1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Poll: General Election 2019 voting intention - Nov 15th - 30th

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Rilot, Nov 15, 2019.

?

Who will you vote for?

  1. Brexit

    15 vote(s)
    2.9%
  2. Conservative

    148 vote(s)
    28.8%
  3. DUP

    2 vote(s)
    0.4%
  4. Green

    3 vote(s)
    0.6%
  5. Labour

    137 vote(s)
    26.7%
  6. Liberal Democrats

    161 vote(s)
    31.3%
  7. Plaid Cymru

    3 vote(s)
    0.6%
  8. Sinn Fein

    1 vote(s)
    0.2%
  9. SNP

    20 vote(s)
    3.9%
  10. TIG

    1 vote(s)
    0.2%
  11. UKIP

    2 vote(s)
    0.4%
  12. Other party

    5 vote(s)
    1.0%
  13. Independant

    2 vote(s)
    0.4%
  14. Spoil ballot

    14 vote(s)
    2.7%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,539

    Location: Plymouth

    I saw that, another £58bn spending promise. Anyone who thinks the labour position on spending and taxation is remotely economically credible is either a total idiot or completely insane.

    When economics and politics conflict, politics never, ever wins.
     
  2. Stumble Bum

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Apr 2, 2009

    Posts: 2,151

    Location: Location, Location!

    He's so desperate to get into power. This is why people say they are scared of the thought of a Corbyn government. There is no end to the spending and he just manages to pluck another £58 billion out of the air.

    What an idiot.
     
  3. String

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jan 6, 2013

    Posts: 12,589

    Why do people analyse to this extent. Who cares how any of them will fund their pledges?

    Tories: "You can't trust Labour with their £100Bn pledges, trust us with our £80bn instead"... Disregarding that they've broken most of them over 10 years in office!

    It's laughable. We simply don't have the means to properly scrutinise the figures, that's their job. The electorate needs to simplify the process here; vote according to who pledges what you need & want, and if they don't deliver then vote accordingly next time. How they deliver it is up to them.

    The Tories have a 10 year track record in office to judge them on, and it's abysmal. Similar with Lib Dems and their time in Coalition, which is why Swinson got rinsed the other night.

    If a party pledges to abolish tuition fees, then why are people voting against it because they think it isn't financially viable; that's madness. My daughter goes to Uni every day, and I can assure you I don't lie in bed at night worrying about how the SNP are going to pay for it. They said they'd do it, and they did. Simple.
     
  4. ultralaser

    Hitman

    Joined: Sep 7, 2014

    Posts: 939

    It's just totally shocking that either party can seriously be considering any additional large scale government borrowing with our current debt levels, we're paying upwards of £30 billion a year on debt repayments but oh no lets borrow an additional (ranging from 80 - 240 billion) significant amount - it's total madness.
     
  5. Quartz

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Apr 1, 2014

    Posts: 9,406

    Location: Aberdeen

    You should. We all should. Generally government spending means inflation.

    Actually, their record is not bad. They inherited a cluster f***. The economy is not in recession, wages are rising, unemployment is - percentage-wise - low. Of course, they've been busy self-destructing over Brexit.
     
  6. Quartz

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Apr 1, 2014

    Posts: 9,406

    Location: Aberdeen

    Agreed.
     
  7. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,423

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    No, I don't. The UK does need to bring down the debt-to-GDP ratio in the longer term but it's not a sensible priority. The UK has suffered from a long period of low growth, low productivity, low investment in public services, and low wage growth. It's more in important to solve these fundamentals than it is to be overly concerned about a readout whose state is largely determined by these fundamentals.
     
  8. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,539

    Location: Plymouth

    I'm afraid that, while I know this line of thought is common, I don't agree with it, I find it naive, and it is reflective of a wider cognitive malaise that has become acceptable where holding an uninformed or uneducated opinion is still considered valid in the UK.

    The state has no money that it doesn't either take from current citizens or borrow from future citizens either directly (through taxation and borrowing) or indirectly (through currency issues such as qe devaluing the existing currency).

