[Archived] Election

[Al]

Subject to permission from the volcano I will be in Lanzarote at the time of the election and I can't be bothered to apply for a postal vote so UKIP will be my vote short.

[jim mk2]

Taxation stats can be heavily manipulated. As Jim has found on Wikipedia, take the main taxes and we are average but start to add all the extras such as Road Tax, fuel duty, flight surcharge, inheritance tax, NI, council tax, Alcohol duty, stamp duty etc etc and the figures change considerably.

Good try but it goes without saying that all countries have local taxes, motor and air taxes etc etc etc. Britain is not a low tax country but it is not a high tax country either and is certainly does not have the highest taxes in Europe as the previous poster said.

[thenodrog]

I don't see how anyone can vote Conservative. They care less about the working class than Labour do, and their stance on immigration is hysterical. Their stunts like capped immigration will appeal to those who believe all our woes are the work of (to quote Moe Syzlak) those nasty "immigants!" And David Cameron as the forefront of our country? Gaaah... It's enough to turn your stomach.

Can you define 'the working class' please Topman?

[tony gale's mic]

Taxation stats can be heavily manipulated. As Jim has found on Wikipedia, take the main taxes and we are average but start to add all the extras such as Road Tax, fuel duty, flight surcharge, inheritance tax, NI, council tax, Alcohol duty, stamp duty etc etc and the figures change considerably.

As Jim has already said, all these other countries have their own taxes too. It's pretty well known by anyone who knows the first thing about politics outside of our country that the Scandinavian countries have the highest taxation rates in Europe. Why is it that at least half of the people backing the Tories in this thread have to resort to things that are just plain factually inaccurate?!

Besides, it's worth noting that the Scandinavian countries are also thought to have possibly the best quality of life of all the countries in Europe too. Are the two linked?

[thenodrog]

It was in the papers at the weekend that Clegg is almost as popular as Churchill was in 1945 after the war, a complete Joke.

I've a feeling that Winston Churchill would have fared badly in such a debate. Some are doers and some are talkers.

[koi]

Good try but it goes without saying that all countries have local taxes, motor and air taxes etc etc etc. Britain is not a low tax country but it is not a high tax country either and is certainly does not have the highest taxes in Europe as the previous poster said.

Not quite Jimbo, a quick google will show you plenty of total individual tax burden reports, these take into consideration ALL taxes. As I said the stats can be manipulated to suit. I think the World Tax Organisation has the UK at about 14th in the world, how valid that is who knows.

[broadsword]

Closer scrutiny of the Lib Dem's immigration amnesty:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/parties_and_issues/8629354.stm

I think the chap's right in saying the Lib Dem's are sticking their neck out on this one. It's the policy issue that daren't speak it's name. I would say that appearing tough on immigration is an easy vote winner. To offer an amnesty to an unknown number of illegals is surely an enticement to othes who wouldn't pass the new points-based system, but who would be willing to chance their luck at evading detection for 10 years.

I guess it would be better for these people to be in the system rather than (likely as not) without worker's rights and tax contributions in the black (grey?) economy. However, if we put them in the mainstream, are there likely to be enough jobs on the market to accommodate them as well as the jobless who are both entitled to be here and genuinely want to work.

It's a contentious topic, but in my opinion this policy is a sure-fire vote-loser for the Lib Dem's.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Besides, it's worth noting that the Scandinavian countries are also thought to have possibly the best quality of life of all the countries in Europe too. Are the two linked?

Plain and simply no. They have favourable demographics and low population density, which helps with public sector sending provision and avoids overly populating their inner cities. Canada, Australia & Ireland all rank highly in any quality of life indices and all three have far lower taxes than their Scandinavian counterparts.

Can you define 'the working class' please Topman?

Theno- as the poster would know. The gap between Rich & poor has increased under new labour, it is a myth that Labour has done anyjthing to help the working class. It is too busy throwing hand-outs to the unemployed sappers on our council estates.

[koi]

. Why is it that at least half of the people backing the Tories in this thread have to resort to things that are just plain factually inaccurate?!

Really, I could give you some cold hard facts about the economy if you want.

[tony gale's mic]

Not quite Jimbo, a quick google will show you plenty of total individual tax burden reports, these take into consideration ALL taxes. As I said the stats can be manipulated to suit. I think the World Tax Organisation has the UK at about 14th in the world, how valid that is who knows.

A quick google search for "World Tax Organisation" reveals...nothing. Anyone can invent organisations.

Really, I could give you some cold hard facts about the economy if you want.

You could start by naming me some major Western economies which havent been severely affected by the global financial crisis.

[philipl]

On the amnesty, it is interesting that the one Conservative who is actually running something big, Boris Johnson, is strongly in favour of an amnesty for illegals.

Dave has been dumping on the idea today but then Dave hasn't got the same experience of responsibility as Boris has running London.

