the snap general election thread

Thrugelmir

Chrysalis wrote: »

Trump threatened various manufacturers in america (who were planning to move manufacturing to mexico) with a fat 35% import tax, it soon changed their minds. All a government has to do is make tax avoidance unprofitable. In addition to penalise tax evasion with the same amount of effort as they put into dealing with benefit fraud, no sweet heart deals.

Ford may have scrapped their Mexico plant. Hasn't stopped them subsequently deciding that China is now a better option. Big business is only interested in cost and profit. Politicians are only temporary in the the broader scheme of things. By the time the plant is up and running Trump will be gone.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

Fella wrote: »

Er, yes, because they lost.

Beware, you may now enter a Twilight Zone of incessant pointless and often belligerent posts determined to prove you wrong and to provoke much disagreement in an attempt for the "report" button to be the result.
Or the thread simply to be closed.;)

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Ford may have scrapped their Mexico plant. Hasn't stopped them subsequently deciding that China is now a better option. Big business is only interested in cost and profit. Politicians are only temporary in the the broader scheme of things. By the time the plant is up and running Trump will be gone.

Exactly that - business has many options whether to realise a profit or invest somehow or defer that until a njcer corporation tax rate comes along. The FD's of the big forms are way smarter than Mr McDonnell IMHO...they won't break the law - but they also won't pay any more than they have to.

If you close all the open for business options - then eventually you will have a Soviet-type state - which will be in no way corrupt of course.

Thrugelmir

ilovehouses wrote: »

A little ironic yes but no money will change hands for those labour votes. The invoice from the DUP for services in supporting a minority government has, however, arrived; marked for the attention of the taxpayer.

NI needs to be able to compete post Brexit with it's Southern neighbour. With no hard border. The benefits to the UK Treasury could be sizable.

padington

ilovehouses wrote: »

The taxpayer is paying £150m per parliamentary vote to prop up a minority government.

Not because of any change in attitude to the NI/ Irish border.

They'll need every penny if a hard border gets established.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

ilovehouses wrote: »

The taxpayer is paying £150m per parliamentary vote to prop up a minority government.

Not because of any change in attitude to the NI/ Irish border.

Er, but not all of it is new money.
Fake facts alert! Do your sums again please.

Also, I though the objection to Tory policy was not enough spending enough - so what exactly is the issue?

Herzlos

ThinkingOutLoud wrote: »

Also, I though the objection to Tory policy was not enough spending enough - so what exactly is the issue?

That the spending isn't being based on who needs it. It's being based on who the Tories need.

It's such a shame the 13 Scottish Tories don't have the spine to try and leverage their position for the benefit of Scotland like they said they will.

Rinoa

ilovehouses wrote: »

I won't be doing the sums again because I'm happy with my assumption that, in return for DUP support, eye watering sums of new money will be changing hands.



I think the government is spending too much money.

However, when money is spent I'd prefer it be done after assessing needs and priorities rather than for reasons of political expediency.

Maybe the Tory faithful could make personal contributions rather than socialising the costs.

£1Bn to save the country from a marxist, terror sympathizing government?

Worth every penny.

TrickyTree83

ilovehouses wrote: »

She could've done that for free by not calling an election.

But that's not what happened. She did call one and we are where we are now.

So what would you rather?

£1.5bn for N.Ireland via the DUP confidence and supply deal, or a "progressive" "alliance", which is neither progressive nor allied in any way, that would be a chaotic shambolic Marxist insurgency.

TrickyTree83

ilovehouses wrote: »

Which testicle would you rather have removed? That's the choice you've been left with as a result of the government's disastrous error of judgement.

If you'd felt like it you could have been equally polemic about the DUP's attitudes and the chances of the deal succeeding but your bias is there for all to see. I don't think a Corbyn minority government would be a 'chaotic shambolic Marxist insurgency' - it would be as hamstrung as the current May government.

I don't care, I'll wear my bias against Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott, etc.. proudly.

Scream and shout about DUP as much as you like, they're not front bench, they're not ministers, their input is limited. Not so with JC and his band of Marxists and racists, if they had a minority government we would be seizing the assets of the wealthy to house Grenfell survivors. The seizure of private property by the state!!!! Sounds familiar to another group of Marxists if you recall. We would also have a racist home secretary who cannot spot failures in her mental arithmetic and an openly Marxist chancellor.

I'm happy with the outcome as it is right now.