View Full Version : General Election 2010
Mods any chance of a sticky for the net 4 weeks...?
Post your general election related musings here. I'll open an anonymous (of course) poll, keep track of how we're voting :)
Dunno if anybody saw the programme on bbc2 last night about the history of televised debates, very interesting stuff, certainly from the U.S where there have been elections lost pretty much down to one thing said or done during the televised debates. Really looking forward to watching them over here, I think Brown will get hammered myself, he just doesnt have the charisma it seems the other 2 do. But its all about their teams behind them I guess....
bugger, i've set the poll to close 20th april, can a lovely mod change that to be 7th may 2010. ta
Gonna be tight this time, I think.
I'm gonna "Vote for Change" because:
1. present govt have run out of steam
2. they didn't save for a rainy day when times were good
3. they finance huge public spending by selling the nation's gold reserves
4. no boom and bust? Yeah, right :rolleyes:
5. we are the most "watched" nation on earth
6. ID cards will be back on the agenda
7. we are taxed to high heaven
8. they won't tell us where the investment in public services went, i.e. bureaucrats rather than front line services/nurses
9. they took us into Iraq via a dodgy dossier
10. El Gordo has been raiding our savings/pension funds since 2001
I could go on.....
Not saying who I will vote for; saying who won't get my vote ;-)
fizzwheel
13-04-10, 07:55 AM
Stickied and the poll closing date should be sorted now.
I am really not sure who to vote for. Part of me thinks that I should be voting for someobdy who will do the best for the local community that I live in. Historically my area always goes the way of the Lib Dems.
I'd really like to be able to read what it is each party is actually going to do rather than listen or read about them slinging mud at each other...
I am really not sure who to vote for. Part of me thinks that I should be voting for someobdy who will do the best for the local community that I live in. Historically my area always goes the way of the Lib Dems.
I'd really like to be able to read what it is each party is actually going to do rather than listen or read about them slinging mud at each other...
+1
Although I think El Gordo [J.Abba, Post #3] and his bunch of theives have had their day. So I'm leaning towards a change as well.
i don't know who to vote for nobody has been round and nobody campaigning - which is always nice to see!
I vote for who give the public sector more money so I can keep my job - doesn't help really as that the scot Gov anyway.
Should the Scots vote for MP's in westminster?!?!
If I'm honest I don't know.
I think Labour have lost a lot of public support due to the mistakes they have made and the mess the county now is in. Last general election was only the second time I could vote and due to being at uni I voted for Lib Dem as there was talk of removing uni fees (something that would have saved me and my parents a lot of money)
I want Labour out if I'm honest. But I don't know who can/will be any better. I know not all the manifests have been realised yet, but if one spoke about less tax on fuel, can see that swinging a lot of votes (but it would never happen as it is to much of a revenue earner).
I'm also of the view that unless you vote for one of the 3 main parties, your vote may as well of been wasted :confused:
My dad has said for a number of years that at the bottom of the voting slip there should be a box for none of the above and this should be disclosed how many voters have ticked this box!
Meh.... off to research my local area and see which party will benefit us best, as well as what national party will benfit me and drew best! :confused:
timwilky
13-04-10, 08:32 AM
I don't need to research, I and my family will always vote for the party we always have voted for. No wavering voter here that needs to be swayed by cheap gimmicks.
Lets just say it won't be that lying thieving bunch currently planning to raid even more from the honest hard working brit.
My dad has said for a number of years that at the bottom of the voting slip there should be a box for none of the above and this should be disclosed how many voters have ticked this box!
Vote for 2 or more and the paper is 'spoilt'. The number of spoilt papers is returned at the same time as the result.
Vote for 2 or more and the paper is 'spoilt'. The number of spoilt papers is returned at the same time as the result.
I know that.
But that's not the same as saying.... I don't trust none of the above to run the country! For all they know your just an idiot who couldn't follow instructions and ruined your paper! ;)
tigersaw
13-04-10, 08:43 AM
I'll probably vote for a change, give the party that ruined the country in the 90's a chance to blame the current party for ruining the country before taxing the hell out of us and ruining it all aver again.
I have never voted before as I have very little interest in polotics, well not politics as such but the politicians themselves. They are all as bad as each other and only in it to line their greedy piggy fat pockets.
Based on their current record the current lot deserve to be booted out but whoever gets in will be just as bad.
Vote for change - Yer right.
The party getting my vote will be:
The one promising to curb the number of freeloaders entering the country.
The one promising to overhaul the benefits system so that nobody is better of on benefits that someone who works for a living.
The one who says the people on state benefit will do three days of work per week for the state, (still having two days for job hunting).
The one promising to look hard at lowering taxation.
The one who says "Charity begins at home".
Feckit i think i want to vote for Robin Hood & not the usual Robin sod!
Drew Carey
13-04-10, 09:16 AM
My issue is that currently I feel none of the parties actually provide the British public with ideas and policies that we agree on, will help us move forward, will control our borders and make the UK a better place to live again.
