Poll: Poll: UK General Election 2017 - Mk II

Who will you vote for?

  • Total voters
    1,453
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lartyconshayo said:
I notice the daily fail has a headline screaming for the election to be called off - I won't say any more than that and let folk draw their own conclusions
Click to expand...

It would be utterly retarded to call off the election with 4 days to go. It would be letting terrorism win and subverting democracy. I imagine security will be pretty tight especially in London, Birmingham, Manchester and other major cities.
 
Rosbif said:
So looking at the IFS analysis of the manifesto's Labour is spending £0.4bn more on the NHS than the Tories (insignificant), a lot more on Education and a lot more on 'public sector investment' (of which the IFS point out none of that has actually been nailed down i.e. they have no idea what they're actually spending that 'investment' on). The IFS's Taxation and Benefits analysis also shows that for the vast bulk of people there is essentially no difference between the Tories and Labour, unless you're a super high earner, you get hammered under Labour.

So from what I can see, Labours whole pitch is tax the rich to provide free higher education for kids. That is what it boils down to. From what I can see in the analysis austerity for many parts of the public sector are going to continue under Labour except for their cherry picked favourites (Education)

I'm quite partial to increasing capital spending on infrastructure but sadly for all the big numbers in the Labour manifesto there is no concrete vision of where that money is actually going. That is a concern for me. If you're going to invest large sums of money you at least need to know where its going. It takes years to plan and implement big capital projects.

Disappointing tbh.
Click to expand...

Public sector investment in this context is an alternative way of saying pay rises for public sector employees. The ifs costs this at 9.2bn a year vs Tory plans.

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9241
 
norm said:
Any terrorist attack reflects badly on TM and the conservatives policies of cut,cut,cut. Less police increases likelihood of this kind of thing happening.

Little wonder they want the election called off, cons face losing.
Click to expand...

The Police responded and shot them dead within 8 minutes. I mean should we have an armed Police officer on every corner?
 
Roar87 said:
The Police responded and shot them dead within 8 minutes. I mean should we have an armed Police officer on every corner?
Click to expand...

Well looking at social media this morning there are lots of people mistakenly saying this happened because we dropped the security aleart level back down so clearly people want armed soldiers on the street 24/7
 
Freakbro said:
@Rosbif At least their manifesto was costed so we could analyse it....unlike certain other parties...
Click to expand...

I think you're referring to the Tories? ;) I'm no expert (hence reading IFS today) but the impression I get from the IFS is the Tories haven't costed anything because their manifesto made no new promises
 
Rosbif said:
I think you're referring to the Tories? ;) I'm no expert (hence reading IFS today) but the impression I get from the IFS is the Tories haven't costed anything because their manifesto made no new promises
Click to expand...

Careful now, logic and reason isn't tolerated around here when it comes to spreading lies that involve the Tories.
 
Rosbif said:
I think you're referring to the Tories? ;) I'm no expert (hence reading IFS today) but the impression I get from the IFS is the Tories haven't costed anything because their manifesto made no new promises
Click to expand...

I was yes :)

I don't think that's strictly true, there are plenty of economic changes in their manifesto, things like dropping the previous pledge not to increase income tax and NI....i'd sure like to see the costing on that one! ;)

How much it will cost the economy if they get immigration down to the levels they are aiming for.
 
Dolph said:
Public sector investment in this context is an alternative way of saying pay rises for public sector employees. The ifs costs this at 9.2bn a year vs Tory plans.

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9241
Click to expand...

Yeah that figure was in the IFS pdf I was reading. They essentially said that the assumption was a 'payboard' that Labour intend to use to set Public sector pay would increase pay inline with private sector. But that wouldn't be included in the capital spending figures right? Page 5 of this https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/Pres...2017 General Election, manifesto analysis.pdf shows a jump of 1.1% of GDP per annum.
 
Roar87 said:
The Police responded and shot them dead within 8 minutes. I mean should we have an armed Police officer on every corner?
Click to expand...
It happened on her watch, so like it or not the buck stops with her. There's also the matter of cutting 20,000 police.
I thought after the Manchester attack she would gain votes, but she seemed to lose them. The Daily Heil are stupidly calling for the election to be called off, so they're not confident either.
 
I said:
Did the UKs post war governments spend excessively on their children or invest to grow the economy and reduce debt?
Click to expand...
You replied:
Dolph said:
How is continually taking a greater proportion of an individual's property based on financial success not a punishment for that financial success?
Click to expand...

Is this related to the point that historically and around the globe, investing and greater public spending have (done well) allowed countries to climb out of recessions and debt in the past?

Frankly people basing their arguments on their monthly shopping budget is absurd, unless you quantitatively ease or discover north sea oil when you pop to the shop!
 
Greebo said:
Well looking at social media this morning there are lots of people mistakenly saying this happened because we dropped the security aleart level back down so clearly people want armed soldiers on the street 24/7
Click to expand...

The Terror level being critical probably would reflect the danger of an attack at the moment

Uther said:
It happened on her watch, so like it or not the buck stops with her. There's also the matter of cutting 20,000 police.
I thought after the Manchester attack she would gain votes, but she seemed to lose them. The Daily Heil are stupidly calling for the election to be called off, so they're not confident either.
Click to expand...

Winston Churchill could've been in charge and it would've still happened. It's idiotic you're trying to make her responsible in any way.
 
Hmm wait .. that page I just referenced actually says public sector net investment. Is that purely capital spending or throw in any old crap you like?! The page above it in the IFS document has '£2bn for nhs?' written in lol
 
Roar87 said:
The Police responded and shot them dead within 8 minutes. I mean should we have an armed Police officer on every corner?
Click to expand...

There's no ignoring TM began attacking police budgets years ago in her role as home secretary.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-budget-cuts-government-funding-austerity-bbc

Since 2011 there has been a reduction of 20% in the amount spent on police by the Home Office. Theresa May, the home secretary, has said there will be further cuts if the Conservatives win the election."
Click to expand...

She's a lying toad who changes her agenda simply to suit the moment, first remain, now leave, raise income tax, don't raise income tax, cut policing spending, increase policing spending, don't call an election, call an election.

She has none of the qualities of a decisive and responsible leader.
 
norm said:
There's no ignoring TM began attacking police budgets years ago in her role as home secretary.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...-budget-cuts-government-funding-austerity-bbc


She's a lieing toad who changes her agenda simply to suit the moment, first remain, now leave, raise income tax, don't raise income tax, cut policing spending, increase policing spending, don't call an election, call an election.

She has none of the qualities of a decisive and responsible leader.
Click to expand...

Actually a leader changing their mind when they believe it is the right thing to do is absolutely a good thing. There's nothing worse than someone making a wrong decision and sticking to it because they don't want to be seen as weak
 
Roar87 said:
Actually a leader changing their mind when they believe it is the right thing to do is absolutely a good thing. There's nothing worse than someone making a wrong decision and sticking to it because they don't want to be seen as weak
Click to expand...

A fair point, but then you have to call in to question why said leader keeps making the wrong decision...
 
stewski said:
I said:

You replied:


Is this related to the point that historically and around the globe, investing and greater public spending have (done well) allowed countries to climb out of recessions and debt in the past?

Frankly people basing their arguments on their monthly shopping budget is absurd, unless you quantitatively ease or discover north sea oil when you pop to the shop!
Click to expand...

Wrong quote, sorry.
 
Roar87 said:
Actually a leader changing their mind when they believe it is the right thing to do is absolutely a good thing. There's nothing worse than someone making a wrong decision and sticking to it because they don't want to be seen as weak
Click to expand...

I prefer a leader who makes the right decisions in the first place.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom