Theresa May calls General Election on 8th June.

[WelshBluebird]

I think you will find many blame the EU's freedom of movement for the housing market being messed up - especially in the London area which is where the problem radiates from.

And I'd quite happily argue that would be a false statement.
Look at other parts of the country, areas that have barely been affected by freedom of movement or its results, and we still see a messed up housing market.
In terms of London, internal migration is just a big a factor as EU migration, but I don't see people blaming those Brits moving to London for the insanity!

This BBC article is interesting. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39641222

Too long to paste in full, but in short it shows that the proportion of total income tax take paid by the top 1% and top 10% of earners has been steadily increasing. As of last year, the top 10% of earners paid almost 60% of all income tax.

Right, and?
Compare that to what the other 90% have had to deal with - I still fail to have sympathy for the top few %.

 

[pemma]

I don't think it's fair to call it gerrymandering. The Conservatives aren't the ones redrawing the boundaries for starters, it's independently done.

That hasn't stopped Conservative MPs telling the public to respond to the consultation oppose the changes in favour of 'better' revised ones. George Osborne and Graham Brady have been telling us it would be better if instead of abolishing a Conservative safe seat (Tatton) we should abolish one the Lib Dems might win off the Conservatives at the next election (Cheadle.)

 

[pemma]

Yes, I know that.

You seemed to be implying the Labour MPs should stand down if they don't like Corbyn though. As long as they support the Labour manifesto I don't see why that should be the case. However, it's certainly would be unusual if Labour win and then Corbyn has to stand down for parliament to approve the Labour party forming a government.

I was saying that it was the appeal of Nick Clegg (at the time) which would have led to me voting for the Liberal Democrats in my area, had I been old enough to do so. I don't like Tim Farron one jot, but had Nick Clegg been the leader now, I might have been tempted to vote for them again.

I voted Lib Dem in 2010. One of the main reasons was their proposed £10,000 allowance before you pay income tax. Given Labour made a mess of scrapping the 10p tax rate (which they did later correct) and were making some people pay income tax and then refunding their income tax through Working Tax Credits, it seemed like such a common sense policy that both Brown and Cameron were opposing.

Incidentally, the Liberal Democrats came second in my constituency in 2010, and in 2015 they came last.

2010 - Best ever General Election result for the Lib Dems
2015 - Worst ever General Election result for the Lib Dems

 

[pemma]

Right, and?
Compare that to what the other 90% have had to deal with - I still fail to have sympathy for the top few %.

Indeed. The Conservatives have changed the 40p rate threshold so that higher earners pay less tax. They also tried to scrap the 50p tax rate when in Coalition but Lib Dems prevented them from doing it but accepted a reduction to 45p as a compromise for getting their £10,000 allowance through. They could have lowered the 40p and 50p tax thresholds so that higher earners didn't benefit from the £10,000 allowance.

 

[pemma]

But if he doesn't propose any specific tax increases he will be pilloried for not demonstrating where the money for his programme comes from.

Agreed but the announcement was lacking information about how much would be raised and where it would be spent.

 

[Senex]

Indeed. The Conservatives have changed the 40p rate threshold so that higher earners pay less tax. .... They could have lowered the 40p and 50p tax thresholds so that higher earners didn't benefit from the £10,000 allowance.

The 40% rate kicks in well before anyone can be considered a high earner these days. And when the raising of the threshold started there were adjustments so that the 40% payers didn't fully benefit from the changes.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The 40% rate kicks in well before anyone can be considered a high earner these days.

Still between £15k and £20k higher than the average wage though!

 

[pemma]

The 40% rate kicks in well before anyone can be considered a high earner these days. And when the raising of the threshold started there were adjustments so that the 40% payers didn't fully benefit from the changes.

I said higher earners and given the 40p threshold is now £45,000, it's around triple the minimum wage for full time workers. If you earn 3 times the minimum wage you can't call yourself a low earner. There's also now the married tax allowance which can give tax benefits to couples earning as much as £56,000 between them, depending on how much each person earns.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

But how can a candidate campaign for election based on these policies, if they don't believe in the person that will have to implement them?
If Labour were to win the Election by candidates successfully convincing the electorate that these are good policies for the country, they will then have Jeremy Corbyn in Number 10.

