Don't vote Tory

[Smeble]

48 minutes ago, Scruffylovemonster said:

What they are ACTUALLY saying is they want EVERYONE to pay. If only volunteers pay the extra, not enough would be raised and they'd be comparatively worse off than the non-payers. 

Except they're not, otherwise everyone would pay the same flat rate of tax, 

[Teddington]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

so what you're saying that just a few people should pay extra for everyone's benefit?

Cos I know a man with that plan. Will you be voting for him?

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

For the record, I run my own business, so the reductions in corporation tax have benefited me directly.  I am in favour of corporation tax going up, even though I am nowhere near this top 95%.  

I am a socialist and I am happy to pay more tax.

Yep, me too. And it's why I'm pointing out the flaw of telling 95% they won't be paying more (via some means, even if it's not via tax; inflation would have the same effect), because around Corbyn there will be people who are happy to pay more, and not thinking too hard about whether the electorate feel the same.

[Havors]

27 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Yep, me too. And it's why I'm pointing out the flaw of telling 95% they won't be paying more (via some means, even if it's not via tax; inflation would have the same effect), because around Corbyn there will be people who are happy to pay more, and not thinking too hard about whether the electorate feel the same.

Bloody politics and having to try please everyone..   or a majority 

Or maybe in this case a minority! Interesting to see if the SNP or lib dems would support a minority government if it came down to it. 

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, Havors said:

Bloody politics and having to try please everyone..   or a majority 

Pleasing people would be achieving the promise of it costing nothing extra for 95% of people. I can't see it myself.

 

9 minutes ago, Havors said:

Or maybe in this case a minority! Interesting to see if the SNP or lib dems would support a minority government if it came down to it. 

What the Libdems do is the bigger uncertainty, I think. They might be inclined to support the largest party (for PM-ship, then issue-by-issue on policy), or might be inclined to abstain for PM-ship if the tories are the largest party (which is most likely).

The SNP will take the opportunity to put Corbyn in office and then frustrate anything he tries to do, either wanting a deal for it (so they can say 'we got more than nasty labour wanted to give you'), or just to fuck it up. Their biggest threat as a party comes from a competent Labour govt at Westminster.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 Their biggest threat as a party comes from a competent Labour govt at Westminster.

I doubt that will happen regardless of their majority.

[eFestivals]

Just now, Ommadawn said:

I doubt that will happen regardless of their majority.

we'd probably never get to find out even if they had a chance of being competent - because of what I said.

[Mr.Tease]

1 hour ago, Teddington said:

 

So the NHS has stopped fundraising has it?  I could have sworn that they haven't at my local hospital.  Still I suppose you know better.....

 

 

Some of us do voluntary work for third sector organisations (I know I do) and some doctors donate to charities and hospices, I know my dad donated a shit load of money to the local hospice and forgoed a big pay rise when he got promoted so they could use the money on the hospital budget instead. etc, how you portray people is not always accurate.

In fact it really annoys me how oblivious you are to the extra free work NHS staff do to make up for budget shortfalls 

Edited June 6, 2017 by Mr.Tease

[devonhammer]

The way I see it is that the majority of people are against the Tories. This part of the electorate are spread across Labour, Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid and Greens. This results in the Tories winning many seats as the largest party even though most people are against them.

I'd speculate that the Tories are aware of this hence them stamping on any right wing opposition (UKIP) to bring those votes back. The only real solution to this is proportional representation otherwise we will have continual Tory majority governments supported by a minority of the population.

Edited June 6, 2017 by devonhammer
typo

[DeanoL]

2 hours ago, Teddington said:

This is one thing I don't understand about Socialists. 

If people feel so strongly about this, why do they do it voluntarily?

  "I don't mind paying an extra 1% to save XYZ".

Well do it.  Donate.  Nothing is stopping you.

I love it when Tories say stuff like this, completely oblivious to the fact that plenty of people donate a few percent of their income directly to various charities every month.

[Levitz]

Some of the 'on the doorstep' noises that are being reported aren't good, many coming through ITV (is it more than one source?) or Tories, where it could be hubris....eg Tories telling S*n journalists Bolsover is in play. Dennis Skinner with a 12k majority and a 9k UKIP vote, really? .....Not sure what to think. I do think that You Gov thing is a nonsense though. 

[Mr.Tease]

9 minutes ago, Levitz said:

Some of the 'on the doorstep' noises that are being reported aren't good, many coming through ITV (is it more than one source?) or Tories, where it could be hubris....eg Tories telling S*n journalists Bolsover is in play. Dennis Skinner with a 12k majority and a 9k UKIP vote, really? .....Not sure what to think. I do think that You Gov thing is a nonsense though. 

I don't really trust anecdotal evidence- others have said the opposite, we won't know til they day.

It seems up to Saturday, Labour were roughly gaining but weren't close enough. The keys now are:

Youth vote turnout

How terrorist attacks will impact undecideds (will they blame May or feel safer with her?)

Will pensioners chicken out of backing dementia tax etc (no sign of this but I do wonder if they'll have last minute misgivings)

I'm not optimistic but I would love to be wrong- having a tory majority increase (as polls are showing)  after all this will feel crushing 

 

[Levitz]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

I don't really trust anecdotal evidence- others have said the opposite, we won't know til they day.

It seems up to Saturday, Labour were roughly gaining but weren't close enough. The keys now are:

Youth vote turnout

How terrorist attacks will impact undecideds (will they blame May or feel safer with her?)

Will pensioners chicken out of backing dementia tax etc (no sign of this but I do wonder if they'll have last minute misgivings)

I'm not optimistic but I would love to be wrong- having a tory majority increase (as polls are showing)  after all this will feel crushing 

 

The 'on the doorstep' stuff is generally reports back from activists though, who have gained a sense of how their constituency is going overall. If you look at where the leaders final campaigns are going it's to Labour marginals and not so marginals not Tory seats that can be won. It reflects how the party think they are doing and they are all pretty well honed at this. Also Labour may pick up votes but if it's where I live it makes no difference as it's one of the safest Labour seats. It was always about minimising the scale of the Tory majority for me, starting to feel quite down beat....

[Mr.Tease]

3 minutes ago, Levitz said:

The 'on the doorstep' stuff is generally reports back from activists though, who have gained a sense of how their constituency is going overall. If you look at where the leaders final campaigns are going it's to Labour marginals and not so marginals not Tory seats that can be won. It reflects how the party think they are doing and they are all pretty well honed at this. Also Labour may pick up votes but if it's where I live it makes no difference as it's one of the safest Labour seats. It was always about minimising the scale of the Tory majority for me, starting to feel quite down beat....

Things aren't looking good, but we'll see

[Teddington]

37 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I love it when Tories say stuff like this, completely oblivious to the fact that plenty of people donate a few percent of their income directly to various charities every month.

How on earth can you infer that from the post?  Talk about making sweeping assumptions.

The point still stands.  Socialists expect others to pay for their preferences. 

 

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, Teddington said:

Socialists expect others to pay for their preferences. 

Less so than free marketeers. The clue is in the definitions. 

Meanwhile...

Bankers? The problem with deregulated bankers is that eventually they run out of other people's money.

Bail outs? Socialism for the wealthy classes, at the price of working class austerity.

Free schools and academies? The transfer of state assets to private companies, and for free.

Land? The monopolisation of every human's birthright by the greedy.

Etc, etc, etc.

[arcade fireman]

33 minutes ago, Teddington said:

How on earth can you infer that from the post?  Talk about making sweeping assumptions.

The point still stands.  Socialists expect others to pay for their preferences. 

 

What about those who are voting Labour who would stand to be taxed more under these proposals? 

You really seem to have absolutely no grasp of the concept of society. It's like a fundamental part of your brain is missing. 

[Teddington]

28 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Less so than free marketeers. The clue is in the definitions. 

Meanwhile...

Bankers? The problem with deregulated bankers is that eventually they run out of other people's money.

Bail outs? Socialism for the wealthy classes, at the price of working class austerity.

Free schools and academies? The transfer of state assets to private companies, and for free.

Land? The monopolisation of every human's birthright by the greedy.

Etc, etc, etc.

 

Bankers - need seperation of retail banking I agree.

Bail outs - unfortunately necessary due to failure to implement above

Land?  Every species on the planet competes for it, humans no different.

[Teddington]

21 minutes ago, arcade fireman said:

What about those who are voting Labour who would stand to be taxed more under these proposals? 

You really seem to have absolutely no grasp of the concept of society. It's like a fundamental part of your brain is missing. 

Not at all.  Those that vote knowing they will pay more, well that is their choice.  But why should they impose that choice on others?

[stuartbert two hats]

4 minutes ago, Teddington said:

Not at all.  Those that vote knowing they will pay more, well that is their choice.  But why should they impose that choice on others?

To protect the weak and make a better society for all.

[cheeseisamazing]

I hate poor people

so i'm voting Tory

(jks, I'm tactically voting Lib dem in eastbourne)

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, Teddington said:

Bankers - need seperation of retail banking I agree.

which would make no difference at all to the problem with deregulated bankers is that eventually they run out of other people's money.

 

Quote

Bail outs - unfortunately necessary due to failure to implement above

And yet they've happened in other times, when retail banking was separate.

It's the ruling class sorting out the problems of the ruling class, without any of the second thoughts that exist in sorting out the problems of other classes.

 

Quote

Land?  Every species on the planet competes for it, humans no different.

Might you consider the human race to be something better than 'every species'?

It's a political decision to have ownership of land in the way that we do. It's got fuck all to do with 'every species'.

Edited June 6, 2017 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, Teddington said:

Not at all.  Those that vote knowing they will pay more, well that is their choice.  But why should they impose that choice on others?

Why should brexit be imposed onto me? (Or if the vote had gone the other way, why should the EU be imposed onto me?).

It's called democracy. Everyone has all the w*nky stuff the tories always do imposed on them, so why do you think it shouldn't work the other way around?

[Eyebrow]

What other species collects land?

theres a difference between having a home/territory and being satisfied with that, and the quest to have more and more and more.

[arcade fireman]

16 minutes ago, Teddington said:

Not at all.  Those that vote knowing they will pay more, well that is their choice.  But why should they impose that choice on others?

You could say the same about literally any other tax collected.