However, I am also a realist, and at this current moment in time there are only really two options. So, you look at the Labour & Conservative pledges, weigh them up and vote for the lesser of the two evils. Currently and for the forseable future neither party will drastically change the amount of money I pay, the amount of assistance we get, the quality etc of the services we pay for.
However, one thing IS for certain, people just want change, even if it is a bigger bunch of cowboys. So my vote unfortunately goes to Conservatives, as I would rather "give someone else a go", rather than let labout re-introduce all the changes that have been put on hold until after the election. I can't see the conservatives making things any worse, at least not for those of us who work etc, but I cling to the thin thin naieve hope that maybe they may get some things right where Labour haven't!!!!
Any party that does something about this http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=149881 would have me interested...
Milky Bar Kid
13-04-10, 09:45 AM
I think El Gordo and Labour have had their day but I imagine we are going to end with a hung parliment, giving the Lib Dems the power. TBH, the country is in such a mess it is going to take a LONG time before we see any difference.
keith_d
13-04-10, 10:20 AM
Sadly, neither party is willing to tell us what their post election plans really are. You could argue that one party doesn't have the real figures and the other is obsessed with spin but I don't think that's the whole story. Early on in the campaign the Tories tried a dash of honesty about the future of public spending and it hit their ratings so badly that they went back to the same old bull**** as before.
Personally, I'm tired of spin, tired of stealth taxes, and tired of deceitful government. Today I read that Labour would commit that they won't increase income tax, but I remember last time they promised that. We got an uncapped 1% increase in National Insurance instead. Income tax in all but name.
I'd love to vote Labour back in and make them clean up their own mess. But they would just see it as a mandate to screw us around some more, so I definitely won't be voting for them.
I live in a borough that's very solidly Tory, so I think I might indulge in some protest voting and try to save the deposit for one of the minority candidates.
gettin2dizzy
13-04-10, 12:14 PM
"Democracy" is a farce as long as you have the whip system.
CoolGirl
13-04-10, 01:31 PM
I'd really like to be able to read what it is each party is actually going to do rather than listen or read about them slinging mud at each other...
Labour manifesto published yesterday, Tories today, Lib Dems tomorrow.
Any party that does something about this http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=149881 (http://forums.sv650.org/showthread.php?t=149881) would have me interested...
what, holding the media to account for inflamatory journalism?
keith_d
13-04-10, 01:37 PM
"Democracy" is a farce as long as you have the whip system.
No, it's local representation which is broken in the current system where MPs are virtually compelled to toe the party line. It means that rather than voting for someone to represent your needs in parliament you are choosing between two groups of backroom policy makers based on what they claim they will do.
However, as the present incumbents have demonstrated, it is far to easy to promise one thing and deliver something completely different. I'm old enough to remember decades of Labour banging on about civil liberties, but once they were in power it was CCTV on every street corner.
In the end at least we still have the option to vote. So change is still possible, if you can convince enough people to vote for you.
Keith.
Biker Biggles
13-04-10, 01:52 PM
I vote for a hung parliament but despite all the hype in the media I doubt we will get one.The reason I want no overall majority is that it would prevent any one party implementing their insane ideas without restraint.I believe the kind of elected dictatorships we have had since the 1970s have done us no favours.Where I live the tories win so I will vote for someone else.
Incidently I predict a clear tory win on May6.
Can you vote for a hung parliament?
And would that be any good?!
gettin2dizzy
13-04-10, 02:01 PM
No, it's local representation which is broken in the current system where MPs are virtually compelled to toe the party line. It means that rather than voting for someone to represent your needs in parliament you are choosing between two groups of backroom policy makers based on what they claim they will do.
However, as the present incumbents have demonstrated, it is far to easy to promise one thing and deliver something completely different. I'm old enough to remember decades of Labour banging on about civil liberties, but once they were in power it was CCTV on every street corner.
In the end at least we still have the option to vote. So change is still possible, if you can convince enough people to vote for you.
Keith.
Exactomundo. The whip system should be abolished because it means my representative that I helped vote in does not reflect the views he promised. The three line whip is now such common practice; a state of affairs that should never have developed.
It's the battling I can't be bothered with. A hung parliament that could actually work together for the common good rather than petty point scoring could prove invaluable. After all, we're at war and in the biggest recession in living memory. :rolleyes:
Biker Biggles
13-04-10, 02:03 PM
No you cant vote for a hung parliament but I mean I will vote for any party that isnt one of the two who will get most of the seats.Actually it matters not a jot who I vote for here as the tory always wins just like all the safe seats in the country.
The reason for a hung parliament is because I dont think any of them are competant to run the country so Id rather none of them had all the power.The less they can do the less damage they can do IMO.
Actually it matters not a jot who I vote for here as the tory always wins just like all the safe seats in the country.
Do you mean that all safe seats are Tory? coz it's pin a red rosette on a donkey around here.
Biker Biggles
13-04-10, 04:09 PM
I mean that in safe seats of either party it doesnt matter how we vote as the same party always wins.Theres actually a very small number of voters in marginal seats who swing elections one way or the other.Just a few thousand voters apparently,which is why the canvassers go all out for them,and the party manifestos court their very specific interests.Time for electoral reform I think.
