Join the Labour Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Again, above and beyond the call of duty.rjsterry wrote:mamba80 wrote:
You need to get your story straight; is it FN, AfD or UKIP? You also need to clarify whether you mean right wing economically or socially. They might all want to control immigration (even Labour have committed to end FoM to claw back the support they lost to UKIP), but there are big differences. FN's manifesto (ironically on my ISP's blocked list) is slightly more carefully worded than AfD to give the impression of mainstream appeal, but they are just the same bunch of France for the French isolationists that they have always been. I'm pretty sure there wasn't anything in the Conservative manifesto about promoting the birth rate (including outlawing same-sex marriage and surrogacy) of the native population to remove the need for migrant labour, or the introduction of an official version of the national history to be taught in schools.
Unfortunately it appears that mamba hasn't read anything that you posted earlier. I think the enormous chip on his shoulder about the Tories blocked his vision
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
rjsterry wrote:mamba80 wrote:
You need to get your story straight; is it FN, AfD or UKIP? You also need to clarify whether you mean right wing economically or socially. They might all want to control immigration (even Labour have committed to end FoM to claw back the support they lost to UKIP), but there are big differences. FN's manifesto (ironically on my ISP's blocked list) is slightly more carefully worded than AfD to give the impression of mainstream appeal, but they are just the same bunch of France for the French isolationists that they have always been. I'm pretty sure there wasn't anything in the Conservative manifesto about promoting the birth rate (including outlawing same-sex marriage and surrogacy) of the native population to remove the need for migrant labour, or the introduction of an official version of the national history to be taught in schools.
this is what i original wrote... keep up!
mamba80 wrote:
You need realise that todays Labour party would be a middle of the road party in most of europe and the Tories more in common with FN in france or AFD in Germany.
mentioned both and "more in common"... not the same.... which is something you ve failed to grasp.
that tory voters see their party as more extreme than UKIP says it all really.
as for same sex marriage etc... DUP anyone? who the tories are using to keep them in power...
judge a fellow on the company he keeps eh!0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
I don't know what you are on about.Rick Chasey wrote:Where does the the “citizens of nowhere” speech come on the spectrum?
Which bit?
Last year May & Rudd came out with some pretty nasty stuff on immigration.
May’s just awful “citizens of the world are citizens of nowhere” speech, as well as Rudd’s “list all foreigners working at companies”.
Sounds pretty far right on the spectrum to me.
May has a habit of unnecessarily creating divisive, narrowly defined ideas of identity, which only seem to serve the purpose of creating divisions between identity groups, which never leads to more positive outcomes.
Rudd is the same but worse. What was she thinking about those lists????0 -
The only thing I can see that is similar between AfD, FN and our Conservative party is a wish to control immigration to varying degrees, something that they also share with Labour, as I pointed out. The Conservatives and Labour also both advocate controlling immigration on the basis of skills needs, albeit expressed in different ways.
On some economic policy the Conservatives are indeed to the right of UKIP, as are the LibDems. UKIP's economic policy (like FN) is pretty hard left, which is why they managed to entice so many Labour voters.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry wrote:The only thing I can see that is similar between AfD, FN and our Conservative party is a wish to control immigration to varying degrees, something that they also share with Labour, as I pointed out. The Conservatives and Labour also both advocate controlling immigration on the basis of skills needs, albeit expressed in different ways.
On some economic policy the Conservatives are indeed to the right of UKIP, as are the LibDems. UKIP's economic policy (like FN) is pretty hard left, which is why they managed to entice so many Labour voters.
Tories are a very broad spectrum.
On the ven diagram there is definite overlap.
The whiggish metropolitan, internationalist side is in regression and the parochial Tories are in the ascendency. That side has a lot of overlap with UKIP etc.0 -
Rick Chasey wrote:rjsterry wrote:The only thing I can see that is similar between AfD, FN and our Conservative party is a wish to control immigration to varying degrees, something that they also share with Labour, as I pointed out. The Conservatives and Labour also both advocate controlling immigration on the basis of skills needs, albeit expressed in different ways.
On some economic policy the Conservatives are indeed to the right of UKIP, as are the LibDems. UKIP's economic policy (like FN) is pretty hard left, which is why they managed to entice so many Labour voters.
Tories are a very broad spectrum.
On the ven diagram there is definite overlap.
The whiggish metropolitan, internationalist side is in regression and the parochial Tories are in the ascendency. That side has a lot of overlap with UKIP etc.
In a multi party system our parliament would look much like the rest of Europe. As it is the far right camp out on the Tory back benches and the far left are seizing the Labour Party nest.0 -
Far too political0
-
Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:rjsterry wrote:The only thing I can see that is similar between AfD, FN and our Conservative party is a wish to control immigration to varying degrees, something that they also share with Labour, as I pointed out. The Conservatives and Labour also both advocate controlling immigration on the basis of skills needs, albeit expressed in different ways.
On some economic policy the Conservatives are indeed to the right of UKIP, as are the LibDems. UKIP's economic policy (like FN) is pretty hard left, which is why they managed to entice so many Labour voters.
Tories are a very broad spectrum.
On the ven diagram there is definite overlap.
The whiggish metropolitan, internationalist side is in regression and the parochial Tories are in the ascendency. That side has a lot of overlap with UKIP etc.
In a multi party system our parliament would look much like the rest of Europe. As it is the far right camp out on the Tory back benches and the far left are seizing the Labour Party nest.
May is pretty far right.0 -
Possibly I'm being too generous, but I did feel that - particularly with Rudd's statement, which she rolled back on almost immediately - these were slightly desperate attempts to make sure they kept the more right wing voters from defecting to UKIP. More of a grubby grab for votes than something they really believed in. Still stinks, though.Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
I don't know what you are on about.Rick Chasey wrote:Where does the the “citizens of nowhere” speech come on the spectrum?
Which bit?
Last year May & Rudd came out with some pretty nasty stuff on immigration.
May’s just awful “citizens of the world are citizens of nowhere” speech, as well as Rudd’s “list all foreigners working at companies”.
Sounds pretty far right on the spectrum to me.
May has a habit of unnecessarily creating divisive, narrowly defined ideas of identity, which only seem to serve the purpose of creating divisions between identity groups, which never leads to more positive outcomes.
Rudd is the same but worse. What was she thinking about those lists????1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
rjsterry wrote:The only thing I can see that is similar between AfD, FN and our Conservative party is a wish to control immigration to varying degrees, something that they also share with Labour, as I pointed out. The Conservatives and Labour also both advocate controlling immigration on the basis of skills needs, albeit expressed in different ways.
On some economic policy the Conservatives are indeed to the right of UKIP, as are the LibDems. UKIP's economic policy (like FN) is pretty hard left, which is why they managed to entice so many Labour voters.
You r well out of touch if you think that former Labour supporters voted UKIP for their eco policy lol! i doubt anyone could tell you what it is, i certainly have no idea what their view on the independence of the BoE is for example.
we all know why people vote UKiP and it aint for their eco policy.
i would say that the AFD Tories and FN have similar views on the EU, indeed the Conservatives have a pursued a policy even more extreme than either FN or AFD.0 -
Well, she is as long as it suits her ambition. She's not there out of any conviction: she's the prisoner of her soundbites, unlike Margaret Thatcher, whose soundbites articulated her convictions.Rick Chasey wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:rjsterry wrote:The only thing I can see that is similar between AfD, FN and our Conservative party is a wish to control immigration to varying degrees, something that they also share with Labour, as I pointed out. The Conservatives and Labour also both advocate controlling immigration on the basis of skills needs, albeit expressed in different ways.
On some economic policy the Conservatives are indeed to the right of UKIP, as are the LibDems. UKIP's economic policy (like FN) is pretty hard left, which is why they managed to entice so many Labour voters.
Tories are a very broad spectrum.
On the ven diagram there is definite overlap.
The whiggish metropolitan, internationalist side is in regression and the parochial Tories are in the ascendency. That side has a lot of overlap with UKIP etc.
In a multi party system our parliament would look much like the rest of Europe. As it is the far right camp out on the Tory back benches and the far left are seizing the Labour Party nest.
May is pretty far right.0 -
Tangled Metal wrote:My point mambo was that you and Stevo are insulated from tory and Labour mistakes if in power. Are you on just above minimum wage struggling with a mortgage and all the other household expenses a family containing school age kids? Or are you retired, nearly retired with grown up kids who are fending for themselves? Are you likely to lose your source of income through redundancy of the economy tanks? Or lost my job as a result of 2008. I nearly lost my job in the Blair years because of decisions made causing a bit of a downturn in the sector I was in.
My point is most ppl on here are debating this as a kind of intellectual activity. Vague ideas of thinking of my kids / grand kids future is kind of still divorced from a dangerous government's effects. If your kids end up in trouble I bet you've got enough to help out
This is all a guess and I could be overestimating your financial security. It is how I feel you guys are treating this. A cold, intellectual debate because of your position in life and financially.
If I was to be in your position I'd still think Corbyn is a greater risk than the Tories despite their monumental mess that caused the Brexit situation. Not least because the EU is showing signs of moving towards the idea of controlled migration. Imagine without Brexit we could be a full EU member helping this progress towards a level of control that suits us too.
Certainly not job secure at all, its just that i ve enough to survive and by next year i can draw some pension, so i can live ok and its an option i want to take, just need to be laid off, so i can get my redundancy.
i wouldnt bail out my kids, if they mess up then they can sort themselves out, i would nt see them living on the streets but i am a believer that work pays, the welfare state is for people who cannot help themselves and it should be generous for those that contribute and a safety net for those that have not.
why continue to support a party that has a track record in screwing over the poor? the latest cruel fiasco is UC and housing benefit caps, leading to homelessness and evictions.
As i said earlier, if Eton had caught fire, 70 students died and all the independent schools in the UK needed refurbishment, the money would be found... and by now all the work started if not finished but for poor blacks and immigrants living in council property? they can fcuk off.0 -
mamba80 wrote:rjsterry wrote:The only thing I can see that is similar between AfD, FN and our Conservative party is a wish to control immigration to varying degrees, something that they also share with Labour, as I pointed out. The Conservatives and Labour also both advocate controlling immigration on the basis of skills needs, albeit expressed in different ways.
On some economic policy the Conservatives are indeed to the right of UKIP, as are the LibDems. UKIP's economic policy (like FN) is pretty hard left, which is why they managed to entice so many Labour voters.
You r well out of touch if you think that former Labour supporters voted UKIP for their eco policy lol! i doubt anyone could tell you what it is, i certainly have no idea what their view on the independence of the BoE is for example.
we all know why people vote UKiP and it aint for their eco policy.
i would say that the AFD Tories and FN have similar views on the EU, indeed the Conservatives have a pursued a policy even more extreme than either FN or AFD.
It was sold as "protecting our industries" rather than economic policy.
http://www.ukipdaily.com/a-case-for-protectionism/
I'm sure there's some overlap between eurosceptic Tories and similar eurosceptic views over the channel, but there are plenty of pro-EU Tories, too. Just like Labour.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Pick the most extreme view of any party then argue that's the whole party's view and manifesto. Anyone want to try that with labour? Let's see what happens if you follow that line equally with each party.0
-
Tangled Metal wrote:Pick the most extreme view of any party then argue that's the whole party's view and manifesto. Anyone want to try that with labour? Let's see what happens if you follow that line equally with each party.
...but the Tories have gone way beyond the AFD and FNs EU policy, all 3 want as small a rise in migration as possible. the tories have all but swept up the UKIP vote.. and even their own supporters see them as more extreme.
i agree in the past, i couldn't have said this but today's Tories are hard right wing in the context of European politics.
the Labour party even under Corbyn are a centre left european party, so not extreme at all.0 -
I was talking about how Labour and mamba are kidding themselves if they think their views are mainstream. Don't see how what you are saying is relevant to that.Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
I don't know what you are on about.Rick Chasey wrote:Where does the the “citizens of nowhere” speech come on the spectrum?
Which bit?
Last year May & Rudd came out with some pretty nasty stuff on immigration.
May’s just awful “citizens of the world are citizens of nowhere” speech, as well as Rudd’s “list all foreigners working at companies”.
Sounds pretty far right on the spectrum to me.
May has a habit of unnecessarily creating divisive, narrowly defined ideas of identity, which only seem to serve the purpose of creating divisions between identity groups, which never leads to more positive outcomes.
Rudd is the same but worse. What was she thinking about those lists????
Mind you, I never read the speech you mention either."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
Stevo 666 wrote:What a fantastic idea
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11680016/Why-Tories-should-join-Labour-and-back-Jeremy-Corbyn.html
If this goes viral, for the measly sum of £3 each we can put Jeremy Corbyn in charge of the Labour party, consigning Labour to electoral oblivion for quite some time....
It's been an odd couple of years.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
just when you thought it couldnt get worse for her.......
https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2017/06/28/th ... ptys-pelt/0 -
I'm notRick Chasey wrote:It would make sense you pay more attention to Labour, as a labour party member. "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:How do you know whare we are on the Laffer curve?
https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonw ... inequality
top rate of income tax ideal is apaz 44% according to IMF. So UK is almost bang on.