Because it's not 'the person' who will have to implement the policies, it'd be a whole team of people, with all the Labour MPs in a position of strong influence, and a pretty big set of civil servants to advise and sort out implementation details.

Because many of the objections to Corbyn as leader were based on his (apparently) poor media communication, inattention to image, and lack of concern for reaching out to floating voters. Those are huge concerns when you are the opposition attempting to win an election, but not such big concerns when you are a Government deciding how to implement policies.

And also because it's often not a black-and-white thing, it's a question of what out of a limited set of choices is the best choice. As an example, last summer, as a Labour activist, I made no secret of my belief that Corbyn was not the best choice for Labour leader, and I wanted Owen Smith to replace him. But now of course, that choice is no longer available. It's a choice between Corbyn and May (or a smaller party). The choice of Prime Minister appears to be between a Conservative with a consistent record of running down the health service, stirring up divisions in society, pursuing policies that harm vulnerable groups, hugely damaging the economy by supporting unnecessary austerity, and so on. And a Labour person who is clearly looking to bring about a much better, more compassionate, society, but who is not very media savvy, and is perhaps slightly too focused on ideology rather than practicality for my taste. Neither is perfect, but on that measure, Corbyn win hands down over May (even though, in an ideal world, I'd have gone for a different, more media savvy and perhaps more centrist Labour leader).

That doesn't seem an inconsistent position to me. Is it not possible that the Labour MPs you are criticising are coming from much the same position?

 

[pemma]

Former Labour MP Bob Marshall-Andrews has joined the Lib Dems.

 

[Dave1987]

Turning into a blood bath for Labour. Masses of well known MP's are withdrawing from standing. How bigger loss will it take for Corbyn and the Labour Party core to admit they have gone to far to the left to be electable?

 

[EM2]

Is it not possible that the Labour MPs you are criticising are coming from much the same position?

My initial posting was in reply to this quote from AlterEgo:

You can wish all you like but we all know deep down he is incapable of delivering any policy, thanks to his complete lack of authority over his MPs.

which implies that no matter what policy Corbyn develops, this schism between him and his MPs means that Corbyn cannot become Prime Minister.
And my point is that if Labour MPs cannot get behind those policies, which let's face it are classic Labour Party commitments, because of who will be in charge of them, then they are looking after their own interests and not those of the Party of which they are members, the constituents that they have been elected to serve, or the country in whose Parliament they sit.
They know that when they are campaigning and promoting these policies, that they are Corbyn's policies, and that if they convince enough people that Corbyn will be Prime Minister and they know that the electorate know that too.
How can they take part in votes of no confidence in the party leader, and yet campaign on his pledges?

 

[me123]

With May allegedly not taking part in the TV debates (at the moment), we could end up in the rather depressing situation that the winner of the election was "empty-chaired" at the debates.

I'm off to look for jobs in Australia...

 

[Bald Rick]

Re Tax. It is already a progressive tax system.

Someone earning £70k will pay almost three times as much tax / NI as someone earning £35k. And they won't get child benefit, tax credits etc. Putting in another tax at that amount just switches off a whole swathe of the electorate - not just those few who do earn over £70k* - but all those married to, closely related to, have realistic ambition to reach that salary etc.

I am all for those who earn more paying more tax, but they already do, and indeed the stats clearly show they pay a higher proportion of the total tax take than they have for decades (and possibly ever).

It smacks of the politics of envy, and it is interesting that Labour didn't make a show of targeting corporate taxation where there is far more scope for tax revenue generation.

* you'd be surprised the types of jobs where people earn that amount. I know tilers, electricians, plasterers, plumbers, builders; plenty of self employed people (lawn care, building services, glazers); in the rail industry train drivers, signallers, technicians, controllers. All of whom would be described by politicians as 'traditional working people', and the sort of people Labour need to vote for them. And now they won't.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

My initial posting was in reply to this quote from AlterEgo:

You can wish all you like but we all know deep down he is incapable of delivering any policy, thanks to his complete lack of authority over his MPs.

which implies that no matter what policy Corbyn develops, this schism between him and his MPs means that Corbyn cannot become Prime Minister.

That quote is simply AlterEgo's opinion, and I don't think AlterEgo is a Labour MP I'm pretty certain AlterEgo is mistaken, and in the (admittedly, unlikely) event of Labour winning a majority, Corbyn would be able to start implementing Labour policies.

