Danny
Member
Posts: 10,370
|
Post by Danny on Mar 30, 2023 16:13:43 GMT
But the reason I'm a population control extremist is because I see the same thing starting to happen where I live in Wigan. Traffic used to flow freely but especially in areas like Standish where there has been an awful lot of new builds (often replacing green land and wooded areas) the traffic also now limps along at certain times of the day and Manchester has just replicated the conditions in London regardless of what Burnham achieves on his public transport plans. So what does overcrowded cities have to do with total population size? We could resume a policy of shifting population out of major cites and deliberately thin out the population to prevent overcrowding if we wish, but it has little to do with the total. We could implement a policy to ban immigration to the Uk, which has always mostly come from outside the Eu and has always been at the discretion of Uk governments, but instead we seem to have actually made this easier in a number of respects since brexit. We could take steps to discouage brits from having so many children, but we seem to be doing the oppsite. We could make life more affordable for the average brit, so only one person in a couple needs to work and therefore greatly reduce travelling and the crowding it produces. Encourage working from home, instead of government doing the opposite again. But succesive governments like immigration, like growing populations and like overcrowding for the poor(er). Although it looks increasingly likely the governmen will succeed in closing down certain Uk industries, which ought to reduce travelling -the Uk car industry looks doomed (as indeed it was before we joined the EU too). |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Mar 30, 2023 16:21:16 GMT
However, they are promising to spend the same claimed increase in revenue from their version of a windfall tax on yet another item - this time stopping an increase in Council Tax (if they were in power, which they are not). How many times can you spend the same money?!? 
Well money can circulate so if you do it in the right way then yeah, the money can effectively be spent more than once. But some ways work better than others. The priority is to spend on things that will save money and increase income though. House building is a handy one because it saves money on housing benefit, boosts the economy and is counter-inflationary. But it helps the working class, so… Ah, the 'multiplier' effect. Well yes, Reeves can state that in her costings* if she wants to. Agree on house building and I'd add 'house insulating' which could be even more counter-inflationary (provided those who measure inflation reweight the 'basket of goods' to adjust for lower demand). 'Insulate Britain' would boost net disposable income and save various public sectors money on Energy bills that they could then spend on improved services and/or wages. Some very low hanging fruit for LAB to put Red+Green water between their approach and CON's approach. The 'non-event' of Shapps 'Green Day' is picking up some trolling WRT to a song by Green Day - although I doubt the mass media, beyond the Torygraph, will even bother to report the "rehash" that Shapps managed to expand out to 1,000 pages. The question is then why do Starmer-Reeves not pick such obvious low hanging fruit? Perhaps as some LAB strategist has decided to target 'Middle Aged Mortgage Man', some of whom, like to use their home as a piggy bank via remortgaging every time they can release some equity? NB Stuff like cutting VAT or not increasing council tax at all would reduce tax receipts but have very low multiplier effects - perhaps why NewLAB go in for that kind of thing? * She might need to state she is going to rewrite the 'fiscal rules' in order to treat investment in 'Insulate Britain' as.. investment and then surely a #nobrainer to devolve the implementation side to LAs. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Mar 30, 2023 16:35:44 GMT
Maybe Starmer's big announcement on 'Council Tax' for the launch of LAB's LE campaign is covered by the 3% who picked 'Another Tax'? CON have left a super massive open goal, yet Starmer manages to keep missing.
?
However, note CGT is very low on the list - so maybe Reeves realised that? Also it's not clear in such a 'simples' question what folks would like to do about some of the higher ranking 'unfair' taxes (eg too low, too high, just not very effective, etc).