    Further to that, it isn't simply a case that raising tax rates raises revenue. If you look back at the uk historically, our tax take as a percentage of gdp is pretty constant, and in fact already
    Above the historical average and heading towards previous historical peaks.

    https://www.ukpublicrevenue.co.uk/revenue_history

    So we have a baseline of what can be achieved, and the first principle needs to recognise this. You simply can't declare you're going to take another few hundred billion and spend it by simple tax rate changes, because it doesn't work, doubled down if you intend to tax only a small portion of the base to raise the extra.

    Bad economics impacts everyone, directly or indirectly. It is the single most important aspect to acknowledge, and something that, by and large, both capitalist and social democratic parties accept. The ones who don't are the socialists (democratic or not), which is why socialism fails every single time.

    I don't want a failing society, it always ends up hurting the poor and the vulnerable the most. Now, that doesn't mean I support the status quo, but it does mean that proposed answers need to be credible, otherwise you aren't going to help anyone, you will only make things worse.
     
  9. String

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jan 6, 2013

    Posts: 12,589

    I've covered your points with the sections you decided not to quote.
     
  10. Dolph

    Man of Honour

    Joined: Oct 17, 2002

    Posts: 47,539

    Location: Plymouth

    On the whole I agree with you, however;

    The problem is we need a credible plan to achieve this, which clearly understands that spending and investment are not interchangeable, and when all investment is clearly understood with credible long term benefit analysis, and the removal of the ability of nimbies and other special interest groups to delay and interfere with infrastructure improvement and renewal plans.
     
  11. do_ron_ron

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 23, 2002

    Posts: 9,520

    So one person thought the BBC biased. I have been on threads where it is called the Brexit Broadcasting Corporation. I certainly would favour their output over any of the tabloids or the BorisGraph.
     
  12. Murphy

    Mobster

    Joined: Sep 16, 2018

    Posts: 3,038

    That's a bit like saying anyone who thinks spending money on training, a car, or a nice suit because it may increase their earnings is not remotely economically credible, a total idiot, or completely insane.

    Spending, or even borrowing, money is not a political choice, it's a hard nosed economic one, if it results in more money in the future then it's a good choice, if it results in less it's bad.
    Not that (s)he'll see it but ^^that^^, only that simplifies it a little to much IMO as it only results in inflation if the extra spending isn't put to work in the economy, i.e if there's no room for the economy to grow.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
  13. 413x

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jan 13, 2010

    Posts: 16,516

    Location: Cardiff

    Deeply concerned about labour's spending.
    Where is it all going to come from?the pension payout is not worth it. It benefits a few a lot. I can't ***stand corbyn. What is he playing at?

    These massive spending numbers keep coming out.

    Can't we have something easy to digest where money in : money out across the whole manifesto.


    I have no one to vote for but lib dem. At least they seem to justify the spending better.
     
  14. NickK

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jan 13, 2003

    Posts: 18,283

    That I also agree.

    I would offer the point that instability (and recklessness approach) to Brexit has put a nails in the coffin for the next 3-5 years of this too.

    Interestingly enough there's a large number of mid-older voters that are simply not believing the spend-to-win citing every government prior! The issue is there's still some naive younger voters that don't understand money.. and think it all could come from the state.

    My current thinking is simple;
    * tax = funding for education
    * education drives the workforce and success of the companies that provide the tax
    * reduction in benefits drives workforce engagement but pushes up crime + increases harder crime in the longer time.

    It's funny that a capitalists' dream - all individuals are working for themselves is hit by IR35.. on the pretence of reducing the numbers and pushing them back into permanent roles within companies. Instead if they just left the IR35 alone but put tax in place to promote education maybe people wouldn't mind as much.
    As it stands the pressure for IR35 in the tech sector is down to (a) housing costs in the locations of tech, (b) the desire to put in effort to deliver a better live style and (c) to pay for better schooling.

    People work because of what it means for them. Pure and simple. It may be that meaning is helping others but there is both a need to live which costs and a meaning for some to make money.