BanditPat
13-04-10, 04:10 PM
I will vote for 'other' there not on your list, dont know why there bigger than a couple of the ones on the poll...
I always vote at elections. Figure that I don't have the right to moan about things unless I do :lol:
Plus, not to vote would be disrespectful the memories of those who fought and gave their lives so I can.
However, one hears about apathy amongst the younger voters. If you're aged 18 - 25 (or thereabouts), will you be voting? If not, why not?
gettin2dizzy
13-04-10, 05:06 PM
I always vote at elections. Figure that I don't have the right to moan about things unless I do :lol:
Plus, not to vote would be disrespectful the memories of those who fought and gave their lives so I can.
However, one hears about apathy amongst the younger voters. If you're aged 18 - 25 (or thereabouts), will you be voting? If not, why not?
I don't know about that. Their fight TO vote has surely got to include a right NOT to vote?
I think everyone should who feels informed enough. But I'd hate for loads of people to vote for Labour since their parents always have .... doh! ;)
More independents please :thumbsup:
I don't know about that. Their fight TO vote has surely got to include a right NOT to vote?
Quite a few of the older generation (i.e. older than me!) see it as their "civic duty" to vote. Got to admit that I can see where they're coming from.
But yeah, I agree with you, voting for a party* because you always have, because your father/mother always did and their parents before them, is no way to go about it.
Wouldn't it be great if politicians were open and honest about their policies and their implications, both for the country and for individuals, so people could vote from a position of knowledge?
* do people vote for the party or the person? Is it different at local elections?
I vote for whoever does/proposes to the best job in my area as long as they are not Labour.
oh and Jabba i thought you could remember when Adam was a lad so didn't figure there was anyone older than you ;) only joking but couldn't resist
araya213
13-04-10, 06:00 PM
I always vote. Like jabba said, if you don't vote, you can't complain. I do laugh at the Conservative slogan. Time for change. A conservative, by definition, is someone who does not like change. I shall vote green or UKIP, if I can. There's so many old people in my town, who vote Labour or Conservative 'because i always have' or 'because we're a LibDem family'. There's no real campaigning here, especially for younger voters, because it's the die-hards votes that they want. I'm personally fed up of the swing between Blues and Reds. The main 3 parties are now so far removed from what they originally stood for, that they really could almost be each other. I'm also annoyed, that online voting has not been put in place. Imagine if you could see your local candidates on your screen, read all about them, and then vote for who you like best. It's a rotten system, with rotten politicians who want power and money. If they were only paid as much as most people, would they still want their job? If there were no very well paid European jobs to try and get, would they still be interested in Europe? If their lives weren't so cushy and removed from yours, would they start caring about what you actually want or think?
I'll probably vote for a change, give the party that ruined the country in the 90's a chance to blame the current party for ruining the country before taxing the hell out of us and ruining it all aver again.
Excuse me! :shock:
The state of the economy in 1997 compared with today? Do me a favour :roll: The Conservatives took us through some hard medicine (breaking the unions etc. etc.) to deliver an economy in fine shape that Labour completely fecked up - selling off all the gold at the lowest possible price, declaring the end of boom and bust so they could spend like there's no tomorrow including spending all our pensions savings with nothing to show for it.
Hope the early poll results showing here continue and are reflected across the country.
ravingdavis
13-04-10, 06:41 PM
Excuse me! :shock:
The state of the economy in 1997 compared with today? Do me a favour :roll: The Conservatives took us through some hard medicine (breaking the unions etc. etc.) to deliver an economy in fine shape that Labour completely fecked up - selling off all the gold at the lowest possible price, declaring the end of boom and bust so they could spend like there's no tomorrow including spending all our pensions savings with nothing to show for it.
Hope the early poll results showing here continue and are reflected across the country.
I have to admit I agree with this post
tigersaw
13-04-10, 06:47 PM
Excuse me! :shock:
The state of the economy in 1997 compared with today? Do me a favour :roll: The Conservatives took us through some hard medicine (breaking the unions etc. etc.) to deliver an economy in fine shape that Labour completely fecked up - selling off all the gold at the lowest possible price, declaring the end of boom and bust so they could spend like there's no tomorrow including spending all our pensions savings with nothing to show for it.
Hope the early poll results showing here continue and are reflected across the country.
Black Wednesday springs to mind.
Specialone
13-04-10, 06:53 PM
Always have and always will be a tory.
Labour have always been a taxing party, penalising the prosperous and the hard working.
They and no one else got us into this mess, i hope to god the tories get a chance to get us out of it.
Tough decisions and tough times ahead whoever runs the country so be prepared for some unpopular policies in the near future.
I have always wondered why when house prices started getting out of hand why labour didnt push for an interest rise to control them, instead let the bubble keep getting bigger and bigger until it burst leaving **** all over the place.
Ps im with Stu on this one
Dave20046
13-04-10, 07:00 PM
I really don't know who the **** to vote for. They are all lying....but who's lying least?!
