Tories are lying *******s (warning may contain traces of Tory)

[heretoday]

I just cannot believe that this oaf has managed to fool his way to the top job. He doesn't appear to have any hard policies at all.

Even Thatcher had the facts at her fingertips and the plans all costed out. With Johnson it's vague supposition delivered with a public schoolboy's bumbling smirk.

Manna for the adoring media of course who, in my view, have behaved appallingly since this Brexit business began.

Instead of fully informing and educating us about the various options on offer - Norway Plus, Canada Plus, EFTA etc - it's all "Ooh will Theresa last till next week?" or "Has Boris snorted coke?" In other words, they've treated the situation like a soap opera instead of the deadly serious thing that it is.

[Dalianwanda]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There's a website called "they work for you" where you can check on any of them

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24...e_border/votes

Another Angry Voice on facebook making exactly the same point. They are all ****s.

[lapsedhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I just cannot believe that this oaf has managed to fool his way to the top job. He doesn't appear to have any hard policies at all.

He's not quite in the top job yet. There's just a chance that if he turns up for the televised debate on Sunday (big if) he could get skewered by Gove and Stewart.

[James310]

I read something along the lines as Boris will be more like the Chairman than the Chief Executive, so he will not really be in charge of much actual day to day management of things but will direct from a high level and be the public face of the Government, but not actually do that much!

As an aside I don't like him as he is a buffoon, but don't underestimate him either. He is obviously intelligent but seems to have little common sense. I predict he will not last long if elected to be PM, but I never thought Trump would see out the full term of his presidency but he looks like he will.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I read something along the lines as Boris will be more like the Chairman than the Chief Executive, so he will not really be in charge of much actual day to day management of things but will direct from a high level and be the public face of the Government, but not actually do that much!

As an aside I don't like him as he is a buffoon, but don't underestimate him either. He is obviously intelligent but seems to have little common sense. I predict he will not last long if elected to be PM, but I never thought Trump would see out the full term of his presidency but he looks like he will.

Since when was being Prime Minister similar to chairman. Hell, if I called a meeting I would be chairman.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Since when was being Prime Minister similar to chairman. Hell, if I called a meeting I would be chairman.

It's the same delusion the Republicans sold themselves about Trumpy: don't worry, it'll be ok there'll be sensible folk round about him. Hmmmm.

The good news is the next PM puts themselves straight into the same corner May couldn't get out of. Unless the ERG nutters come on side just because its Boris then he is just as ****ed as she was.

Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

[Fife-Hibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's not quite in the top job yet. There's just a chance that if he turns up for the televised debate on Sunday (big if) he could get skewered by Gove and Stewart.

He won't turn up. He won't need to turn up.

[lapsedhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He won't turn up. He won't need to turn up.

Hasn't ruled it out. Might not want to be perceived as frit. What would Churchill have done in the circumstances?

[Ozyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He won't turn up. He won't need to turn up.

Not turning up could be damaging for when he gets to the final two and party members are voting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fife-Hibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not turning up could be damaging for when he gets to the final two and party members are voting.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That'll have nothing to do with anything he could say on stage and everything to do with backroom deals including tax cuts and hedge fund policies.

[Hibernia&Alba]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It’s not really tho. The concept is pretty simple, put a tax too high and people do all they can to avoid it. Put it at a ‘sensible’ level and it’s not worth the effort so it’s paid.

I reckon IHT is a great example where the tax is too high so huge effort goes into avoiding it. Simplify and lower and the tax take would go up.

There is also plenty of examples of flat rate taxes raising more money than complex high tariffs. Georgia for example enacted a huge tax reform in the early 2000’s that removed taxes, lowered others and essentially simplified the whole system...it resulted in a doubling of revenue within 5 years.

BoJo’s proposal is crude and far too simplistic of course but hey what’s new when it comes to that dude...

Didn't Georgia have to be bailed out by the federal government under Obama, when its tax 'reforms' went tits up and basic public services had to be slashed? I remember watching a report on The Young Turks about slashing taxes and its consequences, and I'm sure the state in question was Georgia! That's the state the Republican Governor was also responsible for overseeing his own re-election, refused to recuse himself, scrubbed hundreds of thousands of people in Democratic areas from the electoral rolls and won by a tiny margin? Brian Kemp.

Those who defend this idea of lower taxes increasing revenue never tell us the optimum rate. As I said previously, if taxes are reduced to zero, income is zero; so what is the tax rate, as a percentage, which maximises income?

Also, flat rate taxation is totally regressive and massively favours the wealthiest, so what happens to the cherished equality of opportunity when ever more wealth, and by extension, power, is concentrated in ever fewer hands? I don't see how it is compatible with a thriving democracy, which requires some degree of equality. How does that sit with income maximisation? We have two issues running parallel. And I would add it's a situation we are once again seeing played out in Britain, where the leading contender for prime minister is yet another Old Etonian. A tiny number of very wealthy hereditary millionaires form the political establishment, which undermines democracy. 99.999 per cent of us didn't attend Eton, but we spend much of our lives governed by them and their interests.

