Is there anything in politics more shit than the Labour Party?

[Victorian]

39 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

On the day when the utterly deranged 4 week PM is proving just how batshit mental she actually was, Keith goes full 'hold my beer'!

 

He's going to get an amazing super duper Brexit deal to 'make it work'.

All with no customs union or freedom of movement. 

 

Aye nae bother mate. 

 

 

Labour are carefully setting the terms of a policy trajectory.  Without scaring the horses too much too quickly.  There's a hell of a lot of road to travel on that trajectory.  

 

Going banzai with a policy to reverse the main tenets of Brexit would be monumentally stupid.  It's a very long and hazardous journey.

[JudyJudyJudy]

15 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Labour are carefully setting the terms of a policy trajectory.  Without scaring the horses too much too quickly.  There's a hell of a lot of road to travel on that trajectory.  

 

Going banzai with a policy to reverse the main tenets of Brexit would be monumentally stupid.  It's a very long and hazardous journey.

👍

[The Mighty Thor]

16 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Labour are carefully setting the terms of a policy trajectory.  Without scaring the horses too much too quickly.  There's a hell of a lot of road to travel on that trajectory.  

 

Going banzai with a policy to reverse the main tenets of Brexit would be monumentally stupid.  It's a very long and hazardous journey.

Fair play to you Vic. You have an unshakeable belief that once in power it'll be somewhat different from Keith and the gang. 

I suspect that it won't. This is it. This is his policy agenda and direction of travel. Tory but just a bit less shit. 

 

 

[Victorian]

32 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Fair play to you Vic. You have an unshakeable belief that once in power it'll be somewhat different from Keith and the gang. 

I suspect that it won't. This is it. This is his policy agenda and direction of travel. Tory but just a bit less shit. 

 

 

 

Maybe at the moment.  But the entire venture of trying to gain power,  for whatever ends,  goes to shit if you don't gain power.  Even this tiniest of toes in the water was met with claims that they're hell bent on stealing Brexit.  It's quite a good idea to say next to nothing to draw that kind of fire.  The same fire will be much less effective in response to more substantial policy further down the line.

 

Labour are playing the Brexit legacy game quite well so far.  Substantial policy will develop according to demand.  Business and industry will pursue it.  Voters will be conditioned towards it over time.

[The Mighty Thor]

23 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Maybe at the moment.  But the entire venture of trying to gain power,  for whatever ends,  goes to shit if you don't gain power.  Even this tiniest of toes in the water was met with claims that they're hell bent on stealing Brexit.  It's quite a good idea to say next to nothing to draw that kind of fire.  The same fire will be much less effective in response to more substantial policy further down the line.

 

Labour are playing the Brexit legacy game quite well so far.  Substantial policy will develop according to demand.  Business and industry will pursue it.  Voters will be conditioned towards it over time.

They'll need to do one of two things.

 

Electoral reform (PR/STV) to ensure the vermin don't get back in again in such numbers

 

or

 

Go like feck for the 5 years they'll have if they don't do point 1

[Victorian]

1 minute ago, The Mighty Thor said:

They'll need to do one of two things.

 

Electoral reform (PR/STV) to ensure the vermin don't get back in again in such numbers

 

or

 

Go like feck for the 5 years they'll have if they don't do point 1

 

Yes.  But electoral reform isn't happening.  They'll need to achieve a reasonable record of competence over the first parliament.  That's the default minimum standard.  Hopefully in conjunction with a degree of improvement in the prosperity of people.  

[The Mighty Thor]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

 

Yes.  But electoral reform isn't happening.  They'll need to achieve a reasonable record of competence over the first parliament.  That's the default minimum standard.  Hopefully in conjunction with a degree of improvement in the prosperity of people.  

One term of slightly less shit Tory it is then 👍

[Victorian]

5 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

One term of slightly less shit Tory it is then 👍

 

Quite possibly.  But this potential change of power will hopefully by 3 or more parliaments.  One is merely a holiday.  Even 2.

[jack D and coke]

4 hours ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Fair play to you Vic. You have an unshakeable belief that once in power it'll be somewhat different from Keith and the gang. 

I suspect that it won't. This is it. This is his policy agenda and direction of travel. Tory but just a bit less shit. 