|
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Mar 30, 2023 16:48:38 GMT
Savanta MRP prediction from December for Rutherglen together with lots of caveats: I have had a go at modelling Rutherglen and Hamilton West based on averaged cross-breaks from the two most recent YouGovs. I have ignored the very small movements to and from the SNP with the Cons and LDs. SNP lose 14% to Lab and 7% to SGP, but gain 11% of 2019Lab. Lab lose 11% to SNP, gain 14% of SNP2019. Lab gain 17% of Con2019. Lab gain 40% of LD2019. Lab lose combined 5% of their 2019 vote to LD or Con. This works out as: Lab 40.0% (+5.5) SNP 38.8% (-5.2) However, this assumes that SGP stand. The 3% which YG's figures suggest they would take from the SNP could be crucial. As for Savanta's MRP in December: The SNP's lead has fallen from around 13 points then to 9 now. If you adjust for that, it too would suggest a knife-edge result. IIRC the last by election in Scotland for a Westminster seat was 12 years ago in Inverclyde, so there's likely to be a plethora of candidates. I'd expect all 5 parties in Holyrood to stand (though it's possible SGP might stand aside), as well as Alba, SSP, TUSC, Libertarian, Family Party and various odds and sods of self-publicists like Galloway. SCon vote going to SLab should be enough for SLab to win, even if the SNP vote remained stable. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Mar 30, 2023 16:52:42 GMT
Well money can circulate so if you do it in the right way then yeah, the money can effectively be spent more than once. But some ways work better than others. The priority is to spend on things that will save money and increase income though. House building is a handy one because it saves money on housing benefit, boosts the economy and is counter-inflationary. But it helps the working class, so… Some very low hanging fruit for LAB to put Red+Green water between their approach and CON's approach. Don’t really doubt they’ll make some ok investments. Be interesting to see how much they get out of them, and how much the working class benefit in redressing the balance. |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Mar 30, 2023 17:03:06 GMT
Some very low hanging fruit for LAB to put Red+Green water between their approach and CON's approach. Don’t really doubt they’ll make some ok investments. Be interesting to see how much they get out of them, and how much the working class benefit in redressing the balance. I have my doubts and don't see investing in 'Insulate Britain' as a 'class' thing. It is possible Starmer-Reeves are worried Rishi will copy any good ideas that LAB come up with but it also possible that they don't have any good ideas - not even the Captain Obvious ones that CON ignore, possibly also for daft voter segmentation 'strategy' reasons? I get the 'fuel tax freeze' and don't punch pensioners strategy (even though I disagree with it) but FFS why are LAB avoiding such obvious low hanging fruit that could really help with their GOTV in the LEs and 'lock-in' their lead in Westminster VI?!?! PS There are also 'bad' investments (like HS2, which was a LAB idea). Sadly HMGs of both colours seen pretty good at picking the bad investments - or at least totally screwing up the delivery (in terms of £££ and timescale). Same for likes of EDF as well. |
|
steve
Member
Posts: 12,649
|
Post by steve on Mar 30, 2023 17:06:34 GMT
They will submerge themselves underwater for a nap, leaving their noses out on the edges of riverbanks so they can breathe.
Capybara's not Trevors they have to leave their paws out as well so they can post every three minutes on ukpr2
|
|
|
|
Post by James E on Mar 30, 2023 17:10:59 GMT
oldnat "SCon vote going to SLab should be enough for SLab to win, even if the SNP vote remained stable." Surely the Scon vote is unlikely to move over 'en masse'? YouGov's recent Scottish cross-breaks for Con to Lab (17%) and LD to Lab (40%) are effectively identical to their figures for GB as a whole - the last 4 GB YouGovs show 2019Con>Lab as 16% and 2019LD>Lab as 40%. [to Add - 19:22hrs] The most recent Scottish Westminster by election, Airdrie and Shotts, May 2021, saw no collapse in the Conservative share, despite Lab being the clear challengers to the SNP. They were down 4.7 points from 17.6% to 12.9%. At the time, the Tories were polling around 22% in Scottish Westminster VI - so 3 points down on GE2019. So maybe a couple of points of by-election squeeze on the 3rd-placed Tory vote, but no more than that. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Airdrie_and_Shotts_by-election
|
|
|
|
Post by graham on Mar 30, 2023 17:11:06 GMT
Savanta MRP prediction from December for Rutherglen together with lots of caveats: I have had a go at modelling Rutherglen and Hamilton West based on averaged cross-breaks from the two most recent YouGovs. I have ignored the very small movements to and from the SNP with the Cons and LDs. SNP lose 14% to Lab and 7% to SGP, but gain 11% of 2019Lab. Lab lose 11% to SNP, gain 14% of SNP2019. Lab gain 17% of Con2019. Lab gain 40% of LD2019. Lab lose combined 5% of their 2019 vote to LD or Con. This works out as: Lab 40.0% (+5.5) SNP 38.8% (-5.2) However, this assumes that SGP stand. The 3% which YG's figures suggest they would take from the SNP could be crucial. As for Savanta's MRP in December: The SNP's lead has fallen from around 13 points then to 9 now. If you adjust for that, it too would suggest a knife-edge result. How well would Alba do here? They will surely stand - if only to make life more difficult for SNP. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Mar 30, 2023 17:13:24 GMT