[Hibernia&Alba]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Johnson 114
Hunt 43
Gove 27
Javid 23
Raab 27
Hancock 20
Stewart 19
Harper 10
McVey 9
Leadsom 11


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What collection of amoral/immoral reprobates, careerists and cowards. I despise them all.

[heretoday]

I'm beginning to think he's a Russian plant who's fooled us all brilliantly. The clue is in the name - Boris. It's not rocket science.

[Ozyhibby]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As soon as someone comes along you think might have a bit of humanity about them something like this reminds us they're all just self serving, evil Tory *******s.

I agree, but it will be the same self serving evil Tory *******s that will be doing the voting. RS has built up a fair bit of momentum and is neck and neck with BJ in polls from the Tory members. I can see him getting into the final two.

[Ozyhibby]

Hancock pulling out tomorrow. A help for Stewart likely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I just cannot believe that this oaf has managed to fool his way to the top job. He doesn't appear to have any hard policies at all.

Even Thatcher had the facts at her fingertips and the plans all costed out. With Johnson it's vague supposition delivered with a public schoolboy's bumbling smirk.

Manna for the adoring media of course who, in my view, have behaved appallingly since this Brexit business began.

Instead of fully informing and educating us about the various options on offer - Norway Plus, Canada Plus, EFTA etc - it's all "Ooh will Theresa last till next week?" or "Has Boris snorted coke?" In other words, they've treated the situation like a soap opera instead of the deadly serious thing that it is.

That's because it suits the press to do so.

[Moulin Yarns]

Then there were six

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48631706

[RyeSloan]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Didn't Georgia have to be bailed out by the federal government under Obama, when its tax 'reforms' went tits up and basic public services had to be slashed? I remember watching a report on The Young Turks about slashing taxes and its consequences, and I'm sure the state in question was Georgia! That's the state the Republican Governor was also responsible for overseeing his own re-election, refused to recuse himself, scrubbed hundreds of thousands of people in Democratic areas from the electoral rolls and won by a tiny margin? Brian Kemp.

Those who defend this idea of lower taxes increasing revenue never tell us the optimum rate. As I said previously, if taxes are reduced to zero, income is zero; so what is the tax rate, as a percentage, which maximises income?

Also, flat rate taxation is totally regressive and massively favours the wealthiest, so what happens to the cherished equality of opportunity when ever more wealth, and by extension, power, is concentrated in ever fewer hands? I don't see how it is compatible with a thriving democracy, which requires some degree of equality. How does that sit with income maximisation? We have two issues running parallel. And I would add it's a situation we are once again seeing played out in Britain, where the leading contender for prime minister is yet another Old Etonian. A tiny number of very wealthy hereditary millionaires form the political establishment, which undermines democracy. 99.999 per cent of us didn't attend Eton, but we spend much of our lives governed by them and their interests.

Urmmm the Country of Georgia not the state!

As for the comment about those suggesting lower taxes never state what level the optimum rate is...well the flip side to that is the ‘little bit more’ never seems to be enough so what about the flip side that if higher taxes are good that must mean 100% tax rate is the ultimate outcome of that....you can’t make the rather outlandish alignment to a zero tax rate as an argument if you can’t see the opposite can be called straight back at it.

As for the optimum rate of any tax, all depends on the taxes being levelled. No one is suggesting there is a magic number for all taxes and all situations. That would be daft.

All I was saying is that there is plenty of evidence that simplified and flatter tax rates can, and have, increased revenue where they have been applied correctly.

That doesn’t even begin to remotely suggest a reversion to zero rates or does it mean the removal of progressive levels where they are desirable.

And when you think about it is actually supporting higher levels of overall taxation, just in a more effective and easier manner. And further more it’s a concept that can result in those that can currently afford to pay to avoid (those pesky rich eton types) being brought back into paying the tax.

[Hibernia&Alba]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Urmmm the Country of Georgia not the state!

As for the comment about those suggesting lower taxes never state what level the optimum rate is...well the flip side to that is the ‘little bit more’ never seems to be enough so what about the flip side that if higher taxes are good that must mean 100% tax rate is the ultimate outcome of that....you can’t make the rather outlandish alignment to a zero tax rate as an argument if you can’t see the opposite can be called straight back at it.

As for the optimum rate of any tax, all depends on the taxes being levelled. No one is suggesting there is a magic number for all taxes and all situations. That would be daft.

All I was saying is that there is plenty of evidence that simplified and flatter tax rates can, and have, increased revenue where they have been applied correctly.

That doesn’t even begin to remotely suggest a reversion to zero rates or does it mean the removal of progressive levels where they are desirable.

And when you think about it is actually supporting higher levels of overall taxation, just in a more effective and easier manner. And further more it’s a concept that can result in those that can currently afford to pay to avoid (those pesky rich eton types) being brought back into paying the tax.

