General election 2019

[Ozyhibby]

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

Yet the Corbyn proposals would improve the lives of the vast majority, both personally and as a society. The majority of people would be financially better off, if nothing else. It's baffling to me.

I don’t think they would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibernia&Alba]

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

I don’t think they would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The average salary in the UK is circa £25,000 per year. You don't think most households would be better off financially under Labour, when there will be a guaranteed minimum income, reversal of benefit cuts, an end to benefit sanctions, abolition of zero hour contracts etc etc? Of course such policies would help the majority. Nobody could accuse Corbyn of not helping the poor to average earners.

[Ozyhibby]

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

The average salary in the UK is circa £25,000 per year. You don't think most households would be better off financially under Labour, when there will be a guaranteed minimum income, reversal of benefit cuts, an end to benefit sanctions, abolition of zero hour contracts etc etc? Of course such policies would help the majority. Nobody could accuse Corbyn of not helping the poor to average earners.

If you could make all those things happen in a vacuum then it would may be a good idea but there are knock on effects.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibernia&Alba]

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

If you could make all those things happen in a vacuum then it would may be a good idea but there are knock on effects.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Aye, and what about the 'knock on effects' of more money for the NHS and education, including increased pay for all those staff, plus civil servants, social workers, prison officers, firefighters, police officers etc? Of course the majority will benefit, as will everybody else as those services improve.

I won't even be voting Labour, as I'm a member of the Green Party, but I know which party I would prefer to win the election.

[Fife-Hibee]

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

Your assuming people want that? I don’t think there is much appetite for a return to nationalised industries and socialism in England.

Fixed that for you. Nationalised industry would garner a fair bit of support up here imo.

[Ozyhibby]

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

Aye, and what about the 'knock on effects' of more money for the NHS and education, including increased pay for all those staff, plus civil servants, social workers, prison officers, firefighters, police officers etc? Of course the majority will benefit, as will everybody else as those services improve.

I won't even be voting Labour, as I'm a member of the Green Party, but I know which party I would prefer to win the election.

There has to be a way of paying for all those things as well. I would not say I want Labour to win but I would like them to at least achieve a hung parliament but I think they are too far left to achieve that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fife-Hibee]

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

There has to be a way of paying for all those things as well.

I've got it!

How about putting pressure on the top 1% who own around half of the countries wealth? The same people who have amassed such a wealth through paying their employees as little as possible while contributing ZERO to public services as a result of tax loops that they bribed tory lobbyists to implement/keep in place?

[Hibernia&Alba]

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

There has to be a way of paying for all those things as well. I would not say I want Labour to win but I would like them to at least achieve a hung parliament but I think they are too far left to achieve that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We approach this from different directions, as I don't think they are left enough in some areas, thus I am more comfortable in the Greens. As for 'payment', may I remind you of Tony Benn's adage that "no government in history has ever said they couldn't fight a war because there wasn't enough money. They find the money; so, if we can find the money to kill people, we can find the money to help people. No excuses".

Also in relation to 'paying' for progress, we need to destroy the idea that governments need to pay for spending by taxation, when that simply isn't the case. Despite the nonsense Thatcher used to state, governments are not the same as households i.e. 'pocketbook spending' is not applicable to governments, which have the ability to create money from nothing - see the 2008 banking crisis and bailout. Taxation can be used to keep inflation down, but isn't required to raise revenue for spending. 'The national credit card' etc is total nonsense. In 1945 the country was 'bankrupt' after six years of war, yet we created an NHS, a welfare state, free university education and nationalised key industries. The whole discussion needs reflect the reality, not the myth.

[Ozyhibby]

Ruth Davidson really chasing the dollars these days.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...mpression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[marinello59]

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

Ruth Davidson really chasing the dollars these days.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...mpression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Next she will have her own show on a Russian TV channel.

[Ozyhibby]

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

I've got it!

How about putting pressure on the top 1% who own around half of the countries wealth? The same people who have amassed such a wealth through paying their employees as little as possible while contributing ZERO to public services as a result of tax loops that they bribed tory lobbyists to implement/keep in place?