 

 

If it’s not in the manifesto how can he then start pushing for it after the event?
I have little hope for Keith tbh. Labour will be slightly better but they’ve had to go pretty Tory to get the favour of the people who get you power. 

It’s one term at best then the Tory regroup and then they’re oot. 
 

[Ulysses]

7 hours ago, Victorian said:

 

Labour are carefully setting the terms of a policy trajectory.  Without scaring the horses too much too quickly.  There's a hell of a lot of road to travel on that trajectory.  

 

Going banzai with a policy to reverse the main tenets of Brexit would be monumentally stupid.  It's a very long and hazardous journey.

 

No worries, so, because according to the UK in a Changing Europe think tank Labour are wasting their time and Europe's even thinking about it.

 

http://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2023/0919/1406021-labour-would-struggle-to-get-better-uk-eu-deal-report/

 

Brexit's done, and the EU has moved on.  Renegotiating a trade deal that is mediocre but that works is going to be a long way down the EU's priority list, especially because the deal is so new. Unless Labour have some remarkable surprise up their sleeve, they'll be struggling to get the EU to do anything other than a technical implementation review.

 

It's worth bearing in mind that UK exports to the EU represent about 15% of the UK economy. EU exports to the UK represent about 3% of the EU economy.  Important, but not important enough to mess about with a recent trade agreement that was difficult to negotiate.

[Gundermann]

 

Peter Oborne on Starmer. Sir Keef as vacuous as he is spineless.

 

 

[Roxy Hearts]

4 minutes ago, Gundermann said:

 

Peter Oborne on Starmer. Sir Keef as vacuous as he is spineless.

 

 

It doesn't matter who or what Labour have or do. The sheep are not voting for Starmer or their policies. They're voting because the Tories have been in power too long and need a different shade of shite! 

 

That may change as the Tories will come up with goodies and the propaganda, narrative will get into full swing and the dense public may well vote for it. It's started already with inheritance tax abolition and triple lock pensions. They'll target areas they feel they can win and people's pockets is a start.

 

Labour's lack of integrity to the discerning voter is also against them. Money is tight for a lot of folk so the thought of Labour in power may put a lot of them off. People are more conservative now than they used to be and I don't mean in the political sense. 

 

I couldn't care less who wins power at Westminster but I would laugh if the Tories get in again.

 

Brexit may also have an impact. If Labour can come up with something constructive then that may help them. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

8 hours ago, Roxy Hearts said:

It doesn't matter who or what Labour have or do. The sheep are not voting for Starmer or their policies. They're voting because the Tories have been in power too long and need a different shade of shite! 

 

That may change as the Tories will come up with goodies and the propaganda, narrative will get into full swing and the dense public may well vote for it. It's started already with inheritance tax abolition and triple lock pensions. They'll target areas they feel they can win and people's pockets is a start.

 

Labour's lack of integrity to the discerning voter is also against them. Money is tight for a lot of folk so the thought of Labour in power may put a lot of them off. People are more conservative now than they used to be and I don't mean in the political sense. 

 

I couldn't care less who wins power at Westminster but I would laugh if the Tories get in again.

 

Brexit may also have an impact. If Labour can come up with something constructive then that may help them. 

What’s wrong with abolishing inheritance tax ? 

[Roxy Hearts]

15 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

What’s wrong with abolishing inheritance tax ? 

Nothing. It's a bribe like bus passes, no?

[JudyJudyJudy]

45 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Nothing. It's a bribe like bus passes, no?

No it’s letting people keep their money , well their offspring’s money when they pass on . You know they earned that money , house etc by working and paying taxes . Why should they pay when they croak it? Bus passes are no way near the equivalent 

[Roxy Hearts]

1 hour ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

No it’s letting people keep their money , well their offspring’s money when they pass on . You know they earned that money , house etc by working and paying taxes . Why should they pay when they croak it? Bus passes are no way near the equivalent 

It was a joke Triple J. I think abolishing it is a good idea. The pensions are crap so this would help.

[JudyJudyJudy]

4 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

It was a joke Triple J. I think abolishing it is a good idea. The pensions are crap so this would help.

👍

[Ulysses]

4 hours ago, Roxy Hearts said:

It was a joke Triple J. I think abolishing it is a good idea. The pensions are crap so this would help.

