of life.

[RedWhippet]

@redfanman

or find ways to cut out some additional costs instead

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.

[Noo_Noo]

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

Skint: The Truth About Britain's Broken Economy | Channel 4 Documentaries

[redfanman]

@Noo_Noo

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.

[Dane]

@Noo_Noo

its not that everyone got lazy over the last decade or two

Not everyone, no

[cynicaloldgit]

Just woke socialists.

[Noo_Noo]

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.