The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

[Finnaldo]

Starmer bypassing the VONC and going on the attack regarding the NHS is an interesting tactic, clearly blindsided Johnson who was clearly briefed for mo confidence questions and he looked utterly baffled, makes Labour look like they want to talk about ‘on-the-ground’ issues as well.

[The whole world smiles]

1 hour ago, Finnaldo said:

Starmer bypassing the VONC and going on the attack regarding the NHS is an interesting tactic, clearly blindsided Johnson who was clearly briefed for mo confidence questions and he looked utterly baffled, makes Labour look like they want to talk about ‘on-the-ground’ issues as well.

It's highly unlikely that he will be pm at the next election and its in labour's interest to keep him in post as long as possible. So good tactic to attack 12 years of tory rule rather than him personally. 

[Fazzer 7]

So what is going on here? Javid couldn’t or wouldn’t give a tangible answer! 

 

[fox_up_north]

Back benchers will have their knives out now. There'll be far fewer pally "can my right honourable friend say thank you to this fireman saving a cat up a tree" questions. Can see them wanting to get the cabinet wounded and start making their own ways forward. 

[Corky]

The press, journalists and other party MPs need to get the Election manifesto, see what has and hasn't been done and badger the Tories over it if this "delivering for the people" rhetoric carries on.

 

Nothing will change over the Partygate stuff now, but whether the words are empty or not might.

[st albans fox]

3 hours ago, Finnaldo said:

Starmer bypassing the VONC and going on the attack regarding the NHS is an interesting tactic, clearly blindsided Johnson who was clearly briefed for mo confidence questions and he looked utterly baffled, makes Labour look like they want to talk about ‘on-the-ground’ issues as well.

Starmer has to be careful that he doesn’t make the PM’s problems into a party issue (pardon the pun).  Tory backbenchers will revert to nanny if asked to choose between starmer and Johnson. He is doing the right thing by allowing the tories to stew in their own juices and not raising the stakes from the Labour side. 

[Dunge]

16 minutes ago, Corky said:

The press, journalists and other party MPs need to get the Election manifesto, see what has and hasn't been done and badger the Tories over it if this "delivering for the people" rhetoric carries on.

 

Nothing will change over the Partygate stuff now, but whether the words are empty or not might.

The obvious answer to that though would be that he’s had a pandemic and a European land war to deal with. As excuses go for not fulfilling your election promises, they’re both pretty strong.

 

To me, the changing of parliamentary standards, crackdown on the right to protest, and lying to parliament angles are more the way to go. I was willing to give the attempted prorogation something of a pass due to what was going on in parliament with the Brexit deadlock situation. These latest things do not get that pass.

 

Plus his government’s treatment of the BBC and Channel 4 for me. I won’t be easily forgiving them for that.

[HighPeakFox]

12 hours ago, st albans fox said:

 

The real thickos way outnumber the deliberately ignorant ….   I would class the basically ignorant in with the real thickos ……

Listen, you might be right, but if people are genuinely thick, it cannot be helped. Wilful ignorance is what binds those from privilege with those that have the least. 

[Parafox]

3 hours ago, Fazzer 7 said:

So what is going on here? Javid couldn’t or wouldn’t give a tangible answer! 

 

My guess is, someone, individual or corporate, is going to be making money out of this position and he knows it. Slimy little man.

[Foxdiamond]

9 hours ago, Dunge said:

I don’t think this line will work again, at least not to anywhere near the same degree. Labour has changed significantly since the last election. It can be argued that Starmer is uninspiring, but they’re going to have a hard time convincing people they should fear him.

What always concerns me is that too many people are not engaged with politics at all. Most I think are the very people who would benefit from voting Labour but don't bother voting at all. The Tories get their voters out. 

[weller54]

30 minutes ago, Parafox said:

My guess is, someone, individual or corporate, is going to be making money out of this position and he knows it. Slimy little man.

🤢🤮.... Sleazeball.

