Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

[Gabbatek]

So, as per my much earlier post, you are trying to group people by the fact that they have a disability, define them by it and dictate their position to them as a result.

My wife has a great many qualities that define her before her disability, but you would remove everything about her just to focus on that one aspect of her. What is worse is you then try to act like you are doing her a favour.

I literally have no idea why you're trying to nitpick my terminology or bringing your wife into this, I really don't care about her as she's irrelevant to what I'm talking about. LOL

Listen I can't make this anymore simpler for you.

My post and this whole thing has been about disabled people who have applied for pip not getting the benefits they are entitled to, having to jump hoops for unfair and ill equipped atos examinations and the general failure of atos and the Tory government.

 

[Fishbait]

https://streamable.com/z7bq3

tee-hee.

As for zero hour contracts, it's okay for those that need a flexible job, but it should not be forced onto those that are trying to do full time.
Someone I know was hired locally on zero hour contract & would regularly turn up at the job in early hours (shift patterns), only to be told some machine isn't working, we don't need you or that they'd got staff numbers wrong & over booked.

 

[Dolph]

I literally have no idea why you're trying to nitpick my terminology or bringing your wife into this, I really don't care about her as she's irrelevant to what I'm talking about. LOL

Listen I can't make this anymore simpler for you.

My post and this whole thing has been about disabled people who have applied for pip not getting the benefits they are entitled to, having to jump hoops for unfair and ill equipped atos examinations and the general failure of atos and the Tory government.

I can't make this any simpler for you, stop pretending you represent all people with disabilities and stop discriminating against people with disabilities by defining people by them.

If you don't understand why your position is offensive, try substituting your use of 'the disabled' with 'the gays' and similar until you understand why you are being offensive.

 

[Vidar]

While May doesn't give a good interview, she does speak the truth. All state spending depends on either extracting money from the private sector economy, or borrowing an advance against future takings from the private sector economy.

Without a strong economy, the state doesn't have the money to spend. Unfortunately it seems that maths isn't popular with certain sections of the electorate.

May speaks the truth? Every syllable out of that womans mouth is either a soundbite, half truth or bare faced lie! And lets be frank this particular lady IS for turning.

What this election needs to be about for people is either vote labour and save the NHS and ensure our children all equally have the right to a first class education or vote anyone else and watch these things be snuffed out!

 

[Vidar]

I can't make this any simpler for you, stop pretending you represent all people with disabilities and stop discriminating against people with disabilities by defining people by them.

If you don't understand why your position is offensive, try substituting your use of 'the disabled' with 'the gays' and similar until you understand why you are being offensive.

Also as someone who has been through an ATOS assesment let me assure you that they are heavily generalised, have little or nothing to do with specifics, in my case mental health issues and are delivered by people with severe lack of training. Not to mention full of incensitive and down right offensive questions.

 

[Dolph]

May speaks the truth? Every syllable out of that womans mouth is either a soundbite, half truth or bare faced lie! And lets be frank this particular lady IS for turning.

What this election needs to be about for people is either vote labour and save the NHS and ensure our children all equally have the right to a first class education or vote anyone else and watch these things be snuffed out!

Where does the funding for state spending come from?

 

[Caged]

Bit chicken-and-egg Dolph though isn't it. Private enterprise runs on top of state infrastructure.

 

[Dolph]

Also as someone who has been through an ATOS assesment let me assure you that they are heavily generalised, have little or nothing to do with specifics, in my case mental health issues and are delivered by people with severe lack of training. Not to mention full of incensitive and down right offensive questions.

I'm not defending the assessment process, the whole process of disability management by the state needs a complete redesign.

I am, however, objecting to the idea that someone's voting pattern should be dictated by their disability.

 

[Dolph]

Bit chicken-and-egg Dolph though isn't it. Private enterprise runs on top of state infrastructure.

It does, although in part that is due to the state having a monopoly on infrastructure choices these days. That's where the investment part comes in, but astill I have said, just because the state spends money, it doesn't follow that the state is investing.

 

[Gabbatek]

I can't make this any simpler for you, stop pretending you represent all people with disabilities and stop discriminating against people with disabilities by defining people by them.

If you don't understand why your position is offensive, try substituting your use of 'the disabled' with 'the gays' and similar until you understand why you are being offensive.

What the heck. This has nothing to do with representing anyone.

