Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Politics

If there was a GE today who would you vote for?

658 replies

87SPD · 23/09/2023 19:48

Bit cheeky but I’m curious to see if there are genuinely any Tory voters out there at all following another disastrous week for Rishi Sunak.

So who would get your vote?

I‘ll go first, I would vote Labour. As much as I would love to hear more on policy and a firm grittiness from them, I do understand that Keir Starmer is doing the best he can, in that he can’t alienate a large proportion of the electorate so needs to toe the line.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
10
EasternStandard · 25/09/2023 07:28

1dayatatime · 25/09/2023 07:21

@Oaktree1233

A really good post that details the difficulties and realities we face rather than empty political sound bites.

However in regards to your point:

"There has to be adult discussions on what we can afford and perhaps everyone should reflect on every penny they spend and whether that company is using some elaborate scheme to reduce their tax burden."

When 48% of the population pay no income tax because they don't earn enough, it is logical for them to vote for the party that promises increased Government spending even if it is financed by "taxing the rich" (without ever defining who the rich are) because it will not cost them anything.

It’s easy to fall into a low contribution cycle and vote accordingly

Look at Wales and Labour’s performance

I’d say we’re on the edge of the same

1dayatatime · 25/09/2023 07:29

@jgw1

"You forgot to mention having an increasingly hard right government for the past 13 years who have insisted on enriching those who have more money than they need rather than looking after the country."

++++

The UK tax burden is at its highest in 70 years:

www.ii.co.uk/analysis-commentary/uk-tax-burden-highest-record-ii527398

Of course there is always the empty political statement of "tax the rich" without ever defy who the rich are (top 20%, 10%, 1%?). Also for closing loopholes that is a whack a mole game where well paid accountants will always find new legal loopholes.

So "tax the rich" has nothing to do with raising additional tax revenue to actually benefit the country and more to do with the politics of envy and trying to punish the "rich ".

EasternStandard · 25/09/2023 07:32

1dayatatime · 25/09/2023 07:29

@jgw1

"You forgot to mention having an increasingly hard right government for the past 13 years who have insisted on enriching those who have more money than they need rather than looking after the country."

++++

The UK tax burden is at its highest in 70 years:

www.ii.co.uk/analysis-commentary/uk-tax-burden-highest-record-ii527398

Of course there is always the empty political statement of "tax the rich" without ever defy who the rich are (top 20%, 10%, 1%?). Also for closing loopholes that is a whack a mole game where well paid accountants will always find new legal loopholes.

So "tax the rich" has nothing to do with raising additional tax revenue to actually benefit the country and more to do with the politics of envy and trying to punish the "rich ".

’The rich’ tend to highly attractive to other countries too

Ditto multinationals. ROI a good example of a surplus by being more attractive with rates

Howpo · 25/09/2023 07:48

@1dayatatime
On the austerity, its aim was to reduce levels of Government borrowing and debt built up under Labour. In that regard it wasn't that successful (see graph) although one has to ask what levels of debt would have been without the austerity measures. In any event by 2015 the Conservatives have effectively stopped austerity measures saying they would balance the books over a longer time horizon

Austerity never ended, it continued at pace, look at the cuts to council services, to defence spending, to NHS (per capita) and the never ending inflation busting council tax increases, often many times more than inflation.

Interest rates were indeed super low but increasing spending on public services by increasing debt even more would have had the effect of increasing interest rates and inflation

Well, European countries actually did restore public spending but did not see high interest rates or inflation.

On Brexit, not only is that an economic and cultural disaster for the UK, it has frozen Govt, with each PM in turn fighting to keep his or her party together instead of governing the UK.

Oh and Labour would never have given us Truss, the damage she has done to the country is going to cost us far more than the old stuck record of PFI... whose critics can never ever come up with an alternative - then there is banging on about ROI, ignoring the fact that the UK had low Corporation tax rates too, that Germany has much higher CT, the USA higher than the UK rate until last year.

Tax is not the only reason companies move or invest.

EasternStandard · 25/09/2023 07:52

Howpo · 25/09/2023 07:48

@1dayatatime
On the austerity, its aim was to reduce levels of Government borrowing and debt built up under Labour. In that regard it wasn't that successful (see graph) although one has to ask what levels of debt would have been without the austerity measures. In any event by 2015 the Conservatives have effectively stopped austerity measures saying they would balance the books over a longer time horizon

Austerity never ended, it continued at pace, look at the cuts to council services, to defence spending, to NHS (per capita) and the never ending inflation busting council tax increases, often many times more than inflation.

Interest rates were indeed super low but increasing spending on public services by increasing debt even more would have had the effect of increasing interest rates and inflation

Well, European countries actually did restore public spending but did not see high interest rates or inflation.

On Brexit, not only is that an economic and cultural disaster for the UK, it has frozen Govt, with each PM in turn fighting to keep his or her party together instead of governing the UK.

Oh and Labour would never have given us Truss, the damage she has done to the country is going to cost us far more than the old stuck record of PFI... whose critics can never ever come up with an alternative - then there is banging on about ROI, ignoring the fact that the UK had low Corporation tax rates too, that Germany has much higher CT, the USA higher than the UK rate until last year.

