Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To feel the faint stirrings of hope of a Labour victory?

492 replies

KentMum2008 · 29/05/2017 22:33

Just that really? We all thought it was a done deal, T May was going to win by a landslide and we'd be crippled by another 5 years of Tory rule.

Fast forward a few weeks and a Labour victory doesn't seem like such a long shot.

AIBU to feel optimistic that Labour genuinely have a fighting chance? At the very, very least it might result in no overall majority, but the ultimate dream of a Labour govt, run by a true socialist isn't as impossible as previously though.

JC4PM!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
SunEgg · 30/05/2017 15:21

I am hoping and praying it happens. But I think it will be a bit of a very welcome miracle :)

KentMum2008 · 30/05/2017 19:07

I think JC replied very eloquently to the businessman asking about corporation tax etc. It's true that when everyone is better off, everyone is better off. His children will enjoy free university education, higher wages etc under labour. The way some people are moaning about having to pay VAT on private school fees is awful. So because you don't want to pay a little more for your child's education, that means that the rest of us lowly paupers should watch our children suffer poor quality education under a Tory govt. As long as I'm alright jack....

OP posts:
PigletWasPoohsFriend · 30/05/2017 20:35

The way some people are moaning about having to pay VAT on private school fees is awful. So because you don't want to pay a little more for your child's education, that means that the rest of us lowly paupers should watch our children suffer poor quality education under a Tory govt. As long as I'm alright jack

You do realise that not everyone that pays fees are rolling in money don't you? It's a significant amount not just a 'little more'.

You do realise that this will mean that children will be taken out of private school and go back into the state system which will mean more pressure on schools and less money raised.

ChardonnaysPrettySister · 30/05/2017 20:42

The Labour manifesto says: “We will initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options such as a land value tax, to ensure local government has sustainable funding for the long term.”

So yes, Land/Garden Tax is in the Manifesto, and will be used to make up for the shortfall,and it will affect millions of voters.

JustAnotherPoster00 · 30/05/2017 21:30

Land value taxation is so beloved of economists because, in theory, it does not distort decision making. Suppose a land value tax of one per cent on land value is introduced tomorrow. There can be no supply response: there would still be as much land as there is today. Neither would consumers’ preferences change, as land would be no more useful, either. So if the market for land is competitive, no transactions would be deterred or encouraged. All that changes is the price, which falls until it exactly offsets the discounted cost of paying the tax forever. The buyer assumes the burden of paying the tax, so all things considered is no better or worse off. Landlords are unable to pass the tax on to tenants, because the supply and demand of rented land is unchanged too. Furthermore, if LVTs replaced property taxes, incentives against improving homes and developing land would be removed. Yet LVT would continue to account for "undeserved" gains landowners make on the investment of others, such as the government improving nearby transport links (this feature of the tax appealed to Winston Churchill).

But if LVTs are so great, why are they so rare? One explanation is that it is too difficult to value land separately from what sits on it. There is not much of a market, for example, for undeveloped land in central London. However, some think this can be overcome. The 2010 Mirrlees Review of British taxation argued that bean-counters could compare the price of similar buildings in different locations, for instance. In any case, the efficiency of the tax does not depend on accurate valuations. The bigger barrier is political. LVTs would impose concentrated costs on today’s landowners, who face a new tax bill and a reduced sale price. The benefit, by contrast, is spread equally over today’s population and future generations. This problem is unlikely to be overcome. Economists will continue to advocate LVTs, and politicians will continue to ignore them.

www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/11/economist-explains-0

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 30/05/2017 22:37

The Labour manifesto says: “We will initiate a review into reforming council tax and business rates and consider new options such as a land value tax, to ensure local government has sustainable funding for the long term.”

In which case if it is replacing council tax why should it not be passed on to tenants? Tenants pay council tax. Tenants use public services and should contribute to their costs.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 30/05/2017 22:39

Or do you think housing should be free with landlords picking up all the bills?

No one is suggesting this

Then why the outrage at the suggestion that a replacement for Council tax by LVT be passed on to tenants?

JustAnotherPoster00 · 30/05/2017 23:07

Worth a read about the Corbyn/IRA 'controversy'

anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 30/05/2017 23:30

The Gandhi foundation is a UK based voluntary oganisation which has nothing to do with Gandhi.

That site you linked to claims he got the award because he brokered peace in Northern Ireland, which is complete and utter tosh. Cornyn played no part in that.

His award from this voluntary organisation of very little significance, had nothing to do with Northern Ireland.

MyDarlingWhatIfYouFly · 30/05/2017 23:41

Were you at every meeting? How can you possibly know??

prh47bridge · 30/05/2017 23:42

Agree with LassWiTheDelicateAir. The citation for the Gandhi Foundation Award does not mention Northern Ireland. Corbyn did not broker peace in Northern Ireland. He voted against the Good Friday agreement.

Anyone who was alive and paying attention at the time also knows that the claim that Adams and McGuinness were not the IRA is rubbish. Both men were members of the seven-man IRA Army Council. The evidence is overwhelming.

