the snap general election thread

GreatApe

kinger101 wrote: »

While he did better than expected, and should be congratulated for getting the young out in higher numbers, the elephant in the room is that he lost against a really poor conservative leader who ran a poor campaign. I suspect the next leader of the Conservative party may do a much better job in querying how things will be paid for.

Corbyn and his followers claim to be socialist. They aren't. A socialist would argue we need to improve public services and suggest that they are paid for out of taxation. The amount of extra revenue Corbyn would generate for taxing the top 5% a little more is trivial.

This is the effective income tax rate for an average earner in different EU countries (includes social security, personal allowances etc).

Estonia 18.3 %
Ireland 19.2 %
UK 23.3 %
Czech Republic 23.6 %
Greece 25.4 %
Norway 27.9 %
France 29.1 %
Iceland 29.2 %
Netherlands 30.4 %
Finland 30.8 %
Luxembourg 31.0 %
Italy 31.1 %
Austria 31.9 %
Hungary 33.5 %
Denmark 36.2 %
Germany 39.7 %
Belgium 40.7 %

The truth is that if we want public services and a social security system equivalent to that of our continental cousins, everyone has to pay for them. The Labour party are not suggesting this.

Those figures are not all the picture the best thing to look at is how much is government spending relative to GDP and in the UK that's about 42%

And that is not a fixed sum it tends to rise in recessions.
It will also likely increase as the population gets older.

To want to increase governments size at this point in the cycle is stupid. We have full employment and we are in the boom phase.

Moby

The extent to which government ministers failed to act on expert warnings about inadequate fire safety rules before the Grenfell Tower disaster in London can be revealed by the Observer.

As public outrage mounted and political pressure grew on Theresa May over the tragedy, former chief fire officer Ronnie King – who is secretary of the all-party parliamentary group on fire safety – said urgent requests for meetings with ministers and action to tighten rules were stonewalled.

King also revealed that ministers had failed to insist that life-saving sprinkler systems were mandatory in the design of new schools in England, despite clear recommendations in reports commissioned by the government itself, which advocated their use.

His criticism came as the prime minister admitted on Saturday that although the emergency services had been “heroic”, support for families of Grenfell Tower victims who needed help after the fire “was not good enough”.


Theresa May’s Grenfell Tower statement: response ‘was not good enough’
Read more
King, who was a chief fire officer for 20 years, said: “They seem to need a disaster to change regulations, rather than evidence and experience. It was the same with the King’s Cross fire and the Bradford City football club fire. They always seem to need a significant loss of life before things are changed.”

He said that requests for meetings with former housing minister Gavin Barwell, now Theresa May’s chief of staff, were turned down. King said: “We have had replies, but the replies were to the effect that you have met my predecessor [the previous Tory housing minister James Wharton] and there were a number of matters that we are looking at and we are still looking at it.

“They are politicians and I am a professional fire adviser. I understand the difficulties they have with this,” King said. But he repeated: “They always seem to need a significant loss of life before things are changed.”

kinger101

GreatApe wrote: »

Those figures are not all the picture the best thing to look at is how much is government spending relative to GDP and in the UK that's about 42%

And that is not a fixed sum it tends to rise in recessions.
It will also likely increase as the population gets older.

To want to increase governments size at this point in the cycle is stupid. We have full employment and we are in the boom phase.

Yes, the GDP figures are useful, but they don't explain where the money came from, which is why I posted the income tax figures to expose Labour's lie.

The UK is well below the level in those countries which Corbyn often bangs on about which saying "this is normal in continental Europe"

2015 data;

cogito

kinger101 wrote: »

While he did better than expected, and should be congratulated for getting the young out in higher numbers, the elephant in the room is that he lost against a really poor conservative leader who ran a poor campaign. I suspect the next leader of the Conservative party may do a much better job in querying how things will be paid for.

Corbyn and his followers claim to be socialist. They aren't. A socialist would argue we need to improve public services and suggest that they are paid for out of taxation. The amount of extra revenue Corbyn would generate for taxing the top 5% a little more is trivial.

This is the effective income tax rate for an average earner in different EU countries (includes social security, personal allowances etc).

Estonia 18.3 %
Ireland 19.2 %
UK 23.3 %
Czech Republic 23.6 %
Greece 25.4 %
Norway 27.9 %
France 29.1 %
Iceland 29.2 %
Netherlands 30.4 %
Finland 30.8 %
Luxembourg 31.0 %
Italy 31.1 %
Austria 31.9 %
Hungary 33.5 %
Denmark 36.2 %
Germany 39.7 %
Belgium 40.7 %

The truth is that if we want public services and a social security system equivalent to that of our continental cousins, everyone has to pay for them. The Labour party are not suggesting this.