I've been talking about ATOS and the mess they are making and CUTS to disability benefit.

 

[Dolph]

What the heck. This has nothing to do with representing anyone.

I've been talking about ATOS and the mess they are making and CUTS to disability benefit.

So you don't accept the definition of disability in the equality act? To you, 'the disabled' is not synonymous with people with disabilities, but people who claim disability benefits?

Is my wife not disabled because she chooses not to claim benefits?

 

[Vidar]

Where does the funding for state spending come from?

Are you really trying to justify the conservatives policies on taxation and spending by posing the same tired question of "Where does the funding come from?" I've already replied to you about that several pages back.

But okay close all the tax loop holes, havens etc etc... repeal the tax breaks for the richest and the corporations and recover the estimated funds from tax evasion and avoidance and by god you'd certainly have most if not all of the money required to pay for these investments and policies. Raising wages also means people have more to spend which puts more money into the economy. Now no doubt you'll say I'm talking about that mythical money tree or some other condescending drivel to that effect but I find even by that link you provided that the fact those figures are mere estimates based off a cross section and that the real figures are unknown speaks volumes about how much money isn't being brought in.

I also find it highly interesting that while education budgets are being cut dramatically over £100 million is being used for this grammar schools farce, how despite real terms underfunding of the NHS, the medical staff 1% pay cap that there could be a vote to spend £400 million on a palace refurbishment. And what about George Osbournes now infamous tax sweetheart deal, that let the company off with a colossal figure while authorities in other countries raided their offices.

 

[Dolph]

Are you really trying to justify the conservatives policies on taxation and spending by posing the same tired question of "Where does the funding come from?" I've already replied to you about that several pages back.

But okay close all the tax loop holes, havens etc etc... repeal the tax breaks for the richest and the corporations and recover the estimated funds from tax evasion and avoidance and by god you'd certainly have most if not all of the money required to pay for these investments and policies. Raising wages also means people have more to spend which puts more money into the economy. Now no doubt you'll say I'm talking about that mythical money tree or some other condescending drivel to that effect but I find even by that link you provided that the fact those figures are mere estimates based off a cross section and that the real figures are unknown speaks volumes about how much money isn't being brought in.

I also find it highly interesting that while education budgets are being cut dramatically over £100 million is being used for this grammar schools farce, how despite real terms underfunding of the NHS, the medical staff 1% pay cap that there could be a vote to spend £400 million on a palace refurbishment. And what about George Osbournes now infamous tax sweetheart deal, that let the company off with a colossal figure while authorities in other countries raided their offices.

The problem is, those measures aren't likely to increase the total tax take as a percentage of GDP. We know this because they never have in the past.

http://www.ukpublicrevenue.co.uk/past_revenue

The UK tax revenue, however the tax system is structured, has never exceeded 43% of gdp, it generally sits mid to late 30s.

This is the level of taxation the UK is willing to pay, moving the burdens around doesn't change that. This is the same, labour or conservatives, since the 50s.

So this is the target for public spending, it has to be, because that's how maths works. What proportion of this you spend on wealth redistribution, compensation for circumstance or investment is then the next choice.

 

[Uther]

With a tanking economy due to brexit, the country cannot afford another round of Labour yet. We need a Conservative/Lib Dem coalition again.

Actually I think this would be just about the best solution currently, but haven't the Lib Dems already (stupidly) ruled it out?

 

[Vidar]

The problem is, those measures aren't likely to increase the total tax take as a percentage of GDP. We know this because they never have in the past.

http://www.ukpublicrevenue.co.uk/past_revenue

The UK tax revenue, however the tax system is structured, has never exceeded 43% of gdp, it generally sits mid to late 30s.

This is the level of taxation the UK is willing to pay, moving the burdens around doesn't change that. This is the same, labour or conservatives, since the 50s.

So this is the target for public spending, it has to be, because that's how maths works. What proportion of this you spend on wealth redistribution, compensation for circumstance or investment is then the next choice.

As a percentage of GDP you may or may not be correct however in real world terms making sure that all corporations are paying the right and ultimately fair amount of tax is going to generate significantly more money than taxing the lowest earners in society or cutting benefits that people rely on forcing them to use food banks. Hell even you must admit that recent reports of Nurses having to make increasing uses of pay day loans and foodbanks is alarming and a sure fire sign that things are significantly wrong!

