Westminstenders: From Uxbridge to...?

[RedToothBrush]

Speaker Bercow is gone.

Speculation that Johnson is parachuting into Rutland.

Rumours that the Brexit Party won't contest the election.

A new speaker to be elected on Monday.

Parliament to dissolve next week.

Brexit? Oh we've forgotten that until Friday 13th...

"once a Tory, always a Tory’"

NO
Don't invent what posters believe, just because we disagree with you

I've said that it has been politically impossible to remove Corbyn ever since his 2nd heavy leadership victory
It is pointless fantasising about that until after a GE and only then if the Tories have won a safe working majority
As long as party members support him, he can't be toppled - that's democracy

The absolute worst nightmare for Labour would be an attempt now to topple him or remove his powers as leader
Ditto for the Tories and BJ

So all the current party leaders are staying

There's no point trying to change the mind of a tribal voter, whether that is Tory, Labour, Leave or Remain.

However, there are plenty of possibilities for Remain parties to gain a ex-Tory vote, for this GE only,
or for the Tories to gain the vote of Lexiters

• which is indeed their main GE strategy, to counteract expected losses to the SNP & LDems

Each party must keep its core support, or it will be annihilated
So wooing floating voters should not be via policies which are against core party values.

When I say we need a band aid I mean right now we need to staunch the bleeding.

@JustAnotherPoster00
"People who vote for the disabled to be treated like shit off someones shoe?"
I don't think many people actually vote for this - or understand that they are voting for this. We have had discussions on here about people in there own little worlds..... I am very unusual in parts of my social circle that I meet and know people reliant on benefits, social housing. Many many people in this country know very little outside their own microcosm. They literally have no idea, and to their detriment have no desire to. But if you asked them if they knew that is what they were voting for - they would be horrified at the very real consequences.

Billionaires are evidence of market failure.
Nobody needs more than a million pounds a year in income.

On the other side, many of the "low tax, low spend" fans forget how much luck has done for them.
Once chronic illness or a disabled child or a parent with high needs dementia pop up, suddenly the safety net becomes rather a wonderful thing

Or do we really want the UK to become like the USA

• 79,000 homeless people in New York alone
• road bridge infrastructure that is on the verge of collapse
• millions of people facing power cuts to save the Electricity Company from its lawyers

Dear god, again, you know what I was saying about the royalty on here just dismissing other posters.

By my reckoning that is the 3rd post in 24 hours that BCF has started with NO

It’s so arrogant

I worked as a child protection social worker and then a post sexual abuse therapist for dc for 15 years.
I accept that my own personal life was comfortable enough that I didn't have to vote to protect that but didn't mean that I wasn't thinking about or aware of other issues.
I genuinely believe that a centrist international approach is the best one for a country to take.

because that will fuck it up for everyone

How will it, as you so eloquently put it, 'fuck it up for everyone'?

Trickle down economics doesn't work. This has been shown time and time again to be insincere and, at best, a lie.

OK, taking the simple example of abolishing private schools - how does forcing all children into state school work financially?

Except that there is no safety net for people with severe dementia. Local authorities can’t find anywhere near enough care home places for non self funders.

It was even admitted to by previously right wing thinkers after the last crash place. I'm sure they're conveniently suffering from amnesia now though. It's just a right wing trope that's trotted out to stop people thinking "hang on?"

"many of Labour policies are explicitly aimed at causing financial harm"

That would be harmful if that were the aim

What they are saying - as are all the other parties except the BXP - is that currently the balance has swung too much to the better off and against the poor, disabled and public services
There has been a transfer of wealth over the last 9 years or so from the less well off to the wealthy

So to redress the balance, the better off should be taxed more,
not as punishment, but because there is no Magic Money Tree - except when it comes to Brexit.

In normal, i.e. non-Brexit times, where the balance lies is what defines the policies of all parties
and also how to increase any tax, e.g. IHT, gift tax, wealth tax , ......

As for moving abroad, it is much more difficult than in previous decades to move to English-speaking counries
and there are only certain jobs / professions where one can move to non-English speaking - many of whom are prepared to pay higher tax and are moving to higher tax countries in the EU

And of course many people have commitments such as schools, elderly parents etc which they can't leave behind

So those of us who have left or can leave are a tiny minority of those who are angered by either Tory or labour policies.

People would have better incentive to pay more for education if their children went to state school. Despite what was said earlier, only a small percentage of children are privately educated.

Social care is a big issue that is only going to get bigger.
May actually came up with some sensible thinking on this at the last election but had to drop it quick sharp.
The solutions are going to be so unpopular they should really be dealt with on a cross party basis.

Why does the UK swear an oath of allegiance to the Queen?

Why shouldn't it be like other countries that swear allegiance to the Parliament, even though there is royalty?

Shouldn't the UK be grown up about this and swear allegiance to Parliament, as in many other countries throughout the world.

As above, as an example, could you explain how that would work in reality with the abolition of private schools

I’ve said I’m not against taxing the wealthy proportionately more, I just don’t agree with how Labour propose doing it, not least because it won’t actually work

As a naturally Labour person, it's about a level playing field as far as possible.

If people thought about state education in this country the way they do about the NHS...

Because for better or worse we aren't a republic?

I can use "NO" when someone is claiming I believe something I don't, or said something I didn't

Part of the reason why it is so difficult trying to debate with you is how you take personal offence all the time

If people thought about state education in this country the way they do about the NHS...

But you can choose private healthcare too 🤔

how does forcing all children into state school work financially?

No one is promoting this though. Bear

I do find it abhorrent though that Eton gets charitable status.

The other 2 instances weren’t even to me BCF so it’s not personal

I’m just pointing out the arrogance of using capital letters to shout ‘NO’ in order to make your point

I said thought about not use!!!

Private healthcare is a choice and isn't funded partially via charitable status. Most private healthcare schemes are there as a perk of the career.

No one is promoting this though. Bear

The Labour Party agreed this at their conference