The OECD has published a vast array of comparative tax tables here. As of 2008, all that can be said is the UK is pretty mid-ranking for taxes and that our personal tax system looks far simpler than most. Yes the 50% top rate has come in since then but the the UK top rate starts at far higher numbers than other countries' higher rates and most other countries have been putting their tax rates up as well since the OECD published.

[jim mk2]

Not quite Jimbo, a quick google will show you plenty of total individual tax burden reports, these take into consideration ALL taxes. As I said the stats can be manipulated to suit. I think the World Tax Organisation has the UK at about 14th in the world, how valid that is who knows.

I've heard of the World Health Organisation but not the World Tax Organisation. Do you mean World Trade Organisation ? Either way, the next government has to reduce the deficit incurred as a result of the world financial crisis and the bail-out of the banks and the need to reinflate the economy through quantitative easing. Services do not have to be cut but taxes most certainly need to rise. The rich have done well under Labour and the new 50 per cent rate should be the first in a series of tax rises for the wealthy.

[American]

ILLEGALS - does anyone understand what the word means? People should be rewarded for breaking the law for a long time? How fair is that to those of us who did it the right way?

[philipl]

Illegal is a misnomer. Irregular would be more correct.

In Malta which is at the front line of receiving boat people, the term irregular has now largely replaced illegal.

[broadsword]

I'm not sure that calling them irregular changes their legal status, it's not really an area that I'm clear on. But presumably the hoops that immigrants wishing to reside here have to jump through are a legl requirement. A visa is a legal document, no?

Anyhow, I have no wish to cause offence. All I'm saying is that I can't see this position going down well with the electorate. Having said that, it's been out in the open for a while now, and it's not seemed to affect the Libs negatively in the polls.

[philipl]

The problem Dave and the boys have of whipping up their favourite Lib Dem bogeys is that these are precisely the issues which make them look like right wing ghouls and scare off the middle ground voters they are trying to drag away from the Lib Dems.

For what it is worth, I think the following recent stats are revealing:

75% of people surveyed want an end to Labour Government but only 34% of the same sample actually want a Tory Government. It could be a lot of that 41% in the middle are currently heading into the Lib Dem camp.

The Sunday Telegraph poll showed Lab 27%, LD 29%, Conservative 34% but the groundwork was largely completed BEFORE the ITV leaders' debate. Perhaps Clegg has got incredibly lucky and taken credit for an opinion poll surge that was happening anyway. If that is the case, the next two debates might not be as decisive in shaping the result as Brown and Cameron hope.

The Independent are reporting on a survey of business opinion:

61% (up from 49%) are saying there are "green shoots" of economic recovery.

80% (up from 78%) say Osborne is too inexperienced to be Chancellor.

In contrast with the gloomy Item club report, many assessments of the UK economy are forecasting near 3% growth in 2011 and 3.4% in 2012. The Keynesian boost in the Sates is now producing a stronger (albeit jobless) economic recovery than had been anticipated so it wouldn't be surprising if the architects of the global Keynesian revival (Brown and Darling) are bequeathing a similar strong recovery from such a horrible slump here in the UK.

[thenodrog]

The rich have done well under Labour and the new 50 per cent rate should be the first in a series of tax rises for the wealthy.

Thats twice you've mentioned that. Has this come about since New Labour lurched to the right and emulated traditional tory policies?

I must say it all seems rather contradictory to your general opinions of New Labour and the Tories.

[jim mk2]

Travelling around the country by road and rail, one is struck by the number of Tory advertising placards in farmers' fields. It is often said unkindly that Blackburn's voters "would vote for a pig if it were painted red" but farmers are surely behaving like the sheep in their fields in their slavish devotion to the Tories. The Tory election slogan "Vote for Change" on those placards is perhaps the weakest and most meaningless of modern times. With the country clawing its way out of global recession Britain needs stability under the present government rather than a change of direction that might lead to a double-dip recession. Apparently, Cameron used the word "change" 28 times in a speech in London today, just in case we didn't get the message. Time to change the record Dave.

[philipl]

Great line in the Guardian today.

Tories are the change to business as usual party.

I always enjoyed Clement Freud's quip that the hedges and gate posts were voting against him but the electors were voting for him.

[tony gale's mic]

I think while the instigator of this Lib Dems surge was Clegg's appearance in the TV debate, the main reason why the Lib Dems are doing so well now is because people think they might have a chance of, if not winning, at least upsetting the applecart and becoming a major voice in a new hung parliament. People in this country have not voted Lib Dem for years as they have some kind of a warped concept of democracy which states that if you're not voting for the winning party, your vote is wasted. Which is obviously complete nonsense, even people who vote for the BNP understand that's not true and considering how halfwitted they are that's some going.