 

If you abolish Inheritance Tax, would that not mean that people inheriting a bit of property would gain a little, while people who inherit loads of property would gain lots and lots?  Why is that a good thing?

 

 

Edited September 26, 2023 by Ulysses

[trotter]

21 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

If you abolish Inheritance Tax, would that not mean that people inheriting a bit of property would gain a little, while people who inherit loads of property would gain lots and lots?  Why is that a good thing?

 

 

Regardless of the actual value. Tax has already been paid on those assets. Why should it be OK for tax to be added twice? It's legalized theft. 

 

It's not all that dissimilar to petrol/diesel to be honest. Fuel excise duty is added to the price, but then VAT is compounded on top of that, so effectively you are taxing a tax. 

[Ulysses]

26 minutes ago, trotter said:

Regardless of the actual value. Tax has already been paid on those assets. Why should it be OK for tax to be added twice? It's legalized theft. 

 

It's not all that dissimilar to petrol/diesel to be honest. Fuel excise duty is added to the price, but then VAT is compounded on top of that, so effectively you are taxing a tax. 

 

What's wrong with "taxing a tax"?  It happens all over the tax system, and the only way to eliminate it is either to have much higher tax rates for the taxes you're left with or else have almost no public services.  All of that might suit the very rich, but what use is it to the rest of us?

 

Also, if you're leaving £300,000 of an estate, chances are that you paid a fair bit of tax on your way to acquiring it.  If you're leaving £300 million, chances are you've paid sod all tax.

 

If you want to make Inheritance Tax less of a burden on middle-class punters, the way to do that isn't to abolish it.  It's to raise the exemption thresholds.  Abolishing it is just another freebie to people who are already loaded.

[trotter]

1 hour ago, Ulysses said:

 

What's wrong with "taxing a tax"?  It happens all over the tax system, and the only way to eliminate it is either to have much higher tax rates for the taxes you're left with or else have almost no public services.  All of that might suit the very rich, but what use is it to the rest of us?

 

Also, if you're leaving £300,000 of an estate, chances are that you paid a fair bit of tax on your way to acquiring it.  If you're leaving £300 million, chances are you've paid sod all tax.

 

If you want to make Inheritance Tax less of a burden on middle-class punters, the way to do that isn't to abolish it.  It's to raise the exemption thresholds.  Abolishing it is just another freebie to people who are already loaded.

Whilst I agree with pretty much every other point you make Uly, you are wrong on this one. You are already taxed on a purchase, so why should any additional taxes be compounded on top of what you have already paid? 

 

To go back to my example, fuel duty is currently 52 pence per litre. VAT is 20%. So assuming for arguments sake that the price of a litre of petrol is £1 before you add on duty and taxes, it is £1.52 with duty x 1.2 to account for VAT which makes it £1.82. If you add the VAT on before the fuel duty that makes it only £1.72. Doesn't sound like a lot, but for someone who drives a lot that 10p difference will add up quickly. Taxes levied on top of taxes is just taking the piss, and you know this.

 

Or do you think everyone should be taxed within an inch of their life just because that's how the system is set up? 

 

Your point about it being how much you are leaving behind is a false equivalence. Yes, there are many millionaires that have been less than honest about taxes, but that is the exception other than the rule. 

[joondalupjambo]

If the Tories want to abolish the IHT then you can be sure there will be another alternative introduced.  The rich do pay IHT because they have good accountants. Think it says only a few % of the population pay IHT.  The folk who fall into the IHT bracket will still get taxed somehow.  If the Tories abolish it as a promise as part of their election campaign then if they get back in they will just invent another way of getting that % figure.   No way will that amount of tax income just get written off.

[Roxy Hearts]

5 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

If you abolish Inheritance Tax, would that not mean that people inheriting a bit of property would gain a little, while people who inherit loads of property would gain lots and lots?  Why is that a good thing?

 

 

Thinking about the little guy Uly. There's always plusses and minuses in policy making. I'm sure those who would break the current threshold would be happy if it comes to fruition. 

[Lord Montpelier]

12 hours ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Nothing. It's a bribe like bus passes, no?

No, it's hard worked for assets that should pass freely between generations. 

 

Sensible folk look at trust funds anyway to get round this. 