    Being a slightly above average earner (I'm perm in the tech sector), and having had lots of discussions with both self made multi-millionaires and their decendants there really is a different mind set. One that is - no theiving of my hard earned money. That involves taxation. They don't want to spend all the time and effort in simply giving it all away (they are too aware how easy it is to loose money) to people that simply don't want to give to society.
    In the mid-weathly you're likely to see less tax paid but more guilt contributions in charity with lots of fanfare. I think those self-made (£50M+) are those that can see the disparity, and feel the need to invest in schools, universities, hospitals etc.

    Knowing one family, who is old (10th century+) monied, money isn't discussed openly. Behind closed doors the family are very conscious of taxation, investing but are less concerned with propping up strangers - however help comes to those families close to them for generations. They simply do not understand the outside world on the street they are in their own bubble.


    I have come to the conclusion that every individual/family is out for themselves, the wealthy see benefits from tax as thievery and I sort of agree. I'm also in the mind that most public run services do not think about money in the same way, in an irresponsible way. However I also think that privatised companies scrimping every coin for the investor simply are an extension of understanding money can all too easily be lost.

    Trust needs to be build if there's going to be some tax and some money made for education etc.

    The current politicians have destroyed the concept of Trust in the electorate.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
  15. Murphy

    Mobster

    Joined: Sep 16, 2018

    Posts: 3,038

    Sorry but that's simply wrong, all money belongs to the state, they're literally the only organisation that can issue it, it has the queens head on it for a reason.

    All money is issued by the state (private banks can create money also but when they do that there's a corresponding debt created so essentially they're not creating money their just taking out a loan with the state), the taking of money from citizens (taxes) and so called 'borrowing' from future citizens doesn't fund public spending, they're simply two tools the state uses to control the supply and demand of money and as such control its value (inflation (to much money in the system) vs deflation (not enough)), we've trod the line of there not being enough money in the system for a decade, as evidenced by our lack luster GDP, and while that's preferable over the alternative they've constricted the supply of money far to much IMO, they essentially been chocking off any chance of a recovery for the last 10 years.
     
  16. doodah

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 20,946

    Location: London

    Labour's own fictitious spending plans aside, considering they won't do an impact assessment of Johnson's deal - this is a little hard to believe. We'll see soon enough...
     
  17. do_ron_ron

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 23, 2002

    Posts: 9,520

    Sounds very Trumpish.
     
  18. mid_gen

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Dec 20, 2004

    Posts: 8,678

    The Conservative party is being run by Cummings, the whole cabinet has his hand stuffed firmly up their arse.

    The worst thing about the Tories winning this election isn't the 5 years of the Tories, it's that it will prove Cummings right, and UK politics will become US politics.
     
  19. do_ron_ron

    Sgarrista

    Joined: Oct 23, 2002

    Posts: 9,520

    The problem is that nobody thinks about society/the whole country. Society is like a pyramid in that there are loads of people doing poorly paid or other crap jobs which underpin society. The current Tory way is to go back to Rachman style slums to let them live in, with the wealth and power concentrated in very dew hands. This might have been the model of past kings but we all know what happened to the French and Russian varieties. The current Labour method seems to be a system of state ownership but while some things are crucial to wellbeing and should be in the State others only need firmer regulation to ensure citizens are not getting ripped off. This country needs a more gentle politics where it is acknowledged that we all depend on people doing these poorly paid/crap jobs and ensure they are treated fairly. Going down the current Tory or Labour path will only lead to massive disruption further down the road.
     
  20. nkata

    Soldato

    Joined: Mar 1, 2010

    Posts: 7,241

    Location: Cheshire / Staffordshire

    Basically Corbyn is a tart. He travels across the country to stand behind a union banner proclaiming 'we are not robots' when 100 yards away he cound have had a meeting with the manager of the company (Amazon) and explain his policies. That details his entire attitude to me. Populism until he dies, he was probably not that great a shop steward. I think that if you were worried about ever getting a personal pension, voting labour will reduce that worry, your pension company will be that much poorer and you will know quite soon the consequence.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.