Brexit the economy and house prices part 7: Brexit Harder

Moby

gfplux wrote: »

Good news for top rate tax payers. Boris not only promising huge amounts for the NHS but a major cut in income tax for high earners.
This from Politici.eu daily email this morning.

QUOTE
How to spend £10 billion: The other big news of the morning is Boris Johnson’s first big ticket policy announcement of the campaign. The Daily Telegraph gets the scoop (well, it pays Boris the usual £5,200 fee for his weekly column) and splashes the story across the front page — a plan to raise the higher rate income tax threshold from £50,000 to a whopping £80,000. These figures do not actually appear in the column itself, which says only that “we should be raising thresholds of income tax” to “help the huge numbers that have been captured in the higher rate by fiscal drag.” But they’ve clearly been briefed to the Telegraph, which calculates the pledge represents a massive tax cut of £1,000-a-year for people earning £60,000 or more, costing the Treasury a cool £9.6 billion a year. The cash would apparently be raised from the no-deal “headroom” built up in the budget by Chancellor Philip Hammond — it’s a good job we won’t be needing that for anything else, then.
END QUOTE

He says he did not lie about the NHS money so Boris knows where the money tree is growing. Thank you Boris.

It's all good fun isn't it.

Johnson is going for the big tax cuts for high earners, Hunt for slashing corporation tax and Raab for slashing the basic rate. Gove wants to replace VAT ( apparently because it’s a “european” type tax) and replace it with a Sales Tax which is far less efficient and effective. There doesn’t seem to be much explanation of how these will be paid for other than Johnson saying he would use some of the fiscal headroom for a no deal Brexit in current expenditure plans ( while adopting a policy position which makes no deal more likely).


Some are also the playing the social reactionary card with Hunt’s views on abortion and McVey with her support for homophobes.


All are, unsurprisingly, contemptuous of any Irish or Scottish concerns which don’t accord with their “UK First” approach.


So far they seem to have nothing to say on the social care crisis, post Brexit economic and industrial policy, the future of the union, climate change and other major immediate issues. I don't think I've ever seen politics in this country at such a nadir!

buglawton

gfplux wrote: »

Good news for top rate tax payers. Boris not only promising huge amounts for the NHS but a major cut in income tax for high earners.
This from Politici.eu daily email this morning.

QUOTE
How to spend £10 billion: The other big news of the morning is Boris Johnson’s first big ticket policy announcement of the campaign. The Daily Telegraph gets the scoop (well, it pays Boris the usual £5,200 fee for his weekly column) and splashes the story across the front page — a plan to raise the higher rate income tax threshold from £50,000 to a whopping £80,000. These figures do not actually appear in the column itself, which says only that “we should be raising thresholds of income tax” to “help the huge numbers that have been captured in the higher rate by fiscal drag.” But they’ve clearly been briefed to the Telegraph, which calculates the pledge represents a massive tax cut of £1,000-a-year for people earning £60,000 or more, costing the Treasury a cool £9.6 billion a year. The cash would apparently be raised from the no-deal “headroom” built up in the budget by Chancellor Philip Hammond — it’s a good job we won’t be needing that for anything else, then.
END QUOTE

He says he did not lie about the NHS money so Boris knows where the money tree is growing. Thank you Boris.

Where exactly is that quote from or did you pick a selection and bundle them together yourself?

As you didn't mention that the funding will come from increased NI and part of the don't-pay-£39BN-ransom dividend.

shaggydoo

Arklight wrote: »

Lib Dems overrated.

I don't think so. I'd have voted Labour in Peterborough to keep the Brexit Party out, but I fully intend to vote Lib Dem at the next GE. In all truthfulness, Labour should have done so much better. If they had a different leader they probably would be doing do much better. JC is "not very good".

shaggydoo

gfplux wrote: »

Many homeowners could also find themselves in negative equity, unable to sell up and move, further reducing demand in the property market.

Exactly what happened under John Major during the ERM crisis. They have history in this area.

mayonnaise

'Please don't waste this time', Donald Tusk said when the brexit extension was agreed.

Almost 3 months later and they're engrossed in Gove's cocaine parties and Rory's opium pipe.

What a shambles.

shaggydoo

Arklight wrote: »

I don't disagree. I don't have any personal experience of this however as I have never met anyone who claims to be of a left wing persuasion who has mentioned anything like this. Not that they don't exist I'm sure. It's just all the racists I've met identify with, and vote for, right wing parties.

I don't believe you. I was in the Labour Party for 30 years and I know that Labour members are obsessed with Palestine and I heard loads of Anti-Semitic stuff over the years......

Tromking

Nasqueron wrote: »

I wouldn't engage too much with Tromking, I pointed out before that his signature is a deliberate misquoting of what Churchill actually said and the context it was said in, and he's left it in, trying to paint him as being anti-EU

Aww Bless.:)

Nasqueron

Tromking wrote: »

Aww Bless.:)

Do you deny you are deliberately quoting Churchill out of context to pretend he was anti-EU or are you genuinely unaware of the scenario?

The brexit crowd commonly use the below as "proof" of Churchill's anti-EU views and falsely claim it was said in 1953.

We have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated but not absorbed. If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.”

This of course is a complete lie spread by pathetic people trying to paint Churchill as having the opposite views of what he believed in his later life after WW2 as the leave crowd like to portray themselves as patriotic so naturally want to be able to tie themselves in with Churchill.

As you almost certainly full well know, it's a composite of 2 different speeches 14 years apart. The first 4 sentences were written in the US paper Saturday Evening Post 15th February 1930 (long before WW2 of course). The last sentence was an off the cuff remark, part of an argument with de Gaulle in 1944 on the eve of the D-Day landings as a display of loyalty to Franklin Roosevelt. Crucially, they made up over dinner the same evening.

In reality, Churchill was fervently pro European, reflect in his quotes post WW2

Congress of Europe speech, May 1948

“We cannot aim at anything less than the Union of Europe as a whole, and we look forward with confidence to the day when that Union will be achieved.

Parliament speech 11th May 1953

“We shall continue to play a full and active part in plans for the political, military and economic association of Western Europe with the North Atlantic Alliance.”

Personal writings August 1961

“I think that the Government are right to apply to join the European Economic Community...”

As such, either you are deliberately implying Churchill believed the opposite of what he did, or you are foolishly copying text from the internet because you believe it supports your view.

Tromking

Nasqueron wrote: »

Do you deny you are deliberately quoting Churchill out of context to pretend he was anti-EU or are you genuinely unaware of the scenario?

The brexit crowd commonly use the below as "proof" of Churchill's anti-EU views and falsely claim it was said in 1953.

This of course is a complete lie spread by pathetic people trying to paint Churchill as having the opposite views of what he believed in his later life after WW2 as the leave crowd like to portray themselves as patriotic so naturally want to be able to tie themselves in with Churchill.

As you almost certainly full well know, it's a composite of 2 different speeches 14 years apart. The first 4 sentences were written in the US paper Saturday Evening Post 15th February 1930 (long before WW2 of course). The last sentence was an off the cuff remark, part of an argument with de Gaulle in 1944 on the eve of the D-Day landings as a display of loyalty to Franklin Roosevelt. Crucially, they made up over dinner the same evening.
As such, either you are deliberately implying Churchill believed the opposite of what he did, or you are foolishly copying text from the internet because you believe it supports your view.

Are you OK Nasqueron?
I'm fully aware of the history of this Churchill quote, and as I've said before, its the sentiment behind the remark that drew me to it and nothing else. If that bothers you then I'm sorry. You don't get to choose my signature I'm afraid.
I personally don't think Churchill was a European federalist (with Britain as a member anyway) as we would know it today, although its clear in a post war Europe he was an advocate of the closest co-operation between European nation states. When Churchill spoke of a Federal Europe he was usually at pains to say he did'nt want Britain and its Commonwealth to be part of it. Churchill's prime motivation for wanting a federal Europe was as a vehicle to stop Germany and France fighting each other. If anything Churchill still had an old fashioned view that Britain and its Commonwealth (Empire) differentiated us from the rest of Europe.
If anyone is appending a wrongful bias on Churchill's comments on European post war co-operation its not me.

Arklight

Churchill investigated combining France and England as one country, and making Britain the 51st state of America.

After the war was over he had plenty of time to plan these schemes while his apologists attempted to shovel over his history of gleefully celebrating Indians starving to death, and sending in the troops to kill Welsh miners.

What Churchill's quixotic opinions on abroad has to do with Britain in 2019 evades me, anyway.