[il Duce McTarkin]

Inheritance tax for normal folk will be a thing of the past shortly anyway, as all family assets will already have been punted off to pay for social and medical care.

 

The only winners in abolishing it will be the serially minted. Ulysses point about raising the threshold is about as fair as it gets.

[XB52]

6 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

If you abolish Inheritance Tax, would that not mean that people inheriting a bit of property would gain a little, while people who inherit loads of property would gain lots and lots?  Why is that a good thing?

 

 

It's not. Just another gift to the millionaire tories.

[Roxy Hearts]

24 minutes ago, Lord Montpelier said:

No, it's hard worked for assets that should pass freely between generations. 

 

Sensible folk look at trust funds anyway to get round this. 

👍

[JudyJudyJudy]

29 minutes ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

assets will already have been punted off to pay for social and medical care

There are ways to get round this too . 

[jack D and coke]

42 minutes ago, il Duce McTarkin said:

Inheritance tax for normal folk will be a thing of the past shortly anyway, as all family assets will already have been punted off to pay for social and medical care.

 

The only winners in abolishing it will be the serially minted. Ulysses point about raising the threshold is about as fair as it gets.

This isn’t about helping the likes of us. 
A small percentage of the population benefit here. 
Funny that. 

[Japan Jambo]

On 28/08/2023 at 23:03, jack D and coke said:

 

ain't that the truth...

 

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

2 hours ago, joondalupjambo said:

If the Tories want to abolish the IHT then you can be sure there will be another alternative introduced.  The rich do pay IHT because they have good accountants. Think it says only a few % of the population pay IHT.  The folk who fall into the IHT bracket will still get taxed somehow.  If the Tories abolish it as a promise as part of their election campaign then if they get back in they will just invent another way of getting that % figure.   No way will that amount of tax income just get written off.

It did when the queen kicked the bucket.

[Victorian]

Inheritance Tax has always been a very useful tax in the portfolio to collect a yield on a lot of accumulated wealth that was not taxed fairly during it's accumulation.  It's by no means perfect in design and could benefit from radical reform,  but a full abolition on a stand alone basis upsets the apple cart on the overall fairness of the range of taxes.  If IHT is to be abolished then it should be accompanied by an appropriate reform of other taxes in the range.  

 

I think it's better to retain it with reforms.  Exemptions on particular items in estates.  Family homes to a certain value and with conditions,  etc.

[Ulysses]

3 hours ago, Lord Montpelier said:

No, it's hard worked for assets that should pass freely between generations. 

 

Sensible folk look at trust funds anyway to get round this. 

 

Then the fairest way to reform Inheritance Tax is to remove most of the avoidance provisions, reduce the rate to about 33% (that's the capital acquisitions tax rate here), and increase the base threshold - I'm not sure exactly how much, but if you were dumping all the avoidance rules my guess would be between £750,000 and £1 million.

 

[BlueRiver]

4 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Then the fairest way to reform Inheritance Tax is to remove most of the avoidance provisions, reduce the rate to about 33% (that's the capital acquisitions tax rate here), and increase the base threshold - I'm not sure exactly how much, but if you were dumping all the avoidance rules my guess would be between £750,000 and £1 million.

 

 

Agreed.

 

The base rate threshold could probably use a raise but with the transferable nil rate band between spouses and primary residence exemptions it's already pretty large for the vast majority of people and is similar to the threshold you propose. 

 

[Lord Montpelier]

3 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Then the fairest way to reform Inheritance Tax is to remove most of the avoidance provisions, reduce the rate to about 33% (that's the capital acquisitions tax rate here), and increase the base threshold - I'm not sure exactly how much, but if you were dumping all the avoidance rules my guess would be between £750,000 and £1 million.

 

Dunno... do think increasing the base is right. Had a relative pass away a few years back who I had to pay IHT for. Real shame the lad had made his way through life frugally but proudly in various low paid jobs. But tipped over the threshold which really shouldn't have been the case in my view. 

[jack D and coke]

[Armageddon]

I've not read one post on here, but I'd laugh my tits off if Labour got in and then lumped tax onto the Private School fees, pumping all that extra cash into the state school system.

 

The twats would implode up their arses.