Tax is not the only reason companies move or invest.

Edited

the old stuck record of PFI... whose critics can never ever come up with an alternative, just moaning.

Do you not like seeing facts on the cost?

I didn’t realise you were so delicate on that

Why is it such a problem for you to see we’re still paying it back

And the other fact is it won’t happen again so funding won’t be easy

Attack and insult. Nothing new there 🥱

EasternStandard · 25/09/2023 07:55

Whether posters can deal with it or not PPP was a massive part of state plus private funding in that period

It won’t be repeated. So where will the funding come from this time?

Angela Rayner couldn’t say. Maybe someone on here can?

Howpo · 25/09/2023 07:55

How should Blair have funded the sorry state the NHS/Education was in after 2 decades of Tory rule?

Tax?
Borrow?

Or leave it as it was?

& how would the NHS have managed Covid without Blairs investment?

PFI is nothing compared to the what Brexit and Truss has cost us and for no gain.

1dayatatime · 25/09/2023 07:58

@jgw1

"n the interests of factual accuracy I would like to point out two things.

  1. it is possible for the very rich to pay a small amount of their income in tax. In one known example a multi-millionaire paying less tax on his income than teachers and nurses do.
  2. How many of those who do not pay income tax are pensioners and children?"

+++

  1. I don't know the well known example that you are referring to so it is difficult to explain how they are doing this. Popular options include non dom status and the fact that capital gains and investments are taxed lower than income. I am all in for supporting a wealth tax over income provided it raises more than it costs to collect.

But I recognise that many will disagree with the idea of an old lady in London who is on a small pension having to pay a wealth tax because she lives in a million pound house.

  1. It is 48% of income earners, so would only include children and pensioners if they were in PAYE work.
EasternStandard · 25/09/2023 08:01

All those questions do not change the costs and it was criticised heavily on many fronts

Which I quoted below. To add - In total, PFI repayments are expected to add up to nearly £82 billion. So pretty high

None of those questions change the outcome. The huge markups which increase the cost to the taxpayer massively and that no one will touch it again.

If it was as good as you think it wouldn’t have been abandoned by all parties

So how will they do it this time?

Howpo · 25/09/2023 08:08

I never said it was "Good" i just asked what the alternatives were and you cannot suggest any.

Truss is estimated to have cost the UK at least 65bn and in terms of increased inflation and interest rates, has cost house holds far more, then there is the collapse in the bond markets and the impact on pensions/govt borrowing, yet we all have got nothing for these costs.

I just think that PFI was an ok idea but very badly implemented, hence why some contracts have been renegotiated.

The problem for Lab, should they get in, is how to afford to fix the NHS and social care... among other things.

SallyWD · 25/09/2023 08:08

I'm not keen on Starmer but will vote Labour. Need to get the Tories out.

EasternStandard · 25/09/2023 08:13

Howpo · 25/09/2023 08:08

I never said it was "Good" i just asked what the alternatives were and you cannot suggest any.

Truss is estimated to have cost the UK at least 65bn and in terms of increased inflation and interest rates, has cost house holds far more, then there is the collapse in the bond markets and the impact on pensions/govt borrowing, yet we all have got nothing for these costs.

I just think that PFI was an ok idea but very badly implemented, hence why some contracts have been renegotiated.

The problem for Lab, should they get in, is how to afford to fix the NHS and social care... among other things.

Of course there was an alternative

Tax for a start.

It was pushed by financiers and the public loved it as they got stuff without recognising the huge mark up or even that it was wasn’t on gov debt books

It was a bad decision, as others have said, and one that won’t be repeated

And if you think there was no alternative then when we were on the upward swing of a global boom you’re not going to see it now after a war and a pandemic

Which is why no one in Labour can answer how will you pay for it

Howpo · 25/09/2023 08:20

Tax? so an incoming Labour Govt sticks 4% on income tax... (would have raised about 12bn in the early 2000's) how regressive would that be on the lower paid and not in their manifesto either, Blair would have been kicked out 5 years later.

Odd you suggest that, yet believe lower taxes increase revenue, both with CT and higher rate cuts from 50% to 45%.

jgw1 · 25/09/2023 08:24

1dayatatime · 25/09/2023 07:29

@jgw1

"You forgot to mention having an increasingly hard right government for the past 13 years who have insisted on enriching those who have more money than they need rather than looking after the country."

++++

The UK tax burden is at its highest in 70 years:

www.ii.co.uk/analysis-commentary/uk-tax-burden-highest-record-ii527398

Of course there is always the empty political statement of "tax the rich" without ever defy who the rich are (top 20%, 10%, 1%?). Also for closing loopholes that is a whack a mole game where well paid accountants will always find new legal loopholes.

So "tax the rich" has nothing to do with raising additional tax revenue to actually benefit the country and more to do with the politics of envy and trying to punish the "rich ".

You don't think it appropriate that a multi-millionaire should at least pay the same proportion of his income in tax as teachers and nurses?