Don’t disagree with that. There are far too many tax loopholes. Most of them put there by Gordon Brown right enough who massively over complicated the tax system.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

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

Next she will have her own show on a Russian TV channel.

Not the same. Salmond is no longer a politician.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fife-Hibee]

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

Ruth Davidson really chasing the dollars these days.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politi...mpression=true


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wait... ITV pay politicians to appear on their political programmes?

Well that explains a lot. I wonder how much they pay them to say whatever they want them to say as well.

[Fife-Hibee]

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

Next she will have her own show on a Russian TV channel.

Why not? She's probably already receiving sources of funding from there already.

[Hibrandenburg]

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

Next she will have her own show on a Russian TV channel.

I might actually take a day off work now, the chance to see her face tripping her as the election results in Scotland come in is tempting.

[CloudSquall]

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

I might actually take a day off work now, the chance to see her face tripping her as the election results in Scotland come in is tempting.

Finally seeing that smug look on her face getting chipped away at with each and every "SNP Gain" will be extremely enjoyable, I wonder if she'll actually defend Boris and co this time around?

[lapsedhibee]

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

He could be made a member of the House of Lords which would enable him to remain as PM until he won a seat somewhere else.

Not sure there's a rule that PM has to be a member of either House of Parliament. Possibly just a tradition. So he could go back to writing lies for the Telegraph for his main income, and tell lies for the Government as PM for pin money.

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

If fewer EU folk come here after Brexit, we'll have to get folk from elsewhere.

I'm not sure why this isn't a huge problem for the Tories, since 'from elsewhere' almost certainly in practice means 'who are browner'. Have they not twigged this yet?

[Future17]

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

Why not? She's probably already receiving sources of funding from there already.

Fife, could you answer my previous question about your criticism of the Electoral Commission please?

[Cataplana]

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

Not sure there's a rule that PM has to be a member of either House of Parliament. Possibly just a tradition. So he could go back to writing lies for the Telegraph for his main income, and tell lies for the Government as PM for pin money.


I'm not sure why this isn't a huge problem for the Tories, since 'from elsewhere' almost certainly in practice means 'who are browner'. Have they not twigged this yet?

I believe that it was a problem gettin Alex Douglas - Home into the Commons, and it took a few by elections before it was solved.

[Fife-Hibee]

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

Fife, could you answer my previous question about your criticism of the Electoral Commission please?

Is it not the job of the electoral commission to over see the election process and how it's handled by the parties? Yet they don't seem to hold any of the main British parties accountable for misinformation in their leaflets used to mislead voters, particularly in Scotland.

[Jack Hackett]

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

I'm not sure why this isn't a huge problem for the Tories, since 'from elsewhere' almost certainly in practice means 'who are browner'. Have they not twigged this yet?

Of course they have, but inconvenient truths won't attract the voters they're after.

[Hibrandenburg]

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

I'm not sure why this isn't a huge problem for the Tories, since 'from elsewhere' almost certainly in practice means 'who are browner'. Have they not twigged this yet?

I've wondered this too and there's probably a few reasons as to why but it's probably first and foremost the inability of forward thinking amongst most of them.

[Future17]

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

Is it not the job of the electoral commission to over see the election process and how it's handled by the parties? Yet they don't seem to hold any of the main British parties accountable for misinformation in their leaflets used to mislead voters, particularly in Scotland.

Thank you for replying. In short, the answer to your question is no. If any body should be intervening in what you're referring to, it would be the UK Statistics Authority.

[G B Young]

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

When you look at the policy proposals of the two major parties, combined with the rank incompetence of Johnson and his hardline Brexit government, I find this astonishing. Perhaps I'm just way outside mainstream opinion (I probably am) but I find this poll baffling. Perhaps it's wrong, like at the last general election when the polls predicted a Conservative majority of over one hundred. I don't know.

Doesn't always come down to policy proposals. A vast swathe of voters simply don't like Corbyn:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50403154

His hopes of seeing the polls narrow in a similar way to 2017 seem like wishful thinking to me. He no longer has that 'surprise' factor of being a bit different. Voters have him sussed now and for many he just comes across as endlessly vague, even a bit dim-witted. Justified or not the allegations of anti-Semitism and habouring terrorist sympathies also tend to stick.