Edited 8 June 2022 by weller54

[Daggers]

1 hour ago, weller54 said:

🤢🤮.... Sleazeball.

Parafox is currently unavailable for comment but would no doubt reject such a characterisation of him.

[foxile5]

From each according to their worth; to each according to their need. 

 

This really shouldn't be a difficult discussion. 

[ozleicester]

There continues a belief that one persons work week is worth more than anothers.

 

Remember when we all decided that nurses, rubbish collectors and retail workers were actually more valuable than bankers etc.

 

Still the pay disparity is horrific, plus the greedy bastards complain about paying more tax.

[Jon the Hat]

4 hours ago, ozleicester said:

There continues a belief that one persons work week is worth more than anothers.

 

Remember when we all decided that nurses, rubbish collectors and retail workers were actually more valuable than bankers etc.

 

Still the pay disparity is horrific, plus the greedy bastards complain about paying more tax.

 

Of course one persons work week is worth more than another's.  It is the foundation of everything in society.  You could rightly argue that things get skewed and the market is far from perfect, but the principle seems pretty sound to me.

 

Whether having a high tax rate actually earns more tax is the question, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest in some cases it doesn't.

[Foxdiamond]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

 

Of course one persons work week is worth more than another's.  It is the foundation of everything in society.  You could rightly argue that things get skewed and the market is far from perfect, but the principle seems pretty sound to me.

 

Whether having a high tax rate actually earns more tax is the question, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest in some cases it doesn't.

I wouldn't mind if some of the really well off were paying their fair share of tax. We all know that tax avoidance is not illegal but it does mean eye watering amounts of money lost to the exchequer. 

[ozleicester]

2 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

 

Of course one persons work week is worth more than another's.  It is the foundation of everything in society.  You could rightly argue that things get skewed and the market is far from perfect, but the principle seems pretty sound to me.

 

Whether having a high tax rate actually earns more tax is the question, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest in some cases it doesn't.

 Bollocks...Ask anyone in hospital who they think is worth more, a banker or a nurse. It is the foundation of a corrupted society.  As somone,  Im going to guess,  earning a shitload more than a nurse, ive no doubt it sounds good to you.

Of course a higher tax rate results in greater revenues..unless the corrupt avoid tax.

Add to that the thoroughly disproven theory that tax cuts for the rich...trickle down. We all know they pocket it, whereas cutting for the poor means it gets spent and drives the economy.



 

[Jon the Hat]

30 minutes ago, ozleicester said:

 Bollocks...Ask anyone in hospital who they think is worth more, a banker or a nurse. It is the foundation of a corrupted society.  As somone,  Im going to guess,  earning a shitload more than a nurse, ive no doubt it sounds good to you.

Of course a higher tax rate results in greater revenues..unless the corrupt avoid tax.

Add to that the thoroughly disproven theory that tax cuts for the rich...trickle down. We all know they pocket it, whereas cutting for the poor means it gets spent and drives the economy.

What about a Surgeon who is about to save their life or a nurse?  I can confirm that a consultant surgeon might well earn well over 100k, and the same if not more from private work.  They also likely invested a lot more time and effort in getting to where they are professionally.  Would enough people bother if it wasn't rewarded?  Meanwhile most people also would quite like their pension to be well managed and grow so they can have a comfortable retirement.\

 

In this world the rich don't have to stay and pay their taxes here, they can and do move elsewhere.  There is a point at which a higher tax rate doesn't always result in a higher tax revenues, as Scotland has discovered over the past few years.  It isn't just a tap which runs forever.

 

Trickle down was never a serious theory, and is only raised by people like your good self in discussions like this one.

