Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

Arklight

cepheus wrote: »

I've just posted the tax rates. The top rate of income tax under Labour in the 70s was 83% or as much as 98% on certain categories of unearned income. What would happen if Jeremy Corbyn introduced tax at the rates used in the 70s?


https://fullfact.org/economy/are-conservatives-right-about-labours-tax-plans/

Your opinion needs to be supported with evidence. The Labour manifesto wasn't radical by historic standards. You have just got so used to low taxes on earnings and investment since Thatcher.

The Tory / Blairite people are so unhinged about Corbyn being popular with a large swathe of society because his policies reflect what that part of society want, that they seem incapable of debating anything other than character assassination.

Corbyn's a communist, pacifist, Russian spy blah blah red faced rant, yawn.

I don't care. Labour under Corbyn has moderate centre left policies again that I can actually vote for. They want a normal state run railway that runs to time like every other European country, dont want to make poor kids starve with mean benefit cuts, see disabled people made homeless, or sell off the NHS to ghastly American corporations, and they plan to fund that with actually taxing people who have money.

Can the Tories debate against that? No.

And now the Right are all screaming today because he suggested we actually find out if Russia is responsible for state mandated assassinations rather than just assuming they are and pointlessly expelling a handful of diplomatic staff overnight (who the Murdoch press are referring to as "spies".)

Filo25

Arklight wrote: »

The Tory / Blairite people are so unhinged about Corbyn being popular with a large swathe of society because his policies reflect what that part of society want, that they seem incapable of debating anything other than character assassination.

Corbyn's a communist, pacifist, Russian spy blah blah red faced rant, yawn.

I don't care. Labour under Corbyn has moderate centre left policies again that I can actually vote for. They want a normal state run railway that runs to time like every other European country, dont want to make poor kids starve with mean benefit cuts, see disabled people made homeless, or sell off the NHS to ghastly American corporations, and they plan to fund that with actually taxing people who have money.

Can the Tories debate against that? No.

And now the Right are all screaming today because he suggested we actually find out if Russia is responsible for state mandated assassinations rather than just assuming they are and pointlessly expelling a handful of diplomatic staff overnight (who the Murdoch press are referring to as "spies".)

Arklight, I like a lot of your posts, but I think its naive in the extreme to try to indicate that there is any reasonable doubt as to who is ultimately responsible for the nerve gas attack on British soil.

It will never be absolutely 100% proven because Russia will clearly block any investigation that could provide the evidence to do it, but not only is it clear that Russia did it beyond reasonable doubt (nobody else even has a motive to point the finger at Russia, because we all know that there will be no meaningful consequences for them), but Russia actually wants the world to know they did it, so people in certain positions understand the consequences of crossing them.

It's not even just overseas that some enemies of Putin have a nasty habit of dying younger than expected, it's a somewhat endemic phenomenon in Russia as well.

The problem is for Corbyn most issues with regards to Foregin Policy pretty much ends up being the fault of The West/NATO/The US, as he showed in the recent past pretty clearly himself. https://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-972b-nato-belligerence-endangers-us-all

Matt_L

cepheus wrote: »

Businesses are packing up and moving folks

Faisal IslamVerified account@faisalislam

https://otp.tools.investis.com/clients/uk/unilever/rns1/regulatory-story.aspx?newsid=988892&cid=129 …

What on earth has this got to do with this thread??

Arklight

Filo25 wrote: »

Arklight, I like a lot of your posts, but I think its naive in the extreme to try to indicate that there is any reasonable doubt as to who is ultimately responsible for the nerve gas attack on British soil.

It will never be absolutely 100% proven because Russia will clearly block any investigation that could provide the evidence to do it, but not only is it clear that Russia did it beyond reasonable doubt (nobody else even has a motive to point the finger at Russia, because we all know that there will be no meaningful consequences for them), but Russia actually wants the world to know they did it, so people in certain positions understand the consequences of crossing them.

It's not even just overseas that some enemies of Putin have a nasty habit of dying younger than expected, it's a somewhat endemic phenomenon in Russia as well.

