Brexit Arms. Empty Ditch for sale. Interested parties please contact owner by 12th Dec.

[Epicwaffle]

Apparently the usual landlady over ordered on Bar nuts on the last thread. Just step over them if you find them here, as we haven’t had a chance to clear them up yet.

Welcome to all friendly parties!

First drinks are free!

Good analysis everyone. And Labour=politics of envy. You'd think they'd remember the dismal failure of the 98% tax rate in the 1970s, which resulted in the brain drain.

It's all very Orwellian. All men are equal, but some are more equal than others.

“Labour Party policy = banning things. Ban billionaires, market enterprise, entrepreneurship, inheritance, private schools. The idea that some people think it’s a good thing is worrying. Next it’ll be the ban on owning private property or a car or maybe taking a flight.”

Utterly, scarily, BONKERS. And that some of those same 🌹✊ cultists, are the very same folk bemoaning how much we are apparently going to lose from leaving the EU, yet can’t see the irony in holding those simultaneous positions, when we collectively stand to lose so much and be robbed blind in a corbyn venezuelan government, is honestly mindblowing to me. Well, at least we can all be dirt poor together I guess, 🤷🏻‍♀️ hooray!

Also, a poster on twitter, was seemingly very excited that Corbyn would apparently renationalise the railways. Yet I was under the impression that the EU wouldn’t allow this if we stayed in? (Please correct me if I’m wrong) So, what to make of that? 🤔

A corbyn government would indeed be ‘real change’ but not quite the one they expect or imagine.

I am honestly, genuinely, scared of the prospect of momentum gaining any real power. For the first time in my life, instead of just disagreeing with their policies , I truly fear the opposition.

Not good.

Also, a poster on twitter, was seemingly very excited that Corbyn would apparently renationalise the railways. Yet I was under the impression that the EU wouldn’t allow this if we stayed in? (Please correct me if I’m wrong)

Not wrong, Epicwaffle. In fact, the only argument that might have given me pause for thought in the run-up to the referendum is that the EU would stop Corbachov from nationalising anything. Oddly, it was never used

Labour Party policy = banning things. Ban billionaires, market enterprise, entrepreneurship, inheritance, private schools.

What I’ve never understood is why anyone thinks any of the above is a good thing. One can only assume it’s because they haven’t thought it through

If you decentivise the high earners etc, where do people think the funds are going come from for these equality schemes?

Actual lol at 'Corbachov' 🤩😂

🌹 ✊ 🤮

Politics of envy & keeping citizens in their place Bear.

Tis the one true way.

Dear leader and the benevolent masters must control all.

I know! It’s like when British Steel went to the wall. Howls of why isn’t the government bailing them out. Erm, under EU rules the government isn’t allowed.

I would also love to understand how all this nationalisation would be paid for. A lot of people have their pension funds invested in energy or water companies. So would those for nationalisation be happy to see their investments be wiped out and pension potentially a lot less?

If you’re going to compensate or pay off those shareholders, then you’d be giving tax payer money to shareholders.... isn’t that the very definition of what The Hard Left hate?

This sums it up really

Thank you, Dusty, I aim to please 😁
Wait till you hear how the Taoiseach is referred to in this house.

If you decentivise the high earners etc, where do people think the funds are going come from for these equality schemes?

They don't think, Bearbehind. It's really not something that has any relevance for them. 43% of all adults in the UK do not pay any income tax whatsoever. That's why the promise of tax cuts in a manifesto simply don't cut through to so many. It's not shared pain by any means.

And before anyone jumps down my throat - I don’t disagree with taxing the wealthy at all but it needs to be proportional otherwise they’ll just stop working or go elsewhere

Have labour said how much they would increase income tax for those earning over 85k?

Corbyn would apparently renationalise the railways. Yet I was under the impression that the EU wouldn’t allow this if we stayed in? (Please correct me if I’m wrong)

Yes you’re wrong. The EU is neutral on public ownership and is supportive of public services being run for the public good, such as railways, postal services, some telecoms and utility distribution networks.

Technically you can nationalise within EU rules I think, but state aid for things like that has to be submitted as a request & they are looked at on a case by case basis by the commission (I think I've remembered that right).

My understanding of the EU regulations on nationalisation is in line with continuity

It’s just an urban myth that it’s prohibited

Re: EU policy on rail nationalisation. It's complicated and it's about to change to go more anti-nationalisation. Unfortunately for Corbz. Long discussion here if anyone is really interested!
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-eu-railways-eu-rules-nationalise-single-market-restrictions-labour-a8968691.html

Found it

Extra 5%

From 80k and lower the higher rate threshold to 123k

Railways = complex interpretations on nationalisation then! 🚞

Hence why I asked, thank to those who politely cleared that up (sort of! Lol)

“And before anyone jumps down my throat - I don’t disagree with taxing the wealthy at all but it needs to be proportional otherwise they’ll just stop working or go elsewhere”

So much this ^.

Taxation is such a delicate balance in a strong economy.

In 2016 their was a reduction in pension tax relief for very high earners.
The consequence in 2019 is that senior doctors (on 6 figure salaries) are voting with their feet and either retiring early or refusing to work any extra sessions because they will have to pay to much tax on their earnings.

Apparently its causing a big problem in the NHS.

Perfect modern day example of why Corbynism would destroy the NHS and the UK.

state aid for things like that has to be submitted as a request

Government owned companies have to tender for contracts and there generally still has to be some kind of privatised offering to comply with state aid rules. For instance, DB has separate (several) companies running track and trains, but shares are all 100% government owned and these companies have to tender for government contracts.

The Fourth Rail Package does not ban state-owned train operating companies and it doesn’t preclude the possibility of awarding public service contracts without a competitive tender to state-owned train operators in certain circumstances (eg for smaller contracts). Also, where a public service contract has been awarded, member states can restrict the access of other train operating companies to the railway infrastructure if this compromises the “economic equilibrium” of the contract.

IPPR has a good primer on this.

In 2016 their was a reduction in pension tax relief for very high earners.
The consequence in 2019 is that senior doctors (on 6 figure salaries) are voting with their feet and either retiring early or refusing to work any extra sessions because they will have to pay to much tax on their earnings.

That’s specific to the NHS pension scheme though because of the way it is set up.

The tax rules were due to be changed, but Boris and Sajid cancelled the November budget which could have dealt with the issue.

The cap on private pensions for everyone has been decreasing steadily for the last few years as well.

Perfect modern day example of why Corbynism would destroy the NHS and the UK.

Except this had all been happening under Tory governments?

Except this had all been happening under Tory governments?

lol.

I believe the quote is something like "Taxes are the price we pay for civilization."

Looking at the state of the country at the moment, there is definitely a case to increase taxes.

Thank you Continuity, that’s interesting.

I note the use of the word ‘Possibly’. So from my interpretation (and its only my interpretation, as It would be disingenuous of me to suggest I knew much about this particular area.) of what you have said, a corbyn rail nationalisation under the EU would be neither a given, or at least without some significant and complex hurdles to jump?

So perhaps the twitter poster may have been a little ahead of herself with her enthusiasm on this one?

“Except this had all been happening under Tory governments?”

I am fairly confident that Walking is fully aware of this. She is pointing out that whilst it’s obviously a bad policy, (all parties have some) it’s merely the tip of the iceberg, of the effect, that the myriad of arguably much worse and poorly thought out policies from Corbyn et al would have on our economy.

Cause and effect, basically, was the obvious take away here Imo.