the snap general election thread

BobQ

westernpromise wrote: »

Go on then. In what sense is the EEA a middle way?

Its what people voted for, just as much as what she is apparently planning. Who is to say there is nowhere in between?

BobQ

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

So, with the French election being 66% to 34%, would you expect Macron to kowtow to the 34% all the time?

The numbers are irrelevant, the fact is that Leave won.

I voted remain. But, after the way the eu are acting, I am now glad we are leaving. I do not want a middle way if that involves still being dictated to by the eu.

A President needs to govern in the interests of the nation even the 34%. The closer the result the more onus there is on doing this.

The EU are responding to the UK's attitude. Whether you like it or not globalisation is here to stay and we will have to cooperate with other nations.

Enterprise_1701C

BobQ wrote: »

A President needs to govern in the interests of the nation even the 34%. The closer the result the more onus there is on doing this.

The EU are responding to the UK's attitude. Whether you like it or not globalisation is here to stay and we will have to cooperate with other nations.

Quite happy to cooperate with other nations.

Just don't want to be part of a superstate.

If the eu are unhappy about that that is their problem, they are the ones that forced the changes through from common market to federal superstate (in all but name) whilst utterly discouraging allowing the people to vote on whether they actually wanted the change or not.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

BobQ wrote: »

A President needs to govern in the interests of the nation even the 34%. The closer the result the more onus there is on doing this.

The EU are responding to the UK's attitude. Whether you like it or not globalisation is here to stay and we will have to cooperate with other nations.

Totally agree with your first point - you are elected to govern your nation for the better (all of it).

Are the EU only capable of response and not of initiating their own set of mind games and negotiating approaches? Has Juncker suddenly become like he is as a response to events in 2017? If we took a far more "we will do whatever you want" approach - would we see them offering up carrots already? They have to be seen to put off other nations exiting.

This will be a long and complex and protracted negotiation - I'd expect nothing less in the weigh in for such an event than for both sides to mix talk of a good and fair fight with mutterings to unsettle the other. BUT for once the best result will be a tie on points.

antrobus

BobQ wrote: »

Its what people voted for, just as much as what she is apparently planning. Who is to say there is nowhere in between?

"Nowhere" is precisely what there is "in between".:)

In or Out, that is the question. And the answer was Out. Much to my disappointment as I voted In. But there you go, you don't always get what you want.

Fella

Interesting & very predictable that both Labour & the Libdems are saying their manifestos are "fully costed" which turns out to mean they'd fund their spending with Corporation tax rises.

This is simple lies. Everybody knows two things about Corp tax:

1. It's impossible to predict with any accuracy what effect changes to it will have.

2. There is absolutely no agreement on what effect changes on it will have. Or indeed what effect changes on it have had!

So basically the Labour & Libs have not costed any of their spending plans, they've just come up with some populist ideas & are proposing tax changes that are at least as likely to reduce tax take as to raise it, but hoping they'll go down well because they involve bashing those nasty corporations that er....half the country depends on for a job.

michaels

Fella wrote: »

Interesting & very predictable that both Labour & the Libdems are saying their manifestos are "fully costed" which turns out to mean they'd fund their spending with Corporation tax rises.

This is simple lies. Everybody knows two things about Corp tax:

1. It's impossible to predict with any accuracy what effect changes to it will have.

2. There is absolutely no agreement on what effect changes on it will have. Or indeed what effect changes on it have had!

So basically the Labour & Libs have not costed any of their spending plans, they've just come up with some populist ideas & are proposing tax changes that are at least as likely to reduce tax take as to raise it, but hoping they'll go down well because they involve bashing those nasty corporations that er....half the country depends on for a job.

I disagree, with the US already planning to reduce their corporation tax from 35% to 15% it is highly likely that UK (and all other country) corporation tax receipts will fall - and fall very sharply if we try to raise the rate payable making tax arbitrage to the US even more attractive.

Then again it is not only Labour who can end up with less tax take by raising rates, the stamp duty increases appear to have killed the housing market stone dead so that is a big chunk of lost revenue as a result of making BTL unattractive.

Conrad

Ireland suffered more than most in the Banking crash and I recall people saying would take decades to recover.


As it turns out Ireland attracted corporations from around the world thanks to it's 15% CGT tax rate, and has been recovering fast.


Remember every time we take higher taxes from a corporation that this has a direct effect on millions of pensions and ISA's that gain their returns from corporate profit dividends. Not to mention all the employment corporations provide. Another classic example of left wingers not joining the dots.

westernpromise

Conrad wrote: »

Ireland suffered more than most in the Banking crash and I recall people saying would take decades to recover.


As it turns out Ireland attracted corporations from around the world thanks to it's 15% CGT tax rate, and has been recovering fast.


Remember every time a left winger wants to take tax from a corporation that this has a direct effect on millions of pensions and ISA's that gain their returns from corporate profit dividends. Not to mention all the employment corporations provide. Another classic example of left wingers not joining the dots.

As long as people they envy and hate are worse off, they're happy.

If you had two countries, in one of which everybody had £100 apart from 10% who had £200, and in the other everyone had £50, a lefty will always try to turn the former into the latter.

antrobus

Electoral calculus have updated their prediction.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/homepage.html

They are now predicting a Con majority of 190. (It was 158, to the best of my recollection.)