What does that prove? Income tax is only one of many taxes applied by governments. The income tax rate in Estonia nay be only 19.8% but the Estonian government expenditure is more than the UK as a percentage of GDP. In fact the UK government expenditure is in line with most other European countries (or continental cousins as you choose to call it).

PixelPound

wintersunshine wrote: »

He didn't win. You were right. 5 more years of the Tories. And if he stands again. Another 5 years of the Tories.

Don't change your mind. The guy's a loser.

Tories didn't get an overall majority, and relying on 10 DUP MP's to take them over the threshold, and you will think that will last 5 years.
The right wing press thought Corbyn a joke candidate. The Tories thought he was the golden ticket to them being in power with a landslide, even his own MP's thought he wasn't fit to lead and would lead them to their biggest defeat since 1983.
Didn't turn out like that, he campaigned, engaged and mobilised people. Yes he didn't win, but no-one outside his tight circle of corbynestas didn't think he would. It has been raised that the reason why his campaign seemed to be teflon coated (revelations in the press and Abbot-gaff after Abbot-gaff) is because it was about limiting Tory power rather than a possibility of a Labour govt. Not sure this is the case though.

If you look at the number of votes the main two parties got. Highest Tory vote since 1992, highest Labour vote since 1997, on the highest turnout (in votes) since 1992. There would probably have been a strong tory govt if Labour hadn't have mobilised a lot of new voters, and their could have been a Labour gov't if former UKIP voters and others hadn't decided to vote Tory to avoid Corbyn.

Rinoa

Contrary to press reports and remainers on MSE, Hammond backs leaving single market and customs union.

https://order-order.com/2017/06/18/hammond-backs-brexit/

CKhalvashi

Rinoa wrote: »

Contrary to press reports and remainers on MSE, Hammond backs leaving single market and customs union.

https://order-order.com/2017/06/18/hammond-backs-brexit/

So, reputable news websites say one thing, and something run by a drink driver and offshore so noone can sue him says another.

Who are we going to believe?

Rinoa

CKhalvashi wrote: »

So, reputable news websites say one thing, and something run by a drink driver and offshore so noone can sue him says another.

Who are we going to believe?

Maybe you should have checked the link before posting.

GreatApe

UK has one of the worlds lowest fire death rates its dishonest to blame this government for this horrific fire. It also seems dishonest to suggest UK regulations are lax as it appears UK fire deaths are about half the level they are in France USA Canada Belgium Sweden Finland etc

http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/fires/by-country/

GreatApe

nic_c wrote: »

Tories didn't get an overall majority, and relying on 10 DUP MP's to take them over the threshold, and you will think that will last 5 years.
The right wing press thought Corbyn a joke candidate. The Tories thought he was the golden ticket to them being in power with a landslide, even his own MP's thought he wasn't fit to lead and would lead them to their biggest defeat since 1983.
Didn't turn out like that, he campaigned, engaged and mobilised people. Yes he didn't win, but no-one outside his tight circle of corbynestas didn't think he would. It has been raised that the reason why his campaign seemed to be teflon coated (revelations in the press and Abbot-gaff after Abbot-gaff) is because it was about limiting Tory power rather than a possibility of a Labour govt. Not sure this is the case though.

If you look at the number of votes the main two parties got. Highest Tory vote since 1992, highest Labour vote since 1997, on the highest turnout (in votes) since 1992. There would probably have been a strong tory govt if Labour hadn't have mobilised a lot of new voters, and their could have been a Labour gov't if former UKIP voters and others hadn't decided to vote Tory to avoid Corbyn.

The Tories ran a terrible campaign with someone who was unpopular. Go look at my old posts before the election I said multiple times I would vote for May but that she creeped me out and all her sound bites made her look dim and stupid and were plain annoying.

Despite having this very poor leader and a horrifically sold manifesto corbyn did not get a majority. The Tories didn't lose they got as many MPs as labor + SNP + libs also the country as a whole voted for right leaning parties Tories + DUP

Next time which I hope is in 5 years rather than an election induced by Tory infighting the Tories won't have a leader this poor. At some stage they will lose we don't have a dictatorship but I'm hoping that the next one is on 2022 and they win that one. And that the changeover (which is inevitable at some point) in 2027