My apologies, I thought you meant the state of Georgia, as I know that was used as a poster child for right wingers in the States. The only problem was it all collapsed in on itself and had to be saved from bankruptcy, much like when the same experiment was tried in Chile under Pinochet. I believe Kansas went down the same route, with the same result.

But again, there are two issues. What is this magic tax rate which optimises revenue, and, is it even desirable, given the consequences on the social fabric of a country? For sake of argument, let's say a very low tax rate does increase revenue; well, is revenue the only thing we should be concerned with? What about the other consequences of very unequal societies in terms of social cohesion and social mobility? Great concentrations of wealth and power inevitably lead to plutarchy, and how does that sit with a functioning democracy? Democracy is egalitarian: you get one vote, whether a prince or a pauper. Great inequality puts the democratic process under strain, as positions of influence will inevitably be filled by the rich and powerful. I would say progressive taxation is always preferable in terms of both raising revenue and social desirability. The Scandinavians and Germans seem to get it right, and I think we should be looking more towards their model, not the American model.

We've had four decades of this neoliberal/supply side nonsense in the UK and look where it's gotten us: food banks, a million people waiting for social housing, increased homelessness, household debt higher than ever, student debt, falling social mobility, to name just a few consequences. It's all ideological: policy changes always benefit some and harm others; the question is who benefits and who loses?

Milton Friedman and his pals offered a form of alchemy: by reducing taxes, the tax revenue increases. By having less of something, you actually have more. As I said, it's Orwellian in its dishonesty. Also it has no interest in the wider consequences of such changes and only thinks about the bottom line. I suppose this is natural for economists, but the world isn't about economics alone.

[lapsedhibee]

Bojoke skips Sunday's debate because there are too many people in it. Running scared of being picked apart by Stewart, more like, and hoping he gets knocked out before Tuesday. Such a transparent liar.

[Moulin Yarns]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Bojoke skips Sunday's debate because there are too many people in it. Running scared of being picked apart by Stewart, more like, and hoping he gets knocked out before Tuesday. Such a transparent liar.

Funny how different people see things. I realise the Sunday debate is different, but I think he has a point. I think he might struggle to get many more supporters among the party MPs.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48638758

[Hibernia&Alba]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Bojoke skips Sunday's debate because there are too many people in it. Running scared of being picked apart by Stewart, more like, and hoping he gets knocked out before Tuesday. Such a transparent liar.

He's a fat fool. Had daddy not had the money to pack him off to Eton, he'd be unemployable.

[lapsedhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's a fat fool. Had daddy not had the money to pack him off to Eton, he'd be unemployable.

How can you say he's a fool when this very day he's solved Brexit. Just drop the backstop and replace it with alternative arrangements! What a guy!

[Hibernia&Alba]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How can you say he's a fool when this very day he's solved Brexit. Just drop the backstop and replace it with alternative arrangements! What a guy!

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

He's a fat fool. Had daddy not had the money to pack him off to Eton, he'd be unemployable.

He won a scholarship to Eton. If that paid for all the fees I am not sure.

[Hibrandenburg]

Feel the love!A poem published by Boris Johnson when he was editor of Spectator magazine.

The Scotch - what a verminous race!

Canny, pushy, chippy, they're all over the place.

Battening off us with false bonhomie;

Polluting our stock, undermining our economy.

Down with sandy hair and knobbly knees!

Suppress the tartan dwarves and the Wee Frees!

Ban the kilt, the skean-dhu and the sporran

As provocatively, offensively foreign!

It's time Hadrian's Wall was refortified

To pen them in a ghetto on the other side.

I would go further. The nation

Deserves not merely isolation

But comprehensive extermination.

We must not flinch from a solution.

[Just Alf]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Feel the love!A poem published by Boris Johnson when he was editor of Spectator magazine.

The Scotch - what a verminous race!

Canny, pushy, chippy, they're all over the place.

Battening off us with false bonhomie;

Polluting our stock, undermining our economy.

Down with sandy hair and knobbly knees!

Suppress the tartan dwarves and the Wee Frees!

Ban the kilt, the skean-dhu and the sporran

As provocatively, offensively foreign!

It's time Hadrian's Wall was refortified

To pen them in a ghetto on the other side.

I would go further. The nation

Deserves not merely isolation

But comprehensive extermination.

We must not flinch from a solution.

Thought this was a wind up!

Found that he did publish it but its not 100% clear he was the author, either way he was involved.. Oh what a wonderful PM he'll make.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[James310]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thought this was a wind up!

Found that he did publish it but its not 100% clear he was the author, either way he was involved.. Oh what a wonderful PM he'll make.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

He was not the author but he did publish it, which is a horrendous thing to do. Not as bad a writing it, but comes close.

Boris is a gift for the SNP, I wonder if they can take advantage.

[Smartie]

I saw this earlier.

It beggars belief that people see this guy and think he's Prime Minister material.