Only up to the value of the rent cap

If landlords are not able to pass the LVT on to tenants they will exit the market as they will no longer be able to cover their costs. That will lead to a crash in property prices. Some may think this a good thing but it will be difficult to persuade those home owners who would find themselves in negative equity.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 31/05/2017 00:04

Only up to the value of the rent cap

If landlords are not able to pass the LVT on to tenants they will exit the market as they will no longer be able to cover their costs. That will lead to a crash in property prices. Some may think this a good thing but it will be difficult to persuade those home owners who would find themselves in negative equity

Agreed completely. I don't understand the outrage at the suggestion that LVT should be passed on to tenants. If it replaces Council Tax why should landlords pay their tenants' Council Tax?

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 31/05/2017 00:07

Were you at every meeting? How can you possibly know??

He was a nobody. Of no importance and with no power. He was glad handing these people to show he sympathised with their aims- Corbyn socking it to the man.

deeedeee · 31/05/2017 01:09

Here's what I'm really struggling to understand. All I've ever heard from people, for years, is
"bloody bankers and their bonuses"
"bloody rich and their offshore tax havens "
"bloody politicians with their lying and second homes"
“bloody corporations paying less tax than me”
"bloody Establishment, they're all in it together”
“it'll never change, there's no point in voting”

And quite rightly so, I said all the same things.

But then someone comes along that's different. He upsets the bankers and the rich. The Tory politicians hate him along with most of the labour politicians. The corporations throw more money at the politicians to keep him quiet. And the Establishment is visibly shaken. I've never seen the Establishment so genuinely scared of a single person.

So the media arm of the establishment gets involved. Theresa phones Rupert asking what he can do, and he tells her to keep her mouth shut, don't do the live debate, he'll sort this out. So the media goes into overdrive with…
“she's strong and stable”
“he's a clown”
“he's not a leader”
“look he can't even control his own party”
“he'll ruin the economy”
“how's he gonna pay for it all?!”
“AND he's a terrorist sympathiser, burn him, burn the terrorist sympathiser”

And what do we? We've waited forever for an honest politician to come along but instead of getting behind him we bow to the establishment like good little workers. They whistle and we do a little dance for them. We run around like hypnotised robots repeating headlines we've read, all nodding and agreeing. Feeling really proud of ourselves because we think we've came up with our very own first political opinion. But we haven't, we haven't came up with anything. This is how you tell. No matter where someone lives in the country, they're repeating the same headlines, word for word. From Cornwall to Newcastle people are saying
“he's a clown”
“he’s a threat to the country”
“she's strong and stable”
“he'll take us back to the 70s”

And there's nothing else, there's no further opinion. There's no evidence apart from 1 radio 5 interview that isn't even concrete evidence, he actually condemns the violence of both sides in the interview. There's no data or studies or official reports to back anything up. Try and think really hard why you think he's a clown, other than the fact he looks like a geography teacher. (no offence geography teachers) because he hasn't done anything clownish from what I've seen.

And you're not on this planet if you think the establishment and the media aren't all in it together.

You think Richard Branson, who's quietly winning NHS contracts, wants Corbyn in?

You think Rupert Murdoch, who's currently trying to widen his media monopoly by buying sky outright, wants Jeremy in?

You think the Barclay brothers, with their offshore residencies, want him in?

You think Philip Green, who stole all the pensions from BHS workers and claims his wife owns Top Shop because she lives in Monaco, wants Corbyn in?

You think the politicians, both Labour and Tory, with their second homes and alcohol paid for by us, want him in?

You think Starbucks, paying near zero tax, wants him in?

You think bankers, with their multi million pound bonuses, want him in?

And do you think they don't have contact with May? Or with the media? You honestly think that these millionaires and billionaires are the sort of people that go “ah well, easy come easy go, it was nice while it lasted”?? I wouldn't be if my personal fortune was at risk, I'd be straight on the phone to Theresa May or Rupert Murdoch demanding this gets sorted immediately.

Because here's a man, a politician that doesn't lie, he can't lie, he could have said whatever would get him votes anytime he wanted but he hasn't. He lives in a normal house like us and uses the bus just like us. He's fought for justice and peace for nearly 40 years. He has no career ambitions. And his seat is untouchable. That's one of the greatest testimonies. No one comes close to removing him from his constituency, election after election.

His Manifesto is fully costed. It all adds up, yes there's some borrowing but that's just to renationalise the railway, you know we already subsidise them and they make profit yeah? One more time… WE subsidise the railway companies and they walk away with a profit, just try and grasp the level of piss taking going on there.

Unlike the Tory manifesto with a £9 billion hole, their figures don't even add up.

And it benefits all of us, young, old, working, disabled, everyone.

How can you not want that?

deeedeee · 31/05/2017 01:09

Here's what I'm really struggling to understand.
All I've ever heard from people, for years, is
"bloody bankers and their bonuses"
"bloody rich and their offshore tax havens "
"bloody politicians with their lying and second homes"
“bloody corporations paying less tax than me”
"bloody Establishment, they're all in it together”
“it'll never change, there's no point in voting”

And quite rightly so, I said all the same things.

But then someone comes along that's different. He upsets the bankers and the rich. The Tory politicians hate him along with most of the labour politicians. The corporations throw more money at the politicians to keep him quiet. And the Establishment is visibly shaken. I've never seen the Establishment so genuinely scared of a single person.