I have had a go at modelling Rutherglen and Hamilton West based on averaged cross-breaks from the two most recent YouGovs. I have ignored the very small movements to and from the SNP with the Cons and LDs. SNP lose 14% to Lab and 7% to SGP, but gain 11% of 2019Lab. Lab lose 11% to SNP, bit gain 14% of SNP2019. Lab gain 17% of Con2019. Lab gain 40% of LD2019. Lab lose combined 5% of their 2019 vote to LD or Con. This works out as: Lab 40.0% (+5.5) SNP 38.8% (-5.2) However, this assumes that SGP stand. The 3% which YG's figures suggest they would take from the SNP could be crucial. What a polling based approach can't allow for is tactical voting in a one-off by-election context. For example, it is easy to imagine the Conservative vote collapsing completely in favour of Labour if Tory voters see this a free opportunity to give the SNP a kicking, knowing there is no effect on the Westminster position. I am sure both the SNP and Labour would throw everything they have at this and I am happy to confess I have no idea what the outcome would be. Labour really ought to win a seat which it gained in 2017 under Corbyn. Dire for Starmer if they fail. |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Mar 30, 2023 17:18:12 GMT
oldnat "SCon vote going to SLab should be enough for SLab to win, even if the SNP vote remained stable." Surely the Scon vote is unlikely to move over 'en masse'? YouGov's recent Scottish cross-breaks for Con to Lab (17%) and LD to Lab (40%) are effectively identical to their figures for GB as a whole - the last 4 GB YouGovs show 2019Con>Lab as 16% and 2019LD>Lab as 40%. Different boundaries , but the former Rutherglen seat was Tory-held until won by Gregor Mackenzie for Labour at a by election in Spring 1964. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Mar 30, 2023 17:21:04 GMT
What a polling based approach can't allow for is tactical voting in a one-off by-election context. For example, it is easy to imagine the Conservative vote collapsing completely in favour of Labour if Tory voters see this a free opportunity to give the SNP a kicking, knowing there is no effect on the Westminster position. I am sure both the SNP and Labour would throw everything they have at this and I am happy to confess I have no idea what the outcome would be. Labour really ought to win a seat which it gained in 2017 under Corbyn. Dire for Starmer if they fail. Current Scottish Westminster polling (SNP around 39%, Lab around 31%) is very much in line with the overall Scottish 2017 result, when SNP finished about 8 points ahead of SLab - another indication that if there is a Rutherglen by Election, it will be very close. Labour has of course made much greater progress in England than in Scotland under Starmer - that much must be obvious from even a brief perusal of polls from the past year or two. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Mar 30, 2023 17:23:32 GMT
Little while back mentioned Alexei Sayle as a left wing comedian. Anyway came across him today in an interview:
“Best day of your life?”
“The 2017 general election, when Jeremy Corbyn came within around 2,000 votes of forming a minority government. It was a glorious day… we came so close. Being on the Left, you get used to losing all the time. It was intoxicating for me to get so close to winning.”
|
|
|
|
Post by steamdrivenandy on Mar 30, 2023 17:25:02 GMT
Thank you to those who wished me well in my Covid battle, last friday I tested positive. 2nd time for me and the first 4 days were rough, then it was fine. Feel great now but I'm still testing positive. Anybody know if its safe to go back to work? Really want to get back to work. As I posted I'm on my third bout. So far it's been a lot easier than the previous one where I tested positive for 19 days. It seems this time I caught it at the school reunion 12 days ago. When I posted on FB and asked if any other attendees had got it I was surprised when about nine others said they had. The event was on the Saturday evening and most said they tested positive on the Tuesday and negative after a further week. Which seems to be very fast detection and swift finish to me. I felt 'odd' from last Friday and over the weekend, but didn't test 'til yesterday (Wednesday) when I got a positive. I'll test again tomorrow but I'm feeling back to normal apart from an annoying cough. I thought it took a couple of days for the virus to take hold and start giving out infection, that symptoms became apparent around the same time, but that it was a couple more days before tests could show a positive result. Hence you were giving out infection without realising you were infectious. I also thought the average length of time before testing negative was ten days from testing positive. My fellow reunion attendees appear to have tested positive in two days and got a negative in a week. Which seems a different pattern. And why did I not feel bad 'til the Friday, when they felt bad enough to test on the Tuesday? |
|
|
|
Post by graham on Mar 30, 2023 17:25:51 GMT
Labour really ought to win a seat which it gained in 2017 under Corbyn. Dire for Starmer if they fail. Current Scottish Westminster polling is very much in line with the overall Scottish 2017 result, when SNP finished about 8 points ahead of SLab - another indication that if there is a Rutherglan by Election, it will be very close. Labour has of course made much greater progress in England than in Scotland under Starmer - that much must be obvious from even a brief perusal of polls from the past year or two. Labour is currently polling higher in Scotland than the 2017 outcome - as is the SNP. The Tories are a fair bit weaker. In 2017 the SNP fell short of their poll ratings. |
|
|
|
Post by lululemonmustdobetter on Mar 30, 2023 17:27:50 GMT
I have had a go at modelling Rutherglen and Hamilton West based on averaged cross-breaks from the two most recent YouGovs. I have ignored the very small movements to and from the SNP with the Cons and LDs. SNP lose 14% to Lab and 7% to SGP, but gain 11% of 2019Lab. Lab lose 11% to SNP, bit gain 14% of SNP2019. Lab gain 17% of Con2019. Lab gain 40% of LD2019. Lab lose combined 5% of their 2019 vote to LD or Con. This works out as: Lab 40.0% (+5.5) SNP 38.8% (-5.2) However, this assumes that SGP stand. The 3% which YG's figures suggest they would take from the SNP could be crucial. What a polling based approach can't allow for is tactical voting in a one-off by-election context. For example, it is easy to imagine the Conservative vote collapsing completely in favour of Labour if Tory voters see this a free opportunity to give the SNP a kicking, knowing there is no effect on the Westminster position. I am sure both the SNP and Labour would throw everything they have at this and I am happy to confess I have no idea what the outcome would be.
If you look at the past few GE's for the seat, lower turnout favours Labour -ukpollingreport2.proboards.com/post/77497/quote/57?page=423I think this will be an incredibly interesting election. Lab cant make serious gains in Scotland by just relying on 'Unionist' votes - it needs to gain VI from the SNP. Polls are saying Scottish people place Cost of Living/NHS etc as more important than indy - can Labour ensure the election is fought on those issues, painting the SNP as 'obsessed with indy and out of touch with real voters'. Lab and the SNP will throw everything they can at it.
Also it may indicate how much of the SNP vote was linked to Sturgeon. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Mar 30, 2023 17:53:47 GMT
oldnat "SCon vote going to SLab should be enough for SLab to win, even if the SNP vote remained stable." Surely the Scon vote is unlikely to move over 'en masse'? YouGov's recent Scottish cross-breaks for Con to Lab (17%) and LD to Lab (40%) are effectively identical to their figures for GB as a whole - the last 4 GB YouGovs show 2019Con>Lab as 16% and 2019LD>Lab as 40%. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,577
|
Post by pjw1961 on Mar 30, 2023 17:54:44 GMT
oldnat "SCon vote going to SLab should be enough for SLab to win, even if the SNP vote remained stable." Surely the Scon vote is unlikely to move over 'en masse'?
YouGov's recent Scottish cross-breaks for Con to Lab (17%) and LD to Lab (40%) are effectively identical to their figures for GB as a whole - the last 4 GB YouGovs show 2019Con>Lab as 16% and 2019LD>Lab as 40%. In a GE yes but a by-election? They are often unique events with huge levels of tactical voting. Everyone will be well aware that this is a straight SNP v Labour contest. I guess the Tory vote won't go below -say - 5% because there will be some who dislike Labour almost as much as the SNP, but I could easily imagine 2/3rds of the Conservative vote switching to Labour on a one-off basis. |
|
pjw1961
Member
Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one.
Posts: 8,577
|
Post by pjw1961 on Mar 30, 2023 17:57:12 GMT
oldnat "SCon vote going to SLab should be enough for SLab to win, even if the SNP vote remained stable." Surely the Scon vote is unlikely to move over 'en masse'? YouGov's recent Scottish cross-breaks for Con to Lab (17%) and LD to Lab (40%) are effectively identical to their figures for GB as a whole - the last 4 GB YouGovs show 2019Con>Lab as 16% and 2019LD>Lab as 40%. Different boundaries , but the former Rutherglen seat was Tory-held until won by Gregor Mackenzie for Labour at a by election in Spring 1964. Never mind the boundaries, the strength of the Conservative and Unionist vote in Scotland in the 1950s has no relevance at all to current Scottish voting patterns. A lot has changed since then. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Mar 30, 2023 17:57:53 GMT
How well would Alba do here? They will surely stand - if only to make life more difficult for SNP. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Mar 30, 2023 18:03:58 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by shevii on Mar 30, 2023 18:11:12 GMT
Labour split over capital gains taxRachel Reeves says there are ‘no plans’ to increase the current rate, despite Angela Rayner suggesting the levy might be raised “ Angela Rayner, the party’s deputy leader, last week suggested raising taxes on savings and investments as she criticised Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, for paying a lower rate than most working people.