[Foxdiamond]

7 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

What about a Surgeon who is about to save their life or a nurse?  I can confirm that a consultant surgeon might well earn well over 100k, and the same if not more from private work.  They also likely invested a lot more time and effort in getting to where they are professionally.  Would enough people bother if it wasn't rewarded?  Meanwhile most people also would quite like their pension to be well managed and grow so they can have a comfortable retirement.\

 

In this world the rich don't have to stay and pay their taxes here, they can and do move elsewhere.  There is a point at which a higher tax rate doesn't always result in a higher tax revenues, as Scotland has discovered over the past few years.  It isn't just a tap which runs forever.

 

Trickle down was never a serious theory, and is only raised by people like your good self in discussions like this one.

I might be wrong but I thought it was Tories who used to quote about trickle down. Not arguing that well qualified professionals should earn a good living. There is a point where you wonder how much is required to have a very comfortable lifestyle and still look after their own families. The pandemic showed us that the carer or supermarket worker is vital to us all. 

[foxes1988]

9 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

I might be wrong but I thought it was Tories who used to quote about trickle down. Not arguing that well qualified professionals should earn a good living. There is a point where you wonder how much is required to have a very comfortable lifestyle and still look after their own families. The pandemic showed us that the carer or supermarket worker is vital to us all. 

I think the problem is not so much the people earning lots at the top the problem is the deteriorating standards of living towards the bottom end.  If Nurses and carers could live comfortably with what they earned then it would be easier to swallow and accept it 

 

This is all relative of course as obviously in comparison to the developing world even people at the bottom end in the UK do tend to live 'comfortably'

[ozleicester]

20 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

What about a Surgeon who is about to save their life or a nurse?  I can confirm that a consultant surgeon might well earn well over 100k, and the same if not more from private work.  They also likely invested a lot more time and effort in getting to where they are professionally.  Would enough people bother if it wasn't rewarded?  Meanwhile most people also would quite like their pension to be well managed and grow so they can have a comfortable retirement.\

 

In this world the rich don't have to stay and pay their taxes here, they can and do move elsewhere.  There is a point at which a higher tax rate doesn't always result in a higher tax revenues, as Scotland has discovered over the past few years.  It isn't just a tap which runs forever.

 

Trickle down was never a serious theory, and is only raised by people like your good self in discussions like this one.

So surgeons only do it for the money?

I tend to think that people would do they best they could even if they werent rewarded by obscene amounts of cash.  As demonstrated by nurses.

trickle wasnt serious...????????...
From the Financial Times 2011... 
Trickle-down theory is dead. The belief fostered by Ronald Reagan in the US and Margaret Thatcher in the UK in the 1980s, that if the rich got richer their income and wealth would trickle down the income scale so that a rising tide lifted all the boats, has had the last rites pronounced on it – by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

 

 

 

[Foxdiamond]

12 minutes ago, foxes1988 said:

I think the problem is not so much the people earning lots at the top the problem is the deteriorating standards of living towards the bottom end.  If Nurses and carers could live comfortably with what they earned then it would be easier to swallow and accept it 

 

This is all relative of course as obviously in comparison to the developing world even people at the bottom end in the UK do tend to live 'comfortably'

Housing costs are too high for many.  

[ozleicester]

28 minutes ago, foxes1988 said:

I think the problem is not so much the people earning lots at the top the problem is the deteriorating standards of living towards the bottom end.  If Nurses and carers could live comfortably with what they earned then it would be easier to swallow and accept it 

 

This is all relative of course as obviously in comparison to the developing world even people at the bottom end in the UK do tend to live 'comfortably'

[Bellend Sebastian]

It's really hard to know who to trust sometimes e.g. this - Nadine Dorries or literally anybody else

 

https://bylinetimes.com/2022/06/09/one-big-bag-of-lies-says-reality-show-family-nadine-dorries-accused-of-being-paid-actors/

[Foxdiamond]

42 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

It's really hard to know who to trust sometimes e.g. this - Nadine Dorries or literally anybody else

 

https://bylinetimes.com/2022/06/09/one-big-bag-of-lies-says-reality-show-family-nadine-dorries-accused-of-being-paid-actors/

If you ever find yourself agreeing with Dorries then safe to assume you are wrong.