The question "would you vote Lib Dem/Liberal if you thought they could win" has consistently yielded a return of around 40% in the polls for decades upon decades, and this campaign poster from the Charles Kennedy shows this (yes it's propoganda but it must have been based on some kind of non biased poll):

Actually putting Clegg on the same platform as the other two leaders in itself has done wonders for the party, and seeing him hold his own and come out on top against the other party leaders, even if he didnt perform anywhere near as brilliantly as some may have you believe, has flicked that switch in a great many people's heads. It certainly won't produce the map above, but it will almost certainly give the party a platform from which they can realistically dream of being in power by the turn of the decade - something which even a week ago would have sounded implausible given the history of post war British politics.

[Mattyblue]

Why must you be a 'halfwit' to vote BNP?

None of the parties are listening to the majority of voters who want action on immigration and the loss of British identity is a real issue to millions of Britons.

Personally I have yet to be convinced to why we need immigration at all at this stage when we have 3 million unemployed in this country.

10 years ago, to vote for a party like the BNP would be seen as beyond the pale, now I sense a big change, I have had many conversations with people over the last few weeks, old labour supporters and traditional Tories alike who are seriously considering it.

Are BNP voters unashamedly racist? Their hardcore most definitely, the rest? I don't think so.

[Ewood and I Would]

Why must you be a 'halfwit' to vote BNP?

None of the parties are listening to the majority of voters who want action on immigration and the loss of British identity is a real issue to millions of Britons.

Personally I have yet to be convinced to why we need immigration at all at this stage when we have 3 million unemployed in this country.

10 years ago, to vote for a party like the BNP would be seen as beyond the pale, now I sense a big change, I have had many conversations with people over the last few weeks, old labour supporters and traditional Tories alike who are seriously considering it.

Are BNP voters unashamedly racist? Their hardcore most definitely, the rest? I don't think so.

Voting for the BNP because you want to see tougher rules on immigration is like voting for Hitler because you want to see people's dress sense sharpen up a little. You can't cherry pick the BNP's immigration policy (or should I say their 'advertised' immigration policy) and ignore all the others they want to introduce.

I once thought the BNP got a raw deal until I actually took the time to read one of their manifestos (and not just the big, flashy, and 'safer' stuff they promote on their site/in debates).

Next time you canvas opinion from your peers, ask them if they'd like to see mixed race marraiges outlawed or if they would be happy witha Government that wants to power to 'send home' anybody that doesn't have a releative that lived here in the 1600s...because by voting BNP that is exactly what you are voting for.

It is halfwitted because if someone's real issue is immigration then why not vote for UKIP who have a similar policy without the racist past/intentions.

[BiggusLaddus]

Why must you be a 'halfwit' to vote BNP?

Because they can say whatever they want, safe in the knowledge that they will not get into power and have to act on it. Underneath they are the same bunch as your hardcore racists from 10yrs ago.

[tony gale's mic]

Why must you be a 'halfwit' to vote BNP?

None of the parties are listening to the majority of voters who want action on immigration and the loss of British identity is a real issue to millions of Britons.

"Loss of British identity?" I'm sorry but this sort of claptrap in my eyes singles people out as either halfwits, or unashamed racists looking to justify their views.

What sense of British identity do you feel is being lost? The Britain where the national dish has become Chicken Tikka Masala, the best national football manager in years is an Italian and full of the sons of immigrants, our most famous and most brilliant musical export (The Beatles) started off as a band imitating American styles and ended it as a band being inspired by Indian styles or where our best cricketers are South African?

I don't think the politicians have anything to do with that do you? Or do you feel that some of the genuinely British achievements and traditions this country is associated with - the works of Shakespeare, the great minds that this country has produced like Darwin, Newton and Faraday or the defeat of - ironically - the facsists during World War II will somehow be eroded by some immigrants coming to this country?

British identity, like any national identity, is not a static thing. British identity in 1500 is different from 1800 which is different from 1900 which in turn would vary a great deal from British identity in 1950 and 1990. It is dynamic and will be different again in 50 years' time, but if the likes of the BNP were ever to get a foothold then in the eyes of the world being small minded and bigoted would suddenly leap near to the top in the eyes of the world. Thank god that would never happen.

Personally I have yet to be convinced to why we need immigration at all at this stage when we have 3 million unemployed in this country.

OK we'll get some of those 3 million unemployed and just randomly allocate them jobs in the medical, legal, engineering etc professions. I'm sure that would turn out fine wouldn't it?

And you wonder why I call BNP supporters halfwits..

[LeChuck]

Why must you be a 'halfwit' to vote BNP?

None of the parties are listening to the majority of voters who want action on immigration and the loss of British identity is a real issue to millions of Britons.

Personally I have yet to be convinced to why we need immigration at all at this stage when we have 3 million unemployed in this country.

10 years ago, to vote for a party like the BNP would be seen as beyond the pale, now I sense a big change, I have had many conversations with people over the last few weeks, old labour supporters and traditional Tories alike who are seriously considering it.

Are BNP voters unashamedly racist? Their hardcore most definitely, the rest? I don't think so.

Why not vote UKIP instead if immigration is the issue?