Fruity-ya-ya
13-04-10, 07:12 PM
I really don't know who the **** to vote for. They are all lying....but who's lying least?!
+1
At least you are!
Some of the lads at work have said they aren't going to bother this year.:shock:
I broke out the 'many lives were laid down so you can vote' line and I think some may spoil they vote on purpose.
One said he'd vote Labour as they are proposing to keep recycling bins rather than recycling sacks.
So I guess votes that get cast for reasons like this are at least better than 'red's my favorite color' or 'I'll vote lib dem cos I voted conservative last time'.
Unfortunately many voters are loosing sight of why we vote and instead prefer moaning about who to vote for, tho I share many of their frustrations.
Rant over.
Dave20046
13-04-10, 07:26 PM
+1
One said he'd vote Labour as they are proposing to keep recycling bins rather than recycling sacks.
.
Jesus!
The only thing I'm really concerned about is who's going to sort out the economy (if at all) in the most sensible way.
Labour have cocked up with the gold etc. and whatever else, but the criticism the media are giving the conservatives' sums threw me a bit (but then again who's side are the media on...).
And I kind of ruled off the lib dems after they were described as 'off their nut' to me, but I've just realised I can't remember who said it and whether they're stupid or not so they're an option again.
Will attempt to look for somewhere with all the facts written out closer to the time.
I found the 'aboutmyvote' website but got distracted by all the 'are you registered to vote' crap, I'm assuming I'm registered to vote...they sent a poll card to my house.
Specialone
13-04-10, 07:27 PM
If you dont vote, then dont moan, only the majority can make a difference.
Fruity-ya-ya
13-04-10, 07:32 PM
they sent a poll card to my house.
That reminds me of when I moved into my 1st house (this one) I opted for a postal vote as I had no idea where the polling station was.
Turns out it's at the school 10 feet away from my door, the post box being a few hundred feet up the road (DOH!) and yes I did post it :smt068but sorted it out for the next one.
ChrisSV
13-04-10, 07:52 PM
i happen to be between the age of 18 and 25, admittely only 18 but i wil vote, so i can moan and i can atleast make an effort to make a bit of change. Ive got no F**kin idea who im voting for, i cant make sense of whos lying the most. and IMO i reckon theyre all as bad as each other (im willing to take abuse for that) but i shall look closer the time, and il make sure i choose the one i want, that ill feel could make a difference.
Dave20046
13-04-10, 08:02 PM
Has anyone seen boys from the black stuff?
I was told it was a good idea to watch that before thinking of voting tory, I get the point but I was led to believe thatcher did ok for us on the whole (well until she went insane after a few years) but how much of that was down to her and how much of it was down to the party? david cameron seems a bit of a ****....
Specialone
13-04-10, 08:11 PM
Has anyone seen boys from the black stuff?
I was told it was a good idea to watch that before thinking of voting tory, I get the point but I was led to believe thatcher did ok for us on the whole (well until she went insane after a few years) but how much of that was down to her and how much of it was down to the party? david cameron seems a bit of a ****....
Dave if we all voted on things that happened 20 years ago where would it get us albeit the tories would have to introduce free board at my house for immigrants for me to waiver.
Half the reason for employment problems in the 80's was strikes, everyone striked, in the long term that doesnt help at all, same as it wont for BA staff, you've just gotta pull together, a job is better than no job.
Biker Biggles
13-04-10, 08:16 PM
Thatcher was a conviction politician who had direction and went with it.For that I respect her,but I also believe she did more long term damage to this country than anyone else since before the War.She "fixed" the economy by decimating it and left us unable to compete with France and Germany.That is why they are now better off than us and we are floundering in the economic **** we see today.She actually kick started the policy of burning the North Sea oil and flogging off anything not nailed down in order to pretend we were rich.Other weak willed losers from both parties continued in the same vein.
Just sorted my form out to get registered to vote, yeah I tend to leave stuff late, but I'm assured this is the last week, so there we go.
I shall not be voting for out current lot, nor did I last time.
Jambo
Can you vote for a hung parliament?
And would that be any good?!
A vote for Liberal Democrats is surely a vote for a hung parliament as they obviously can't win outright themselves.
Biker Biggles
13-04-10, 09:46 PM
It depends who is most likely to beat the tory or labour encumbant.That may be Libdem or one of the nationalists.It could be an "other" in some constituencies.Id vote for anyone who can beat one of the main parties to prevent either of them taking a majority.
When the Tories last left Government, John Major and Ken Clarke left the public finances in excellent shape. Look at them now, after 13 years of Labour.
I will vote Conservative. I always have and I probably always will. A vote for Brown and his homies... er, no.
It dismays me when people say that they won't vote. It's one of the very few freedoms we have left.
BanannaMan
14-04-10, 02:21 AM
All I can say is best of luck to you all.
America voted for change in it's last election, but "nothing in the streets
looks any different to me".
The war goes on and the economy is still in shambles.
Seems the only change we got is "parting on the left is now parting on the right"
Hope the UK "Won't get fooled again" like the US did in it's last election.
If you vote for change, I bloody well hope you get it.
Politicians. :rolleyes:
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" :thumbdown:
I will vote for 'other' there not on your list, dont know why there bigger than a couple of the ones on the poll...
i made the list up of the elected representatives from the last general election with 500 or more votes, there were 15 on the list but i could only select 9 + "other" so couldnt cater for all im afraid
All I can say is best of luck to you all.
America voted for change in it's last election, but "nothing in the streets
looks any different to me".
The war goes on and the economy is still in shambles.
Seems the only change we got is "parting on the left is now parting on the right"
Hope the UK "Won't get fooled again" like the US did in it's last election.
If you vote for change, I bloody well hope you get it.
Politicians. :rolleyes:
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" :thumbdown:
as an outsider looking in, i'd still be hapy with Obama as President for two reasons. firstly the mess your country is in can't be repaired at the drop of a hat and secondly would you seriously have preferred McLain?
Seems to me Obama is making some progress, there was recent news stories over here about the health care changes he promised in his campaign have been brought to fruition? and i believe some serious changes made to the way big bonus's are handed out to bankers and the money men?
i guess the biggest topic is afghanistan and the war. until that exceptionally thorny issue is resolved he'll be deemed as a "failure"
Milky Bar Kid
14-04-10, 07:29 AM
i made the list up of the elected representatives from the last general election with 500 or more votes, there were 15 on the list but i could only select 9 + "other" so couldnt cater for all im afraid
Keith, I wouldn't even have dignified Banditpats post with a response.
Specialone
14-04-10, 07:56 AM
As you know, I do not pass on these "add your name" lists that appear in emails,
BUT this one is important. It has been circulating for some time now and it is estimated that it has been received by over 20 million people so far.
We don't want to lose any names on the list so once you have added your name PLEASE send it on to keep it going.
To show your support for Gordon Brown please go to the end of the list and add your name.
1. Mrs.. Brown.
2.
oh and Jabba i thought you could remember when Adam was a lad so didn't figure there was anyone older than you ;)
Oi!! :lol:
i guess the biggest topic is afghanistan and the war. until that exceptionally thorny issue is resolved he'll be deemed as a "failure"
I'm surprised that this hasn't really surfaced during campaigning so far. My guess is that the opposition parties are keeping this in the locker until the final week as it could well be the issue that sways wavering voters.
The politicians are talking about billions of £s here and billions of £s there, but not one (to the best of my knowledge) has so far mentioned the billions of £s that the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts are costing.
There has been a political black on anything relating to the war.
You'll notice there has been no discussion on it and even the paper have been pretty much from reporting on it. Even people that are dieing out there are not getting mentioned right now.
This poll makes for interesting reading though.
plowsie
14-04-10, 09:05 AM
Oh, Lib Dems, £10,000 Tax free allowance. Hello.
keith_d
14-04-10, 09:07 AM
I've seen a few posts on here advocating a hung parliament and couldn't resist commenting on the practical aspects.
A hung parliament starts with a few weeks of political paralysis while the small parties engage in back room wrangling with the big boys until they manage to find enough common ground to form a coalition. (e.g. lib-lab pact).
Then it's like this children's joke. "If I have one green ball in my left hand and one green ball in my right hand, what do I have?? Complete control of the Jolly Green Giant". The larger party in the coalition finds itself having to cater to the whims of the smaller party. So there will be a lot of horse trading and some very watered down legislation that won't offend anybody. Not exactly what we need at the moment.
Of course if the balance of power is held by a bunch of independents it is a truly hung parliament. Nobody is likely to be able to build a lasting coalition and the most likely outcome is another general election within 6 months. Again, not a real winner for the UK in difficult times.
Oh, Lib Dems, £10,000 Tax free allowance. Hello.
and this extra money will come from where precisely, sir? what's the downside....?
plowsie
14-04-10, 09:25 AM
and this extra money will come from where precisely, sir? what's the downside....?
My point exactly
My point exactly
lol oh sorry, there was a point behind your post?! your subtlty evaded me my good man! :D
and this extra money will come from where precisely, sir? what's the downside....?
I read somewhere that the top 1% of earners pay 99% of income tax so it probably wouldn't make that much difference and an increase on tax to the higher earners would probably be made to cover it.
plowsie
14-04-10, 10:15 AM
lol oh sorry, there was a point behind your post?! your subtlty evaded me my good man! :D
I forgot the Sarcasm smiley mate. Politics isn't my thing, but, when somebody in the office shouted this out, my reply was along the lines of :laughat:
I read somewhere that the top 1% of earners pay 99% of income tax so it probably wouldn't make that much difference and an increase on tax to the higher earners would probably be made to cover it.
You sir, have your figures so spectacularly f*cked up I don't know where to begin with the point you were trying to make :laughat:
Yer well I can't remember the exact figures but it was somehting like that.
The point I was trying to make was the money lost from taxing the lower earners less would probably be made by taxing the higher earners. Didn't day that I was for or against it.
Yer well I can't remember the exact figures but it was somehting like that.
The point I was trying to make was the money lost from taxing the lower earners less would probably be made by taxing the higher earners. Didn't day that I was for or against it.
Top 1% pay 24% of total income tax. Top 10% pay 53% of total income tax. source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm)
Taxation is a very emotive subject. Whilst most high earners understand that they should pay more than those on lower incomes, if you make the top rates too high (95% in the 70's under then reds I believe) you will just drive them offshore where you collect ZERO tax revenue.
This is why many film and rock stars from the 70s now are domiciled abroad and can only spend so many days per year in the country.
Top 1% pay 24% of total income tax. Top 10% pay 53% of total income tax. source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8417205.stm)
Taxation is a very emotive subject. Whilst most high earners understand that they should pay more than those on lower incomes, if you make the top rates too high (95% in the 70's under then reds I believe) you will just drive them offshore where you collect ZERO tax revenue.
This is why many film and rock stars from the 70s now are domiciled abroad and can only spend so many days per year in the country.
That was the graph I can rember seeing, looks like I mis-remembered the figures but the point I was trying to make was the same.
Whilst most high earners understand that they should pay more than those on lower incomes....
In absolute monetary terms they do at the moment.
The real issue is that at the moment those on lower incomes are paying more tax as a proportion of income than those on higher incomes. This is a disgrace, and more so when you remember that this situation has arisen under a Labour Govt.
The real issue is that at the moment those on lower incomes are paying more tax as a proportion of income than those on higher incomes. This is a disgrace, and more so when you remember that this situation has arisen under a Labour Govt.
Think you maths is a bit faulty there. If everybody got taxed at 20%, then everybody pays the same proportion of their income. As the rates are banded, those in the higher band pay a higher proportion of their income in tax than those in the lower rates.
Think you maths is a bit faulty there. If everybody got taxed at 20%, then everybody pays the same proportion of their income. As the rates are banded, those in the higher band pay a higher proportion of their income in tax than those in the lower rates.
Yes, but NI has an upper limit above which you stop paying.
Also the rich are better placed to use legal tax avoidance schemes e.g. pension contributions
Yes, but NI has an upper limit above which you stop paying.
NI is not the same as PAYE. If you want to start looking at total taxation then you are into a whole new world. More income means more spending which means more VAT/Stamp Duty/Death Duties etc.
Also the rich are better placed to use legal tax avoidance schemes e.g. pension contributions
Since when was saving a tax avoidance scheme? :rolleyes:
Edit cos I'm really annoyed about that last statement: The money I save for my old age (which will help to keep taxation down in the future) is effectively taxed each year reducing the final amount. Then some of it attractes tax upon payment. It really is one of the more stupid things you've said.
NI is not the same as PAYE. If you want to start looking at total taxation then you are into a whole new world. More income means more spending which means more VAT/Stamp Duty/Death Duties etc.
OK, hopefully Jabba will explain himself
Since when was saving a tax avoidance scheme? :rolleyes:
Not sure I understand you, I know labour have taxed pensions as best they can, but they are still fairly tax efficient
I know labour have taxed pensions as best they can, but they are still fairly tax efficient
That if you can reach the new age at which your entitled to one.
It will have gone up to 80 by the time I can claim it.
"Vote for policies, not personalities" cries the website...
take the survey to see who you should be voting for...
http://voteforpolicies.org.uk/
Since when was saving a tax avoidance scheme? :rolleyes:
Pensions!! You pay in from your gross salary, meaning that higher rate payers have saved paying tax on it at 40%. When the person retires and the pension is drawn the person is often only paying tax at the basic rate.
Regarding my earlier comment, I wasn't referring solely to income tax. I accept that direct taxation like income tax is progregressive.
However, when indirect taxation is taken into account, e.g. Council Tax, VAT on fuel bills, VAT generally, fuel duty, alcohol duty, road fund licence, and many others, those on lower incomes are paying more of their income in tax proportionately than those on higher incomes.
Also, as Stu says, those on higher incomes can often afford to take advice on (legal) tax avoidance. Consider this:
Highly paid company executive gets a significant pary of his remuneration package as shares. This is not subject to income tax. He then sells these shares. He is liable to Capital Gains Tax at 18%.
"Vote for policies, not personalities" cries the website...
take the survey to see who you should be voting for...
http://voteforpolicies.org.uk/
Blimey is all I will say to that lol... not what I was expecting.
keith_d
14-04-10, 02:09 PM
The age at which you can claim a pension depends on lots of factors. However, I suspect that by the time I reach 65 the only people entitled to a state pension will be those over 100, simply because the government won't have the money.
Even those nice 'safe' civil service pensions will be under threat, so the government will be looking to tax anyone who has anything.
But this isn't really relevant to the current election campaign.
plowsie
14-04-10, 02:10 PM
Since when was saving a tax avoidance scheme? :rolleyes:
Believe me, it is.
More income means more spending which means more VAT/Stamp Duty/Death Duties etc.
Yup, but more income also means more saving. Saving doesn't attract indirect taxation e.g. VAT.