The problem is for Corbyn most issues with regards to Foregin Policy pretty much ends up being the fault of The West/NATO/The US, as he showed in the recent past pretty clearly himself. https://morningstaronline.co.uk/a-972b-nato-belligerence-endangers-us-all

Where is there any evidence for any of that?

The Russians are denying it and have nothing to gain from this incident. He's a spy they let go, long ago, why would they do this now in such an obvious way?

The toxin can be synthesised easily in a lab anywhere, including 15 minutes away from the poisoning, in Portland Down.

The Russians are asking for a sample of the toxin so they can test it themselves, which they are apparently allowed under international law, as well as it just being common sense. May refused to answer Corbyn as to whether this was being given them.

Corbyn acknowledged that the government may have intelligence that they haven't released, but after Iraq British governments aren't entitled to a free pass on claiming they have evidence foreign states have illegal weapons.

Blair lied, blatantly, that he had evidence that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. The chief British weapon's inspector openly denied this, and then was found dead in the woods outside his house.

Before we tear up our relationship with yet another country we need to get on with, can our government not provide some reasoning as to why? Should it not be the job of the opposition t demand this?

wunferall

Matt_L wrote: »

What on earth has this got to do with this thread??

More so when the Unilever move was mooted over two weeks ago. It's old news - but it seems that the pro-EU pro-remain factions in both the media and on here are running out of (supposedly) anti-Brexit carp to post. A move has been on the cards for ages and wasn't helped by Kraft Heinz's takeover bid last year or from being wooed by Rutte.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/unilever-warned-by-top-shareholders-over-london-exit-bjcrs02ch

The Unilever chief executive, Paul Polman, insisted the decision, which was announced after a year-long review, “has nothing to do with Brexit” and would not result in the loss of any UK jobs. He also said there would be “no change to tax” paid in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/mar/15/unilever-brexit-rotterdam-hq-london

Thrugelmir

Originally Posted by Arklight

I don't care. Labour under Corbyn has moderate centre left policies again that I can actually vote for.

Then ask yourself why Corbyn was never ever made a minister under any previous Labour leader. Given his years of experience and knowledge. Only a matter of time before the game of charades stops. PM's questions the other day was another illustration of just how badly his own backbenchers view him and his antics.

Ballard

Arklight wrote: »

Where is there any evidence for any of that?

The Russians are denying it and have nothing to gain from this incident. He's a spy they let go, long ago, why would they do this now in such an obvious way?

The toxin can be synthesised easily in a lab anywhere, including 15 minutes away from the poisoning, in Portland Down.

I read an interesting piece suggesting that it’s down to the Russian elections. Putin will win but he wants people to vote to give it an air of legitimacy. The Russian press is now very anti-West and this is giving the voters the idea that Russia is under siege.

They could have taken him out in a number of ways but chose an option that made it obvious that it was Russia, knowing that they would get a bad press.

We are unlikely ever to know the truth but I’m inclined to go along with this line.

Rinoa

Arklight wrote: »

The Russians are denying it.....

They denield state doping of their athletes, until it was proven beyond all doubt.

Lornapink

cepheus wrote: »

I've just posted the tax rates. The top rate of income tax under Labour in the 70s was 83% or as much as 98% on certain categories of unearned income. What would happen if Jeremy Corbyn introduced tax at the rates used in the 70s?


https://fullfact.org/economy/are-conservatives-right-about-labours-tax-plans/

Your opinion needs to be supported with evidence. The Labour manifesto wasn't radical by historic standards. You have just got so used to low taxes on earnings and investment since Thatcher.

Labour's answer to every issue is spend more money.

Voters perceive that in reality, regardless of what Fullfact may conclude on one narrow point, that the tone of a Labour Govt will be tax n spend and that in the real world this will indeed place higher taxes on the rump middle class, even if it means by sneaky Brownesque tactics such as NI increase (NI is income tax by another name).

Lornapink

Remainers were bleated about ToyrRus closing being a consequence of Brexit.


Yesterday Morrison's announced a nice jump in profits. Presumably nothing to do with Brexit?