EasternStandard · 25/09/2023 08:24

Howpo · 25/09/2023 08:20

Tax? so an incoming Labour Govt sticks 4% on income tax... (would have raised about 12bn in the early 2000's) how regressive would that be on the lower paid and not in their manifesto either, Blair would have been kicked out 5 years later.

Odd you suggest that, yet believe lower taxes increase revenue, both with CT and higher rate cuts from 50% to 45%.

Well of course it was political. That’s Blair’s success. It didn’t mean it was right for the taxpayer, still paying higher amounts

It does make them look good. It’s not on the books but incredibly high private debt. Like magic

I see a lot of I wish we could have that again.

How was it paid for? High mark up, like HP

Doing it again? No

Ok so what’s the plan? You have a load of people who do not realise how it was funded and it won’t be repeated but expect the same again

bombastix · 25/09/2023 08:27

I will vote for the candidate who stands the best chance of removing the local Conservative. Personally he is a reasonable guy but his party is nuts.

Sorry Bob, but it's anyone but the fruitcakes you have to associate with.

Howpo · 25/09/2023 08:35

Not quite sure how hiking tax rates by 4% or more is good for the tax payer or the country.

Perhaps we should look at why the NHS was in such a state in 1997? and try not to repeat that.

However, i do agree with your more general point that its going to be a lot harder for Labour, if they get in, which i believe is not a done deal at all, a lot can change.

But is Sunak going for a spring (or earlier) GE ? a lot of new policies coming out now!!!

EasternStandard · 25/09/2023 08:38

Howpo · 25/09/2023 08:35

Not quite sure how hiking tax rates by 4% or more is good for the tax payer or the country.

Perhaps we should look at why the NHS was in such a state in 1997? and try not to repeat that.

However, i do agree with your more general point that its going to be a lot harder for Labour, if they get in, which i believe is not a done deal at all, a lot can change.

But is Sunak going for a spring (or earlier) GE ? a lot of new policies coming out now!!!

Why not? it was just a political advantage. A Labour gov who wanted to hide the massive cost

One which was pushed by financial backers

We have higher tax rates now and yet so much more in the economy due to the global boom back then

If there was a time when we could do higher tax it’s boom time

Willmafrockfit · 25/09/2023 08:47

green or lib dem

1dayatatime · 25/09/2023 09:09

You don't think it appropriate that a multi-millionaire should at least pay the same proportion of his income in tax as teachers and nurses.

+++

The problem is that the multimillionaire will make sure his actual annual income is low in order to pay less tax.

The multimillionaire's real value is in assets and investments which is under taxed relative to income and is why a wealth tax would make sense provided it collected more than it cost to collect.

This is a really good article by LSE on a wealth tax:

www.lse.ac.uk/research/research-for-the-world/economics/how-much-tax-do-the-rich-really-pay

Howpo · 25/09/2023 13:56

Oborne also rubbishes Johnson and Sunak far more though, calling them liars as well.

& tbh why would a Tory have a good word to say about any Labour leader? his paper, whilst he worked for them... absolutely trashed Miliband.

MadderthanMorris · 25/09/2023 14:25

Oborne also rubbishes Johnson and Sunak far more though, calling them liars as well.

Again - the fact that Starmer is not quite as brazenly dishonest as the most dishonest prime minister in the history of the country, is not recommendation enough to make me willing to vote for him.

& tbh why would a Tory have a good word to say about any Labour leader? his paper, whilst he worked for them... absolutely trashed Miliband.

But the points he makes, about Starmer's absolute and unrelenting dishonesty since running for the Labour leadership, his willingness to abandon every promise he's ever made and his position as a puppet of the Tory media establishment, are factual.

Grantanow · 25/09/2023 14:37

Labour but as I live in Toryland I'll vote Lib Dem to get the local Tory MP out. Voting for the Greens and other minor parties is a wasted vote.

Howpo · 25/09/2023 14:51

MadderthanMorris · 25/09/2023 14:25

Oborne also rubbishes Johnson and Sunak far more though, calling them liars as well.

Again - the fact that Starmer is not quite as brazenly dishonest as the most dishonest prime minister in the history of the country, is not recommendation enough to make me willing to vote for him.

& tbh why would a Tory have a good word to say about any Labour leader? his paper, whilst he worked for them... absolutely trashed Miliband.

But the points he makes, about Starmer's absolute and unrelenting dishonesty since running for the Labour leadership, his willingness to abandon every promise he's ever made and his position as a puppet of the Tory media establishment, are factual.

what lies has Starmer told that even come close to the porkies Boris and Sunak have come out with... bear in mind KS isn't in power either.

Can you substantiate your view that Starmer has broken every single promise he has ever made?
Circumstances change and so Stamers position has to as well, the most obvious one would be on the EU, re join isn't on the agenda now and neither is joining the SM and/or CU, its not anything the EU has offered the UK.

I read the right wing Tory press headlines and nowhere do i ever see them supporting Starmer, quite the reverse, the recent ones on Starmer will reverse Brexit being the latest.

Starmer being a tory media stooge is as bonkers as Sunaks 7 Deadly Bins whopper!!!