 

[McPhee]

Actually I think this would be just about the best solution currently, but haven't the Lib Dems already (stupidly) ruled it out?

Indeed they have. Mr Farron was a vocal critic of the party's decision to go in to coalition. While he has changed his tune since becoming leader, I don't find it hugely surprising that he's against a repeat run.

 

[Woden]

The problem is, those measures aren't likely to increase the total tax take as a percentage of GDP. We know this because they never have in the past.

http://www.ukpublicrevenue.co.uk/past_revenue

The UK tax revenue, however the tax system is structured, has never exceeded 43% of gdp, it generally sits mid to late 30s.

This is the level of taxation the UK is willing to pay, moving the burdens around doesn't change that. This is the same, labour or conservatives, since the 50s.

So this is the target for public spending, it has to be, because that's how maths works. What proportion of this you spend on wealth redistribution, compensation for circumstance or investment is then the next choice.

As a percentage maybe, but where does that percentage come from?

Do we close loopholes and chase evaded corporate tax, or do we tax the poorest and push more people to food banks and cold winters?

Ultimately, if the poor are getting more money, they use less benefits, and spend more of it, putting it back into the economy. And making them happier and healthier at the same time.
What we have now is an upwards funneling of cash that reaches the richest and stays there, not doing anything.

 

[Caged]

Indeed they have. Mr Farron was a vocal critic of the party's decision to go in to coalition. While he has changed his tune since becoming leader, I don't find it hugely surprising that he's against a repeat run.

Who can blame him? The Lib Dems walked away with zero credit for any achievements during the coalition years, took the full brunt of the blame for the tuition fee hike, and Tory spin ensured no dirt stuck to them.

 

[Combat squirrel]

The amount of wilful ignorance on this forum is astonishing, your even harping the 'strong stable' rubbish - its like a comedy sketch of some sort......the woman is a disaster has no answers to anything, won't do interviews, and the FACTUAL INFORMATION shows how much damage torys have done......yet people are eating up the drivel may and the tories are sending out.

Beyond that, its even text book tactics to brain washing a population - all dicatators in the making do it - history has proven it.

We have facts, being ignored, and tactics proven in the worst disasters in human history - its a way of thinking that never works out, only Labours thinking can progress humanity.

Yet, *most* of this forum is repeating blindly what their pro tory telly boxes are feeding into their brains, *strong and stable strong and stable strong and stable*, while drooling and foaming at the mouth eyes wide open, not even blinking.

Astonishing - its a study in human nature itself this place, sadly, it also represents the mindset of your average middle aged forum user, no offence to anyone personally, but, please, think out side the box, go outside, look around, take your emotionally driven opinions and ask why they are emotionally driven......is it because your being socially conditioned? Are you even aware of it ?

I awaits the flames of the self proclaimed 'decent british person that wants arr country back' - because fellas ya just playing into the 1% who want your money.

Money isn't real you know, its a concept thats been drummed into our minds that its more important than food and water - money is mathmatical slavery - but we all must play the game because these numbers and figures permeate through society - one must not question it (hell entire countries are invaded by the USA for rejecting rockefeller-et al banking systems)..............and it is this that controls you and me (no matter our 'observations' of reality)...............and do I need to define the word 'austerity' ? Do you not see its HOW you reign in a mass populace ?

There is more than enough of this artificial raw material that is 'money' to pay for everyone in the UK to live.....(mark my words within 20 years a living wage will become standard and MP's will market it as 'human decency to let everyone have food and sleep under shelter')...........

All we need to do is cut the BS and pointless debates and follow logic - life isn't about making money, or destroying people, its being a human, stop the idiocy, tax big corp properly (globally so they can't run anywhere) and get ppl back on track.

The era of consumerism is one that cannot end quick enough - getting people to stop thinking buying 'things' will make them happy is going to take 2-3 generations of human - you lot however are likely societies top consumers so this line of thinking will likely be completely alien to you.

 

[Vidar]

As a percentage maybe, but where does that percentage come from?

Do we close loopholes and chase evaded corporate tax, or do we tax the poorest and push more people to food banks and cold winters?

Ultimately, if the poor are getting more money, they use less benefits, and spend more of it, putting it back into the economy. And making them happier and healthier at the same time.
What we have now is an upwards funneling of cash that reaches the richest and stays there, not doing anything.

AMEN!