As for policy, both main parties appear to be bidding to outdo each other in spending pledges so Corbyn doesn't really have the 'anti-austerity' card to play either, while the cut-through clarity of Johnson's 'Getting Brexit Done' message leaves Corbyn's muddled approach to Brexit in the shade.

Perhaps most significantly, Corbyn's not up against the hopeless May this time. Her mind-bogglingly inept campaign was as much responsible for Labour doing better than expected last time round as anything Corbyn had to offer.

[Hibrandenburg]

I like to hear Swinson tell us if push came to shove, would she prefer to see Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. There's no way you'd get a straight answer out of her.

[Fife-Hibee]

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

I like to hear Swinson tell us if push came to shove, would she prefer to see Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. There's no way you'd get a straight answer out of her.

"Neither, we're campaigning for a majority Lib Dem government and once I become PM i'll reverse brexit just like that, without any social repercussions.... blah blah blah, i'm Jo Swinson."

[lord bunberry]

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

Doesn't always come down to policy proposals. A vast swathe of voters simply don't like Corbyn:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50403154

His hopes of seeing the polls narrow in a similar way to 2017 seem like wishful thinking to me. He no longer has that 'surprise' factor of being a bit different. Voters have him sussed now and for many he just comes across as endlessly vague, even a bit dim-witted. Justified or not the allegations of anti-Semitism and habouring terrorist sympathies also tend to stick.

As for policy, both main parties appear to be bidding to outdo each other in spending pledges so Corbyn doesn't really have the 'anti-austerity' card to play either, while the cut-through clarity of Johnson's 'Getting Brexit Done' message leaves Corbyn's muddled approach to Brexit in the shade.

Perhaps most significantly, Corbyn's not up against the hopeless May this time. Her mind-bogglingly inept campaign was as much responsible for Labour doing better than expected last time round as anything Corbyn had to offer.

Your post seems remarkably upbeat on the country rejecting a Corbyn government, obviously I don’t know your individual circumstances, but what I can’t understand is working class Tory voters.
I won’t be voting labour, but I agree with almost everything they are proposing. The answer to this country’s problems is not another Tory government.

[Hibbyradge]

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

I like to hear Swinson tell us if push came to shove, would she prefer to see Brexit or Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. There's no way you'd get a straight answer out of her.

Understandably so. If she admitted preferring either, she'd frighten off potential LD voters, and particularly if she said Corbyn.

Sturgeon has the luxury of being able to say she'd work with Corbyn because she is appealing to a huge number of ex-Labour voters and isn't trying to win votes from natural Tory voters.

If she said that she'd work with Johnson, it would seriously hurt her. Can you imagine the reaction if she did, even just on here?

Whether she actually would or not if push came to shove is another matter and hopefully it'll never be put to the test.

[Fife-Hibee]

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

Your post seems remarkably upbeat on the country rejecting a Corbyn government, obviously I don’t know your individual circumstances, but what I can’t understand is working class Tory voters.
I won’t be voting labour, but I agree with almost everything they are proposing. The answer to this country’s problems is not another Tory government.

Been speaking to numerous business owners and they all tell me the same thing. They can't vote Corbyn, because it means higher corporation tax. Apparently the 2010 levels (that Labour are proposing) were just too high. Never mind that the UK already has one of the lowest corporation tax rates in the developed world at the lowest level it has every been in history.

https://www.figurewizard.com/list-uk...tax-rates.html

[Hibrandenburg]

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

Understandably so. If she admitted preferring either, she'd frighten off potential LD voters, and particularly if she said Corbyn.

Sturgeon has the luxury of being able to say she'd work with Corbyn because she is appealing to a huge number of ex-Labour voters and isn't trying to win votes from natural Tory voters.

If she said that she'd work with Johnson, it would seriously hurt her. Can you imagine the reaction if she did, even just on here?

Whether she actually would or not if push came to shove is another matter and hopefully it'll never be put to the test.

But surely by not answering the question she's just as likely to alienate just as many if not more voters.