So the media arm of the establishment gets involved. Theresa phones Rupert asking what he can do, and he tells her to keep her mouth shut, don't do the live debate, he'll sort this out. So the media goes into overdrive with…
“she's strong and stable”
“he's a clown”
“he's not a leader”
“look he can't even control his own party”
“he'll ruin the economy”
“how's he gonna pay for it all?!”
“AND he's a terrorist sympathiser, burn him, burn the terrorist sympathiser”

And what do we? We've waited forever for an honest politician to come along but instead of getting behind him we bow to the establishment like good little workers. They whistle and we do a little dance for them. We run around like hypnotised robots repeating headlines we've read, all nodding and agreeing. Feeling really proud of ourselves because we think we've came up with our very own first political opinion. But we haven't, we haven't came up with anything. This is how you tell. No matter where someone lives in the country, they're repeating the same headlines, word for word. From Cornwall to Newcastle people are saying
“he's a clown”
“he’s a threat to the country”
“she's strong and stable”
“he'll take us back to the 70s”

And there's nothing else, there's no further opinion. There's no evidence apart from 1 radio 5 interview that isn't even concrete evidence, he actually condemns the violence of both sides in the interview. There's no data or studies or official reports to back anything up. Try and think really hard why you think he's a clown, other than the fact he looks like a geography teacher. (no offence geography teachers) because he hasn't done anything clownish from what I've seen.

And you're not on this planet if you think the establishment and the media aren't all in it together.

You think Richard Branson, who's quietly winning NHS contracts, wants Corbyn in?

You think Rupert Murdoch, who's currently trying to widen his media monopoly by buying sky outright, wants Jeremy in?

You think the Barclay brothers, with their offshore residencies, want him in?

You think Philip Green, who stole all the pensions from BHS workers and claims his wife owns Top Shop because she lives in Monaco, wants Corbyn in?

You think the politicians, both Labour and Tory, with their second homes and alcohol paid for by us, want him in?

You think Starbucks, paying near zero tax, wants him in?

You think bankers, with their multi million pound bonuses, want him in?

And do you think they don't have contact with May? Or with the media? You honestly think that these millionaires and billionaires are the sort of people that go “ah well, easy come easy go, it was nice while it lasted”?? I wouldn't be if my personal fortune was at risk, I'd be straight on the phone to Theresa May or Rupert Murdoch demanding this gets sorted immediately.

Because here's a man, a politician that doesn't lie, he can't lie, he could have said whatever would get him votes anytime he wanted but he hasn't. He lives in a normal house like us and uses the bus just like us. He's fought for justice and peace for nearly 40 years. He has no career ambitions. And his seat is untouchable. That's one of the greatest testimonies. No one comes close to removing him from his constituency, election after election.

His Manifesto is fully costed. It all adds up, yes there's some borrowing but that's just to renationalise the railway, you know we already subsidise them and they make profit yeah? One more time… WE subsidise the railway companies and they walk away with a profit, just try and grasp the level of piss taking going on there.

Unlike the Tory manifesto with a £9 billion hole, their figures don't even add up.

And it benefits all of us, young, old, working, disabled, everyone.

How can you not want that?

Creampastry · 31/05/2017 07:11

Thus morning I hear Corbyn wants a garden tax introduced. Twat.

May has allowed people with zero police experience to become police detectives. Twat.

They are both shite.

Nousernameforme · 31/05/2017 07:20

Well this morning I watched a video of how a heavily disabled women is supposed to live in a top floor flat struggling downstairs on crutches can't get to the loo on her own has to crawl slide on her stomach through the narrow corridors of her place and has to choose between her prescriptions and eating so she lives off milk. She is in a dreadful state and the true cost of of TM's policies
Cheers tory voters

christinarossetti · 31/05/2017 07:48

cream pastry, that was made up by the Telegraph yesterday.

Labour have confirmed that it is not and has never been in their manifesto.

TheMonkeyAndThePlywoodViolin · 31/05/2017 07:49

He's not even said they will have a land tax.

It's been seized upon out of fear of him.

AndHoldTheBun · 31/05/2017 07:52

DEEDEE, that's a great post. Get it and send it off to the letters pages of your favourite newspaper(s) Smile

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 31/05/2017 08:18

His Manifesto is fully costed. It all adds up

The IFS disagrees.

makeourfuture · 31/05/2017 08:23

The IFS disagrees

Not the worst offender, but they definitely have an agenda - a Tory one.

Justanotherlurker · 31/05/2017 08:26

Not the worst offender, but they definitely have an agenda - a Tory one.

Many other economists disagree with Labour also, some of the most prominent left leaning economists couldn't even work with JC and his team.

Plus the IFS has criticised the Tory manifesto so maybe instead of playing the man you should start playing the ball.

clevername · 31/05/2017 08:34

Amazing post, deeedeee

moutonfou · 31/05/2017 08:36

Well the opinion polls were wrong about Trump and Brexit.

Is it too much to hope they could be wrong in a good way for once? Grin

Swipe left for the next trending thread