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

Who will you vote for?

  • Conservatives

  • Labour

  • Lib Dem

  • UKIP

  • Other (please state)

  • I won't be voting

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
mrbios said:
Stop voting for the person and start voting for policies then.
Click to expand...

The idea that the people are unimportant is nonsense. Many of the most important decisions that will be made over the next five years (or so) won't be in any manifesto because they will involve dealing with events that we don't yet know about, and many of the most important policies will either not be in the manifesto or go directly against it (examples of this from recent times would include the Lib Dems tripling tuition fees or the Tories top-down reorganisation of the NHS, but there are plenty from governments before that of every stripe).

In my opinion, the manifesto is little more than a guide to the personality of the people involved.
 
V F said:
There was a meltdown?
Click to expand...

No.

And I really wish the blogosphere on both sides would stop engaging in such hyperbole. I like AAV, and a decent amount of time he's got good, well-referenced, criticisms to make but this kind of hyperbole just undermines his case.
 
Mr Jack said:
But we also have access to non-EU markets via EU trade deals, so the amount of trade done with trade deals we're losing is larger than 45%.
Click to expand...
The EU has concluded trade deals with the countries coloured red and yellow on this map:
axb2MwS.png


Sorry if I'm not overly impressed.


The difference is really quite large. And it's not what I think, it's what the EU thinks. The next two years are about disentangling our affairs, not agreeing a new trade deal. The most likely, and most sensible, arrangement would be a transitional period post Brexit in which we continue on EEA rules and negotiate a trade deal.
Click to expand...
You know there are two sides in any negotiation, right? The EU doesn't get to just decide the terms of negotiation on its own.
 
Greebo said:
You read it then? So which bits do you think he's wrong on?
Click to expand...

For one, his claim that the Labour manifesto is 'carefully costed' is blatant partisan nonsense. Most of the rest of his objections are similar, essentially it amounts to a 'Labour good, Tories evil echo chamber piece.
 
Dolph said:
For one, his claim that the Labour manifesto is 'carefully costed' is blatant partisan nonsense. Most of the rest of his objections are similar, essentially it amounts to a 'Labour good, Tories evil echo chamber piece.
Click to expand...

It is costed. Whether those calculations are correct is debatable granted. Whereas the Tory manifesto has 50 uncosted things. Suppose you think putting no costs is better than putting something down which might be wrong?
 
Roar87 said:
I stopped reading when it said Labours manifesto was carefully costed as I assumed it was some sort of satirical comedy
Click to expand...

Well you should read it all. Not reading stuff because you disagree with one point doesn't open your mind. Echo chamber and all that.
 
Dolph said:
Putting fantasy numbers against a change doesn't make it costed even if some readers are fooled by them.
Click to expand...

So putting no numbers is better then? At least putting something gives people some idea and allows people to pick at it. I just don't understand how you can defend a massively uncosted manifesto. Shakes head.
 
SlyReaper said:
Sorry if I'm not overly impressed.
Click to expand...

Well, does it support your claim? What %age of trade is done within the EU and in those areas? It's also a pretty interesting map in terms of the countries with which the EU is currently in negotiations. The UK will be back to square one on all those too.

You know there are two sides in any negotiation, right? The EU doesn't get to just decide the terms of negotiation on its own.
Click to expand...

We'll see.
 
Am I the only one who'd rather see Keir Starmer than David Davis leading the Brexit negotiations?

For all of this talk of strong and stable leadership, David Davis is a loose cannon. Whereas Keir Starmer has exactly the kind of skills and experience to lead a complicated negotiation.
 
Greebo said:
It is costed. Whether those calculations are correct is debatable granted. Whereas the Tory manifesto has 50 uncosted things. Suppose you think putting no costs is better than putting something down which might be wrong?
Click to expand...

Labour have to justify their proposals a lot more, because they involve a lot more change. Increasing spending by £75bn a year (including capital spending) and increasing taxes by £50bn a year as Labour proposes is huge. The spending increase is nearly 10% based on current figures, the tax increase is around 7% based on current figures.

Paul Johnson of the is sums it up (talking about the conservative manifesto).

Institute of Fiscal Studies director Paul Johnson: "While there is not an absolute promise not to increase income tax or national insurance, what you have got is a pretty modest set of proposals which probably isn't going to require terribly much in the way of tax increases. If you look at the Labour Party proposals, they have costed out their spending proposals at a pretty big £75bn. To be clear, £75bn is a very, very big number indeed, and they have promised £50bn of tax rises. The big difference is that from the Labour Party we have a much bigger state, much more spending, much more tax. In the Conservative manifesto we have much more small-c conservatism. There isn't a lot more spending or a lot more tax."
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39960311

That makes both costing details, and costing accuracy far more important. If, as Paul Johnson suggested on radio 4 earlier this week, Labour are off in their sums by 20 or 30bn in terms of tax income (spending is easier to cost), that is a huge, huge risk.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom