the snap general election thread

BobQ

Out,_Vile_Jelly wrote: »

I'm sure future psephologists will be studying these past few weeks with great interest.

To be fair, I and several others have been bemoaning the detrimental effects of a weak and ineffectual opposition; this Labour surge should hopefully have kicked some Tory complacency sharply in the backside. Just goes to show you can't take anything for granted.

It may prompt less complacency but equally one of Corbyn's problems is making his non-core supporters believe he might win. Now they are beginning to think it is possible.

May will probably win, but who knows it might be a big shock to her

A_Medium_Size_Jock

wotsthat wrote: »

Not everyone could get away that deft moral condemnation of posting the poster whilst pointing out how accurate it is. Most people would see that as a lack of self awareness but I think you pulled it off. Nice one.

And the prize for supercilious post of the year goes to .................

A_Medium_Size_Jock

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Financial Times exposes the Absurdity of Mayhem's meaningless 'no deal better than a bad deal' slogan.


https://www.ft.com/content/83396e2a-45ef-11e7-8519-9f94ee97d996

Er, not quite Hamish.
The opinion of an economist writing for the Times is hardly definitive - and read what the Spectator says about his opinion:

Why the FT’s Martin Wolf is wrong about the EU

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/another-ft-columnist-has-been-struck-by-eu-fever/

Chrysalis

ukcarper wrote: »

Absolute rubbish

check the MSE poll, its the basis of my comment.

But since you disagree.

How many baby boomers do you know that think the government should invest in new social housing?
How many baby boomers do you know that current pensioners are treated too generously?
How many baby boomers do you know that dont consider brexit important?
How many baby boomers do you know that think young people should not pay tuition fees?
How many baby boomers do you know that think house prices need to come down?
How many baby boomers do you know that support higher corporation taxes and taxation for the wealthy?



Please post with a bit more than a one liner.

link to poll here http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/poll/30-05-2017/what-are-the-biggest-factors-that-will-decide-how-you-vote-in-the-general-election

BobQ

setmefree2 wrote: »

Thought I'd flag this up for anyone worrying about social care costs.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4564588/1-2m-homes-hit-Labour-plan-slash-inheritance-rate.html

Maybe people are just content that unearned wealth produced by house price inflation should be taxed in that way.

All parties agree that we need a solution to funding social care costs, a death tax seems a good way of doing it. The Tory policy will protect £100K but then take the full cost of all costs above that in most cases.

Taxing dementia lacks any kind of ethical credibility. Its at best random and at worst immoral.

But in financial terms it will probably raise as much as IHT once the full costs of care at home and in care plus interest are accumulated.

BobQ

mrginge wrote: »

An upper limit sounds like a perfectly reasonable idea.

It does if you want to protect the wealthy.

But until she states what the limit is we do not know if it is fair. If one person pays 1% of their wealth and another pays 50% that is arguably unfair. Either way the concept still taxes those unlucky enough to have degenerative illnesses like Dementia.

Spidernick

It's funny how Paul Dacre and The Daily Mail are not attacking the effective 100% Inheritance Tax rate on parts of an estate under the Tory social care proposals!

mrginge

BobQ wrote: »

It does if you want to protect the wealthy.

But until she states what the limit is we do not know if it is fair. If one person pays 1% of their wealth and another pays 50% that is arguably unfair. Either way the concept still taxes those unlucky enough to have degenerative illnesses like Dementia.

Listen there's no problem if you feel that social care should be paid for as with NHS care by general taxation.
But please don't make out that that alternative is any fairer on those that die of a heart attack and never get the chance to use their lifetime of contribution.

wotsthat

mrginge wrote: »

Listen there's no problem if you feel that social care should be paid for as with NHS care by general taxation.
But please don't make out that that alternative is any fairer on those that die of a heart attack and never get the chance to use their lifetime of contribution.

Yes I suppose we should count our blessings. Plenty of people in the graveyard would be glad to have these worries.

Thanks, you've really helped put it all into perspective.

bobbymotors

Well having watched question time, I thought May did reasonably well, perhaps trying too hard to get soundbites in, but ok never the less.

I thought Corbyn was doing ok too, until he was pressed about using Trident, even in retaliation, and fluffed it. audible audience gasps. Not good, people need to feel protected by their government.

Let's face it, no one would win a nuclear war, but it was a bad moment for him.

Here's my prediction for the night

Con 362
lab 212
lib 11
snp 46
ukip 0
green 1
other 18

con majority 74

But who knows?