But Ms Reeves, Labour’s shadow chancellor, gave the strongest indication yet that Labour would not follow through with an increase.
Asked on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme whether a raid was being planned, she replied: “Look, we will set out all those plans, but I don’t have any plans to raise capital gains tax.
…
While Ms Reeves did not categorically rule out a capital gains tax increase, her comments risk angering prominent backbenchers who are calling for one - including John McDonnell, who was Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow chancellor, and Richard Burgon.
These Labour MPs have demanded that the capital gains levy is doubled on most assets to align it with the 40 per cent income tax rate.”
Telegraph I remember long ago that you linked these boards to an interesting article from Reeves which was almost her manifesto in the style it was written and that had so many promising ideas in there which chimed with a lot of what I think. The way that investment and tweaks to taxation could be used to produce value added "growth" for jobs, industry etc. Her comments today though more or less ruled out any change to CGT. The one example she gave as a reason for this was a small business owner facing a huge CGT bill when they sell after a life of sacrifice (even though the majority would have paid themselves pretty well and got themselves a pension anyway) while ignoring all the other examples where Capital Gains does not lead to any value added for the country and can be detrimental in circumstances such as buy to let. It's especially concerning as she also added in stuff about how low taxes = growth = more for everyone because we get well paid jobs and the government gets an overall increase in the tax take as a result. That is exactly the Thatcherite/Lawson line that surely has been proven not to work for the little people however much short term growth in headline GDP figures might have been achieved with each tax cut. She seems to have moved away from that article where lower taxes were on offer only if those tax incentives provided value added in innovation resulting in well paid UK jobs and things to export (or not need to import). Not much point moaning about Sunak and his tax if you're not going to close the legal things he took advantage of. Doesn't matter much what Rayner says as she has been sidelined and only holds her position of Deputy leader because it is an elected post- not sure quite whether she realises this or hopes somehow that being where she is gives her "influence". I suppose she has a high profile in the same way that Watson had, but then Watson had his backers in the right wing and liberal press for people to take notice of him, mostly when he was trashing the leadership. As an aside on tax I saw an amusing article from an old newspaper where Brian Clough got a whopping pay off from one of his clubs of £90,000 and they made the point that even after tax he ended up with a cool £30,000! How times change. |
|
|
|
Post by James E on Mar 30, 2023 18:12:02 GMT
How well would Alba do here? They will surely stand - if only to make life more difficult for SNP. A bit of an exaggeration there, surely? The LDs are polling a steady (if underwhelming) 6% in Scottish Westminster polls, while Alba's VI is also consistent, ranging between 1% to 0% |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Mar 30, 2023 18:21:19 GMT
The trouble is they can't resource it, the GPs being disastrously overloaded. Actually, there was no GP directly involved in the process in my case. A 10 minute appointment with a nurse, and that was that. I rang back a week later for the results. It seems a no-brainer as a worthwhile initiative, though. I'm not disagreeing. I used to be called in for tests carried out by the practice nurse, but the results go to the GP, who used to call me in for a chat prior to the coronavirus. Since then I've only had specific tests following a complaint, and a GP rang me up rather unhelpfully. Hopefully in due course these regular reviews will restart, and personal contact with a GP also. At the moment the practice clearly can't cope. This isn't I think unusual. I'm not blaming them - I know what the score is, and the neighbouring practice has just closed, which can't help. |
|
|
|
Post by John Chanin on Mar 30, 2023 18:37:06 GMT
Maybe Starmer's big announcement on 'Council Tax' for the launch of LAB's LE campaign is covered by the 3% who picked 'Another Tax'? CON have left a super massive open goal, yet Starmer manages to keep missing. ? However, note CGT is very low on the list - so maybe Reeves realised that? Also it's not clear in such a 'simples' question what folks would like to do about some of the higher ranking 'unfair' taxes (eg too low, too high, just not very effective, etc). That's a really stupid question. I think inheritance tax is unfair because there are too many exemptions, national insurance is unfair because the retired don't pay it, fuel duty is unfair because it's way too low. But many people will say these taxes are unfair because they have to pay them or they are too high. So the answers are meaningless - they just represent taxes that people know about. |
|
oldnat
Member
Extremist - Undermining the UK state and its institutions
Posts: 6,131
|
Post by oldnat on Mar 30, 2023 18:38:04 GMT
May depend on who their candidate is. Tommy Sheridan would be a sensible choice for them. Whoever it is, probably polling better than SLD. A bit of an exaggeration there, surely? The LDs are polling a steady (if underwhelming) 6% in Scottish Westminster polls, while Alba's VI is also consistent, ranging between 1% to 0% |
|
|
|
Post by Rafwan on Mar 30, 2023 18:48:01 GMT
Little while back mentioned Alexei Sayle as a left wing comedian. Anyway came across him today in an interview: “Best day of your life?” “ The 2017 general election, when Jeremy Corbyn came within around 2,000 votes of forming a minority government. It was a glorious day… we came so close. Being on the Left, you get used to losing all the time. It was intoxicating for me to get so close to winning.” PAH!! Bleedin’ commie! |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Mar 30, 2023 18:52:21 GMT
Labour split over capital gains taxRachel Reeves says there are ‘no plans’ to increase the current rate, despite Angela Rayner suggesting the levy might be raised “ Angela Rayner, the party’s deputy leader, last week suggested raising taxes on savings and investments as she criticised Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, for paying a lower rate than most working people.
But Ms Reeves, Labour’s shadow chancellor, gave the strongest indication yet that Labour would not follow through with an increase.
Asked on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme whether a raid was being planned, she replied: “Look, we will set out all those plans, but I don’t have any plans to raise capital gains tax.
…
While Ms Reeves did not categorically rule out a capital gains tax increase, her comments risk angering prominent backbenchers who are calling for one - including John McDonnell, who was Jeremy Corbyn’s shadow chancellor, and Richard Burgon.
These Labour MPs have demanded that the capital gains levy is doubled on most assets to align it with the 40 per cent income tax rate.”
Telegraph She seems to have moved away from that article where lower taxes were on offer only if those tax incentives provided value added in innovation resulting in well paid UK jobs and things to export (or not need to import). Not much point moaning about Sunak and his tax if you're not going to close the legal things he took advantage of. yes I rather like the sound of that, tax incentives to create jobs. Given the kind of subsidies the US are pushing, with the EU following suit, there is that fear of being left behind. Tend to think at times we need some more Bingham types in these roles, not just economists. you haven’t heard of any recent education plans from Labour have you? Like, abolishing Ofsted or summat… |
|
Mr Poppy
Member
Teaching assistant and now your elected PM
Posts: 3,774
|
Post by Mr Poppy on Mar 30, 2023 18:56:02 GMT
Maybe Starmer's big announcement on 'Council Tax' for the launch of LAB's LE campaign is covered by the 3% who picked 'Another Tax'? CON have left a super massive open goal, yet Starmer manages to keep missing. ? However, note CGT is very low on the list - so maybe Reeves realised that? Also it's not clear in such a 'simples' question what folks would like to do about some of the higher ranking 'unfair' taxes (eg too low, too high, just not very effective, etc). That's a really stupid question. I think inheritance tax is unfair because there are too many exemptions, national insurance is unfair because the retired don't pay it, fuel duty is unfair because it's way too low. But many people will say these taxes are unfair because they have to pay them or they are too high. So the answers are meaningless - they just represent taxes that people know about.Which was kind of my point. Although I stated 'simples' rather than 'stupid'. Hard to say who had the damper squib today. CON with Shapps 'Green Day' 😴 LAB with Reeves saying she won't even tax the income (capital gains) from wealth and Starmer's "big" announcement saying he'd freeze Council Tax if he was our current PM but not when he might actually get to be PM Others can judge for themselves but I'd say that was an 'own goal' for Reeves and Shapps and Starmer both missing open goals with their announcements. So 1-0 to CON, although the fans for both teams probably weren't wasting their time to bovver watching. Hence my view that turnout for the LEs will be low, even by LE standards. |
|
c-a-r-f-r-e-w
Member
A step on the way toward the demise of the liberal elite? Or just a blip…
Posts: 6,733
|
Post by c-a-r-f-r-e-w on Mar 30, 2023 19:03:58 GMT
Little while back mentioned Alexei Sayle as a left wing comedian. Anyway came across him today in an interview: “Best day of your life?” “ The 2017 general election, when Jeremy Corbyn came within around 2,000 votes of forming a minority government. It was a glorious day… we came so close. Being on the Left, you get used to losing all the time. It was intoxicating for me to get so close to winning.” PAH!! Bleedin’ commie! Just found this: youtu.be/zx_l9o0i37c(not a link for Starmer fans!!) |
|
