How will you vote on May 5th?

[victoriapeckham]

Just wondered. A little bit political...
a) how did you vote last time (if at all?)
b) how will you vote this time (if at all)?
c) what to you is the deciding issue of this election?
d) if you had to make love (not war) with one politician (past, present, senior or backbench?) who would it be?

Am deeply offended to be called a leftie!

I don't think it's bullying to point out that we enjoy the privilidge (sp???) of living in a democracy when in Zimbabwe voting the wrong way gets your kids killed in front of you.

I vote because I believe it to be my duty, not simply to vote who promises the best for my family (probably the Tories - we are certainly worse off under Labour even though dh earns the national average wage) but to vote for the party that would do the best for those who have no voice, the marginalised and the disadvantaged, and also take a stand against those who would stamp on them i.e both Labour and the Tories re Iraq and asyulm seekers.(For me this is because I'm a Christian, but know others feel the same who aren't.)

I agree, it's a difficult balance but at the moment I don't think we've got enough income tax tiers. It goes from 0, to 10% to 22% to 40%. And then 40% whether you earn £40K or £340K. I think there could be more tiers in between and there could most certainly be a 50-55% tax rate for the very richest - eg those who earn over half a million or whatever (just off the top of my head, I'm plucking a number out of the air, it's not a worked out policy!)

Actually for people like your DH who would like to spend half the year with their kids instead of earning more money, that sounds like quite a good idea - any policy which would encourage that sounds good to me!

I don't believe it's my duty to vote, I think it's a way of legitimising an elective dictatorship.

If we lived in a democracy, governments who broke election pledges would have to resign and call another election. Labour stated categorically that they would not introduce universtity fees. They broke that pledge; in a democracy that should actually be illegal.

Yes, Caligula, our 'democracy' really isn't any such thing. But not voting changes nothing. If everyone who didn't normally vote went and cast a protest vote for the Monster Raving Loonies or similar, they'd have a sizable chunk of the seats in Westminster and the system would have to change.

I agree. The only thing not voting does, is galvanise the corrupt bastards to introduce a system of postal voting so they can "increase turnout".

Like turnout is more important than counting real people's real votes.

Jeez.

Prufrock, someone earning £200,000 a year would pay an extra £10,000 a year tax if top rate went to 50% on £100,000 and up. Hardly worth taking your ball home about that, surely?

"Supertax" was 97.5% in the 50s and 60s. Think on.

The main issue with the LibDem proposal for an extra 10% tax rate is that it won't bring in the money that it promises - at that level the rishest people will just look for the loopholes and exploit them faster than they are plugged. As it is I lose track of the various whizzo schemes that affect Dh's salary each year (and these are just to get around employers NI).

Prufrock - the reality of such tax hits at the margin is that employers are usually forced to increase their salaries leading to wage inflation across most of the salary bands not just the highest (which is another problem I have with the proposal), so your Dh is unlikely to lose out too much - if he is on £200k, then he'll probably get a £20k rise. Intrigued that this rate change alone would convince him to reduce hours though - he's already being taxed at 41% on most of his income - what is the magic figure at which it is no longer worth earning? 45%?

I'm not "taking my ball home" I just think that as a basic principle taxing income discourages people from earning income - whether that be lucky people like my dh, or nurses choosing not to do overtime. Wheras taxing consumption (of non essentials) discourages consumption of non essentials - which can only be a good thing in both ecological terms and encouraging savings. Fiscal plans tbh would not effect how I vote - I like to think I am more principled than that. And Caligula - there is a little bit of me that wishes they would put up tax rates and force dh to stop working so hard now raher than in the future

Snafu, i am sorry if you think my reason is not a real reason. But it is a real reason because thats why i'm not voting, i'm not lying. I will as stated ,vote when i can make an informed decision. Surely you can understand that i do not want to put my name to a party i know nothing about, just for the sake of voting. Surely you know that a womans brain is jelly post childbirth.

huskygirl, I know how hard it is. I voted last year when dd2 was 3 mo, it was the first time I went out without her and ran down the road and back, with boobs leaking everywhere!

Put it this way: voting is your chance to have a say in your dd's future.

ionesmum, exactly, thank you, i agree which is why the right decision is important. at the boobs!

I would have taken her with me ionesmum!

Prufrock I do see what you are saying about your DH only working six months of the year and paying the 41% tax, but it wouldn't all be economic loss. Someone else would presumably have to do the other six months - or pick up the work in some other way, so thats one more person in employment somewhere along the way, so a saving to the tax payer there. Also your DH wouldn't be sat on his backside for 6 months he would be helping to bring up his children and contributing to the community, I assume.

Huskygirl, I did already say that I'm not referring to you specifically. I am sorry if I've offended you but I don't see where I've implied that you're lying. Anyway, you've given your reasons and fair enough. You're entitled to them, just as I'm entitled to say that, for me personally, post-birth 'jelly-brain' would not be a reason to give up my vote. But I'm not trying to argue (or bully), so will just say congrats instead

Snafu, i took it as specific to me from your reply to davros, as i'm the only person on the thread to have said "i dont know enough about politics". If you think that my reason is not good enough for you then i can understand that, but to me its definately a real reason. I thought you meant that i was making up a reason, which i did not. I did try to read all the info that hatmum posted but it just wont go into my brain, its like looking at gibberish. Thank you for the congrats

actually I'd rather people didn't vote if they don't know what they're voting for.

No worries. Anyway, you're right about it all being gibberish...

Hold Your Nose and Vote Labour - Polly Toynbee.

(Because the alternative is so much worse...you know it makes sense!)

Actually agree with her I think.

I agree with her to an extent, but I think her arguments are why so many people are so disillusioned about the electoral system.

Basically, those of us who are on the left know that in the real world without PR, we have to vote for a party we despise, because the other lot are even more despicable.

It's not really conducive to active engagement in politics, is it?

I'd be all for PR - it'd probably mean that ALL parties would have to work together for the greater good!

I mean, if they reckon they can work with umpteen other countries in Europe and still get Britain a good deal why can't 3 home grown parties work together in harmony - there'd be a representative for everyone then!

Are other countries' politics really so harmonious and consensual? Or do they just look like that from a distance?

The point is as la Toynbee says, Labour have made a huge difference, but in ways it is hard to quantify. Waiting lists ARE down, there are more classroom assistants, resources in state schools. But the NHS and education are lumbering institutions which could take 20 years to get right but then people's needs and demands and expectations are increasing quicker than change can be achieved.

If we let the Tories in through pure apathy, many things which we take for granted will go in a puff of smoke. Then all those "oh-i-can't-forgive-Iraq" whingers (who incidentally do nothing to show solidarity with groups inside Iraq who are struggling for democracy and were massacred in their 100,000s under Saddam) will really have something to cry about.

have to say i don't agree with the 50% tax thing either. it's a very populist policy but won't actually increase tax revenues by much because a very small proportion of the population earns that much and secondly because the very high earners are the ones who can hire expensive lawyers and accountants to devise tax avoidance schemes avoiding the loopholes.

plus imho everyone should get to keep the majority of every £ they earn.

s/be "exploiting the loopholes"

Socialist Alliance
Labour (Since the SA has been taken over/sabotaged and disbanded by SWP)
Education, pensions, welfare state stuff.
I'm going to vote Labour because of the continued link with the trade unions and the hope that we can reclaim the party but I can't stand TB or his government and I'm outraged at some of his policies. Anyway letting the Tories back in would be worse than horrible and the Lib Dems are all talk.
No idea who I'd shag tho but not AC he's too smarmy!