Lower corp tax is suggested as corps are mobile unless there is international cooperation.0 -
Interesting, although this seems to be above the norm for many countries. The EU average is around 40%, which I feel is about rightRick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:How do you know whare we are on the Laffer curve?
https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonw ... inequality
top rate of income tax ideal is apaz 44% according to IMF. So UK is almost bang on.
Lower corp tax is suggested as corps are mobile unless there is international cooperation.
Also relevant is the threshold for the top rate to kick in, plus any other allowances and deductions etc"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Would be more interesting to compare the tax free date by nationality and average income after all taxes, expenses (health etc) and allowances are accounted for. A lot can be distorted by focussing on income tax only.Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:How do you know whare we are on the Laffer curve?
https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonw ... inequality
top rate of income tax ideal is apaz 44% according to IMF. So UK is almost bang on.
Lower corp tax is suggested as corps are mobile unless there is international cooperation.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Although looking at the IMF they do seem to be getting things wrong pretty regularly, so not sure how much weight we can put on their views.Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:How do you know whare we are on the Laffer curve?
https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonw ... inequality
top rate of income tax ideal is apaz 44% according to IMF. So UK is almost bang on.
Lower corp tax is suggested as corps are mobile unless there is international cooperation.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/03/imf-failing-reform-it"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Interesting, although this seems to be above the norm for many countries. The EU average is around 40%, which I feel is about rightRick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:How do you know whare we are on the Laffer curve?
https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonw ... inequality
top rate of income tax ideal is apaz 44% according to IMF. So UK is almost bang on.
Lower corp tax is suggested as corps are mobile unless there is international cooperation.
Also relevant is the threshold for the top rate to kick in, plus any other allowances and deductions etc
Highest marginal rate in this country is 62%
If you get irregular bonuses this does not taken as PAYE so if your total pay was £110k they would want a cheque for £2,200 or you make a pension contribution of £3,800 and they give you tax back so you have £10k of pension contribution.
I am sure they would collect more if they scrapped it and started 45% tax at £100k0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Although looking at the IMF they do seem to be getting things wrong pretty regularly, so not sure how much weight we can put on their views.Rick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:How do you know whare we are on the Laffer curve?
https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonw ... inequality
top rate of income tax ideal is apaz 44% according to IMF. So UK is almost bang on.
Lower corp tax is suggested as corps are mobile unless there is international cooperation.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/03/imf-failing-reform-it
Forgive me if I gloss over the guardian’s “comment is free” opinion section.
Only good things in that recently has been Toynbee on Quentin Letts, the little sh!t, and Joris Luyendijk.0 -
CiF is not a good source of information to win an argument IMHO. It's often a bunch of people with too high an opinion of themselves with an axe to grind. Plus it's a censored set of comment pieces. By that I mean it's only free of your comments suit guardian editorial view. It tries to pass itself off as impartial too.0
-
@Rick and TM - I picked the Guardian as one article of several on on quick search and to avoid the usual charges of right wing media bias. Here's a few more if you want:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/9600467/Why-the-IMF-has-got-it-so-hopelessly-wrong-on-the-euro-crisis.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/10881540/IMF-accepts-it-was-wrong-on-George-Osbornes-austerity.html
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/uncategorized/imf-forecasts-are-always-wrong-this-spectacularly-so/
https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2014/10/07/1997772/moneysupply-imf-getting-it-wrong-again-and-again/
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=17332
Plenty more if you want to search.
My point stands."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Withdrawal of the personal allowance is a distorting factor and not a good ideal. They may well collect more if they do what you say. Possibly even better if they just scrap the top rate altogether as a lot of the avoidance will go as well - it seemed to work pretty well in years gone by.Surrey Commuter wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:
Interesting, although this seems to be above the norm for many countries. The EU average is around 40%, which I feel is about rightRick Chasey wrote:Stevo 666 wrote:How do you know whare we are on the Laffer curve?
https://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonw ... inequality
top rate of income tax ideal is apaz 44% according to IMF. So UK is almost bang on.
Lower corp tax is suggested as corps are mobile unless there is international cooperation.
Also relevant is the threshold for the top rate to kick in, plus any other allowances and deductions etc
Highest marginal rate in this country is 62%
If you get irregular bonuses this does not taken as PAYE so if your total pay was £110k they would want a cheque for £2,200 or you make a pension contribution of £3,800 and they give you tax back so you have £10k of pension contribution.
I am sure they would collect more if they scrapped it and started 45% tax at £100k"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