[Gundermann]

19 hours ago, jack D and coke said:

 

 

"We got a thousand points of light
For the homeless man
We got a kinder, gentler machine gun hand"

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

[JudyJudyJudy]

[Gundermann]

Yes. Of course they **** have. It's what Labour do FFS.

 

#RedTories

 

Quote

Labour has dropped plans to end charitable status for private schools but says it will still remove other tax breaks if it wins the next general election.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66942985

[Pans Jambo]

On 26/09/2023 at 08:34, il Duce McTarkin said:

Inheritance tax for normal folk will be a thing of the past shortly anyway, as all family assets will already have been punted off to pay for social and medical care.

 

The only winners in abolishing it will be the serially minted. Ulysses point about raising the threshold is about as fair as it gets.

This. Make it simple, anything under £1M is tax free. Tax the rest.

 

You inherit yer auld mans 2 bed hoose and you and your sister have to sell it or face a large tax bill to keep it. What's the point?

 

Your point about social care is cock on. Those basses charge about £40K/year for an auld folks home. The £300K house you had to sell to pay for the care doesn't last long in that case.

[Gundermann]

Oh dear...

Branch Office! Know your place!

 

[Gundermann]

Another U-turn from Labour. Wonder if this has anything to do with an approaching by-election...?

https://news.stv.tv/west-central/council-u-turns-on-closing-community-facilities-in-bellshill-airdrie-kilsyth-shotts-and-motherwell

 

Quote

 

A council has U-turned on its decision to close 39 community centres and leisure facilities.

The Labour-run local authority announced on Thursday that dozens of venues previously earmarked for closure would shut their doors permanently over the next two years.

 

 

[The Mighty Thor]

Well that's the lying party's annual bullshit-athon finished.

 

Over to the man who would be king.

 

I'd imagine he's in a darkened room, arse twitching like a rabbit's nose at the thought of actually having to commit in public to some policies. 

 

He'll need to be on his game as I reckon this is the last part conference before the next GE

[Gundermann]

15 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Well that's the lying party's annual bullshit-athon finished.

 

Over to the man who would be king.

 

I'd imagine he's in a darkened room, arse twitching like a rabbit's nose at the thought of actually having to commit in public to some policies. 

 

He'll need to be on his game as I reckon this is the last part conference before the next GE

 

Where Braverman talks about a 'hurricane' of immigration, Starmer will says it's only a strong wind then expect us to try and find some clear blue water between Tory and Labour.

 

Will he commit to HS2 though?

[i wish jj was my dad]

50 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

Well that's the lying party's annual bullshit-athon finished.

 

Over to the man who would be king.

 

I'd imagine he's in a darkened room, arse twitching like a rabbit's nose at the thought of actually having to commit in public to some policies. 

 

He'll need to be on his game as I reckon this is the last part conference before the next GE

I understood the strategy of limiting opportunities for Tufton Street and the right wing media to set the mob on him but after the last couple of days, he has to come out and put clear water between New BNP and moderate democratic parties. 

[Gundermann]

Big day for the Branch Office/ Optional Identity Marks today in Rutherglen. Surely Labour's to lose?

 

Tories and Sevconians will be out in force for Labour no doubt. Not sure if the plethora of smaller parties will take much of the big two. Greens not a help to the SNP.

 

Usual attention seeker or two there. If Judy doesn't post here today, we'll know where he is.

 

Who is standing?

The confirmed list of candidates standing in the by-election are (in alphabetical order):

• Gloria Adebo (Scottish Liberal Democrats)
• Bill Bonnar (Scottish Socialist Party)
• Garry Cooke (Independent)
• Andrew Daly (Independent)
• Cameron Eadie (Scottish Greens)
• Prince Ankit Love, Emperor of India
• Niall Fraser (Scottish Family Party)
• Ewan Hoyle (Volt UK)
• Thomas Kerr (Scottish Conservatives)
• Katy Loudon (SNP)
• Chris Sermanni (Scottish Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition)
• Michael Shanks (Scottish Labour)
• David Stark (Reform UK)
• Colette Walker (Independence for Scotland Party)

[manaliveits105]

Good luck to the Labour scum tonight 

[Spitonastranger]

5 hours ago, manaliveits105 said:

Good luck to the Labour scum tonight 

No hope for the Tory scum then