As for Death Duties, this govt has increased the threshold on several occasions and, also and more importantly, in 2007 made the transfer of a spouse's "Nil Rate Band" to the surviving partner automatic and back-dated it in perpetuity. For couples who were married at the time of the first partner's death the "Nil Rate Band" for the surviving partner is currently £650,000.
http://www.inheritance-tax-online.co.uk/Inheritance_tax_&_wills.htm
A nice little sweetener for the better off, eh?
Believe me, it is.
No it's not. Tax avoidance is illegal, tax planning is not. :D
Yup, but more income also means more saving. Saving doesn't attract indirect taxation e.g. VAT.
Savings (except tax free ones which are limited) attract direct taxation removed at source by your bank. If you self assess, you have to declare this so they can take some more.
As for direct vs indirect taxation, if this kind of study (http://clients.squareeye.com/uploads/compass/documents/Fairness%20Thinkpiece%2040%20REVISED_%20%282%29.pd f) is what you are referring to then yes the bottom 10% pay more, but the other 90% are nicely graded which shows the system works in general. Note that the bottom 10% are not in full time employment as the average earnings are below NMW.
So do you advocate a flat taxation system?
Edit: I can think of a number of reasons why the bottom decile could be misleading. The study (warning: left wing focus group) uses original income (salary, pension, investment income etc). If you live off capital, you can have a very low income by this measure, but a very high spending power. Not saying this is the whole story, but should be factored in.
plowsie
14-04-10, 02:50 PM
No it's not. Tax avoidance is illegal, tax planning is not. :D
:lol: If I had a pound for every time I heard that at my work, I'd be the one having to plan around the tax with my money.
Just looking about online, who is it that is offering £11,500 Tax free allowance and 31% flat rate tax and NI?
Savings (except tax free ones which are limited) attract direct taxation removed at source by your bank. If you self assess, you have to declare this so they can take some more.
Other than tax-free savings (e.g. pensions), savings are made net of tax, i.e. from disposable income. It is the interest on those savings which is taxed at source.
My point is that you have to have spare disposable income in order to be able to save this way. Lower income group hardly save anything at all because they have to spend their money on normal living expenses. Most of these expenses are subject to indirect taxation.
So do you advocate a flat taxation system?
No, of course not :rolleyes:
What I am saying is that the more direct taxation of income, suitably graded according to income, the less need for indirect taxation. This would be fairer.
I'm not saying "no indirect taxation", though, e.g. taxing ciggies to fund the NHS would get my vote. As would hypothcating certain taxation income.
Other than tax-free savings (e.g. pensions), savings are made net of tax, i.e. from disposable income. It is the interest on those savings which is taxed at source.
Ah, I misunderstood your original post.
No, of course not :rolleyes:
Why not - everybody pays x% on all "deemed income" and no indirect taxation. Everybody pays the same percentage - seems fair to me.
It only fails when the government try to use indirect taxation to control public habits - fuel usage, smoking, drinking.
Why not
Because I believe that higher income groups should pay more tax.
timwilky
14-04-10, 04:37 PM
Sorry Jabba, must disagree.
Everyone should have a livable tax free allowance, say £15,000 after that charge everyone a single flat rate of 50%. allowances transferable between partners
chances are most households with a couple of kids would pay no tax, rich pay, middle income pays about what they currently pay
Because I believe that higher income groups should pay more tax.
Paying more gross is not a problem, paying vastly more as a percentage of income is (to me). Everybody works hard for their money, and I find it strange that people assume those on higher income should pay a high rate just because they earn more.
If the system becomes too skewed, as I said in an earlier post, it drives the wealth offshore where HMRC can't get their mitts at it at all. There are more accountants looking at how to avoid taxation than there are involved in the collection of it. The less fair it is (rate terms, not total contribution) the more people will look to avoid (not plan ;))
Ill vote BNP seeming as they will:
1. Raise speed limits on motorways
2. Keep our currency
3. Stop immigration completely
4. Bring back Corporal and Capital Punishment.
I feel these 4 things are what is needed in this country and this party is the only party to offer them.
Dave20046
14-04-10, 05:51 PM
:lol:
are you smiling at my post and agreeing....?
Dave20046
14-04-10, 06:19 PM
are you smiling at my post and agreeing....?
Oh ,I assumed it was a joke (apologies if not :smt053 ).
The four policies don't seem really help the country out of the economical crisis, it's almost as if the BNP googled pet hates and decided to make abolishing them their policies.
Sorry Jabba, must disagree.
Don't apologise for disagreeing - this is a good discussion. Shame the politicians aren't having similar philosophical debates. Maybe we should direct them here? :lol:
When I say the higher income groups should pay more I'm not saying that they should be squeezed until the pips squeak (Dennis Healy), I'm suggesting a little bit more gradually as income increases. Lots of little increases with increasing income rather than the crude 20% - 40% step-change that we have now. There shouldn't be a disincentive to earn more, far from it.
I'm also saying that this should only be allied to hugely reduced indirect taxes which, as I've argued earlier, hit the lowest income groups the hardest (proportionately).
I'm also saying that this should only be allied to hugely reduced indirect taxes which, as I've argued earlier, hit the lowest income groups the hardest (proportionately).
I would like to see academic studies of this oft quoted pearl. The one I found first on google did show a disparity, but only really in the lowest decile and I believe there can be a plausible explanation for that. (see posts above wealth vs earnings).
Haha well...
I do actually feel their policies are pretty good. And 'most' of them i agree with. If you read their policies they do seem very good, but they say they would leave Europe (which isnt a good idea in the long run).
But we pay £40 million a day in to europe. BNP would leave Europe (saving £40 million a day which they would re-invest in to 'our' country.
Im not ashamed to admit, that I will be voting them. Most people, i know, are disgusted at even the letters 'BNP' but I feel that is only because of bad press. 90% of people just think they hate black people and are all about racism.... They aren't tho. Their website about their policies is well worth reading. http://bnp.org.uk/policies/
By the way, this is coming from a guy that works on building sites in London which are around 70% Russian, African, Polish and Lithuanian populated, and i've had enough of it. Its ruining our country. I know better, English workers with families who are out of work at the moment due to these foreigners. Its wrong! And its Labour that has done this.
ravingdavis
14-04-10, 07:00 PM
Haha well...
I do actually feel their policies are pretty good. And 'most' of them i agree with. If you read their policies they do seem very good, but they say they would leave Europe (which isnt a good idea in the long run).
But we pay £40 million a day in to europe. BNP would leave Europe (saving £40 million a day which they would re-invest in to 'our' country.
Im not ashamed to admit, that I will be voting them. Most people, i know, are disgusted at even the letters 'BNP' but I feel that is only because of bad press. 90% of people just think they hate black people and are all about racism.... They aren't tho. Their website about their policies is well worth reading. http://bnp.org.uk/policies/
By the way, this is coming from a guy that works on building sites in London which are around 70% Russian, African, Polish and Lithuanian populated, and i've had enough of it. Its ruining our country. I know better, English workers with families who are out of work at the moment due to these foreigners. Its wrong! And its Labour that has done this.
I cant disagree with this strongly enough. Quite often the quality of work done by these immigrants it significantly higher than that which us 'natives' produce. If it was not for the immigrants then the economic climate in this country would be even worse than it is now.
I would just like to highlight here that I am talking about LEGAL immigration not illegal immigration, so called 'asylum seekers' etc. I do believe illegal immigration needs to be clamped down upon heavily
Dave20046
14-04-10, 07:25 PM
In my view* the majority of immigrants have merely took the jobs that the underclass get paid not to do. They've come here seeking work, picked it up and done it - enterprising little devils. If we killed off all the work shy benfiteers (the ones who opt for benefits over work) I'd be happy for all the immigrants to stay and take their places :)
* lighthearted post alert
90% of people just think they hate black people and are all about racism....
No, they seem to hate Muslims more.
Particularily like the part about sending the immigrants back to the middle east where they came from, then building stronger links with Oz/NZ where the indigenous population have the upper hand. :rolleyes:
As for stopping immigration entirely... go abroad, fall in love, don't come back to the UK to live? :confused:
Their policies are innsular and xenophobic. I hope they loose their deposits. :thumbdown:
carternd
14-04-10, 08:09 PM
i don't know who to vote for nobody has been round and nobody campaigning - which is always nice to see!
I vote for who give the public sector more money so I can keep my job - doesn't help really as that the scot Gov anyway.
Should the Scots vote for MP's in westminster?!?! Yes. The English should also get their own parliament. Bring on Federalism.
I will vote for 'other' there not on your list, dont know why there bigger than a couple of the ones on the poll...
Keith, I wouldn't even have dignified Banditpats post with a response.
I'm hoping he's referring to the Monster Raving Loony Party...
Sorry Jabba, must disagree.
Everyone should have a livable tax free allowance, say £15,000 after that charge everyone a single flat rate of 50%. allowances transferable between partners
chances are most households with a couple of kids would pay no tax, rich pay, middle income pays about what they currently pay
Good idea, I've never earned that! And doubt I ever will.
Ill vote BNP seeming as they will:
1. Raise speed limits on motorways
2. Keep our currency
3. Stop immigration completely
4. Bring back Corporal and Capital Punishment.
I feel these 4 things are what is needed in this country and this party is the only party to offer them.
Please reconsider. If you vote for the BNP, you are voting for this.
Visit this site. This is what fascists do.
http://www.shamash.org/holocaust/photos/
BTW, 3/4 of my shift at work are Polish, they are no different to us. No harder-working, nor do they eat swans. Just humans.
ps, sorry for graphic images, this is an extremely serious point that has to be made.
dizzyblonde
14-04-10, 08:15 PM
I want to know which party they were on about on the radio today, who were going to
pull the plug on all these roadworks everywhere you turn
abolishing somesort of defense thingy..Triton or summat
There was a thrid good idea but can't remember
Either way, I was sold on the first......a stop to crappy roadworks :-)
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.