And my point is that if Labour MPs cannot get behind those policies, which let's face it are classic Labour Party commitments,

That would be a valid point IF Labour MPs couldn't get behind those policies, but you've given no reason to think that's the case. I'm pretty sure that if any Labour MPs publically declared that they couldn't support the party's key campaign pledges, it would be headline news right across the media. Since I've seen no such news, it seems a pretty fair bet that Labour MPs do on the whole support the pledges.

How can they take part in votes of no confidence in the party leader, and yet campaign on his pledges?

See my last two posts

 

[HSTEd]

No change. It won't happen even if Corbyn ever becomes PM, because he will be unable to afford to do it. The only thing that might happen will take place very slowly - franchises will be allowed to expire, and a "New BR" will take over their operationsn.

The cost of nationalising first group is a handful of billion pounds. Same for the other TOC parent companies. The company would then be instructed by its new owners to immediately hand back the franchise.
Its like the absurd estimates for nationalising the grid which are somehow ten times the value of the companies that own it and a lot more bedsides and I'm getting rather sick of it

 

[bramling]

Re Tax. It is already a progressive tax system.

Someone earning £70k will pay almost three times as much tax / NI as someone earning £35k. And they won't get child benefit, tax credits etc. Putting in another tax at that amount just switches off a whole swathe of the electorate - not just those few who do earn over £70k* - but all those married to, closely related to, have realistic ambition to reach that salary etc.

I am all for those who earn more paying more tax, but they already do, and indeed the stats clearly show they pay a higher proportion of the total tax take than they have for decades (and possibly ever).

It smacks of the politics of envy, and it is interesting that Labour didn't make a show of targeting corporate taxation where there is far more scope for tax revenue generation.

* you'd be surprised the types of jobs where people earn that amount. I know tilers, electricians, plasterers, plumbers, builders; plenty of self employed people (lawn care, building services, glazers); in the rail industry train drivers, signallers, technicians, controllers. All of whom would be described by politicians as 'traditional working people', and the sort of people Labour need to vote for them. And now they won't.

This sums things up perfectly. Meanwhile, there are plenty of people in what might be regarded as "white-collar" jobs earning £40-50k, aspiring to earn higher. None of these will vote Labour either. I think some people on here underestimate how money-oriented many people are -- if people can squabble over a few ££ of overtime, does anyone seriously think they are going to vote to pay higher taxes? Especially if they don't feel the associated spending will in any way benefit *them*. It's not like Corbyn has thusfar articulated any serious policies to improve public services, apart from pouring in money.

 

[edwin_m]

While I believe Corbyn is genuine and more honest than most politicians, the fact remains that he has divided his party and in particular managed to alienate both the supporters and the opponents of Brexit. Like it or not that's going to be the big issue in this election, which doesn't bode well for Labour or for the many worthwhile things it represents.

 

[pemma]

* you'd be surprised the types of jobs where people earn that amount. I know tilers, electricians, plasterers, plumbers, builders; plenty of self employed people (lawn care, building services, glazers);

Self-employed people have to supply their own equipment and promote their own business, which means their salary is quite a lot less than what they earn from jobs.

A number of those jobs are also weather dependant e.g. if one year we had snow in April then someone working in lawn care might be earning nothing at a time when they would usually be working every day.

in the rail industry train drivers, signallers,

The same ones who have a union saying they want a Corbyn lead government who will re-nationalise the railways? Then their pay will increase at the same rate as all other public sectors workers - no chance of them then getting above inflation pay rises when other public sectors get below inflation pay rises.

 

[EM2]

Since I've seen no such news, it seems a pretty fair bet that Labour MPs do on the whole support the pledges.

But they don't support the leader. From a friend of mine:
'A lot of them (MPs) simply aren’t mentioning him at all. I know a few Labour activists and his name is absolute poison on the doorstep.'
While the original quote may be AlterEgo's opinion, it is one which is widely held including among well-known Labour figures, including Alistair Campbell, David Miliband, David Blunkett, Ed Balls and Peter Mandelson.

 

[DarloRich]

Turning into a blood bath for Labour. Masses of well known MP's are withdrawing from standing. How bigger loss will it take for Corbyn and the Labour Party core to admit they have gone to far to the left to be electable?

You are using conventional electoral logic - that doesn't matter to Corbyn or his cronies. They don't care about winning but about building a special "grassroots" movement.

But they don't support the leader. From a friend of mine:
'A lot of them (MPs) simply aren’t mentioning him at all. I know a few Labour activists and his name is absolute poison on the doorstep.'

That is an accurate report at least from my experience. The answer has to be but Corbyn isnt standing here X is and X has done this...............

 

[chris11256]

Corbyn gave his first election speech today to an invited group of party faithful. They loved it, but I still don't think the public will.

journalist was also overwhelmingly booed when he asked about Corbyn being part of Islington's elite.

 

[Bald Rick]

Self-employed people have to supply their own equipment and promote their own business, which means their salary is quite a lot less than what they earn from jobs.

A number of those jobs are also weather dependant e.g. if one year we had snow in April then someone working in lawn care might be earning nothing at a time when they would usually be working every day.

.

I know that, it I'm talking about their net earnings before tax, not gross income before costs.

As for my chum who does lawn care - if the weather prevents work being done (snow and heavy rain are the only issues), the work that can't be done is rescheduled to evenings and weekends until he catches up. He's done mine under floodlights!

 

[telstarbox]

If you earn £70,000 before tax you are in the top 5% of earners in a globally rich country - you are definitely rich.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

Turning into a blood bath for Labour. Masses of well known MP's are withdrawing from standing. How bigger loss will it take for Corbyn and the Labour Party core to admit they have gone to far to the left to be electable?

38 Labour MP's chose not to stand in the 2015 election, currently I think that 11 have stood down for the forthcoming election. So if 11 is 'masses' - what is 38?

 

[Bald Rick]

If you earn £70,000 before tax you are in the top 5% of earners in a globally rich country - you are definitely rich.

Sorry, that doesn't follow. My income is 3 times that of my parents, yet they are far 'richer' than I am.

The time I felt 'rich' was when both my wife and I earned around £35k. Now I earn more, but she can't work, we have two kids etc. We definitely don't feel rich.

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

Sorry, that doesn't follow. My income is 3 times that of my parents, yet they are far 'richer' than I am.

The time I felt 'rich' was when both my wife and I earned around £35k. Now I earn more, but she can't work, we have two kids etc. We definitely don't feel rich.

Surely, in the UK it depends where one lives. 70k would be a very large income around here (Snowdonia) but in the South-east wouldn't get a great deal because of the ridiculous cost of Housing.

 

[bramling]

Surely, in the UK it depends where one lives. 70k would be a very large income around here (Snowdonia) but in the South-east wouldn't get a great deal because of the ridiculous cost of Housing.

Not just housing; many things are more expensive in the London area. A 70k salary on its own does *not* provide a gold-plated standard of living here. Being a London MP, Corbin should be very well aware of this reality.

Likewise, if Corbyn really supports the young generation, a policy of taking away potential disposable income will not help young people pay the mortgage to secure property on a par with their parents, for example.

 

[Dave1987]

38 Labour MP's chose not to stand in the 2015 election, currently I think that 11 have stood down for the forthcoming election. So if 11 is 'masses' - what is 38?

I think the Labour membership need to wake up and smell the coffee quickly. Corbyn may well be the ideal leader of the Labour Party for the party faithful but is it not abundantly clear he is not appealing to the wider electorate? Labour won a huge victories under Tony Blair and that lead to years and years of Labour Government. Yet Blairites are seemingly despised by the Labour Party faithful. Well to me that says that Labour are pretty much a left wing extremist fringe party. If that is what the party faithful wish to to be than so be it, but expect a bit of humiliation at the ballot box. If I am wrong and Corbyn and Labour storm to victory or don't lose vast swaithes of seats I will happily admit I was wrong but I don't think I will. Just as I believe the Tories have pandered to the extreme right wing in their party, I believe Labour have learched badly to the left as well.

 

[Butts]

Surely, in the UK it depends where one lives. 70k would be a very large income around here (Snowdonia) but in the South-east wouldn't get a great deal because of the ridiculous cost of Housing.

Perhaps you should be looking at the median wage rather than the average where half the people will be above and half below that will be a better indicator.

Does anyone have a figure for this ?