General Election December, 2019 (U.K.)

johnnyskeleton

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Not sure why you want to excuse the man's ignorance

Im not trying to excuse him, Im trying to understand him

Joe_ Public

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Well I explained it above, but I can gladly explain it again.

You know the way people voted for Brexit not based on facts but on feelings? Well, thats an example of how emotional intangible issues are more important than fact based tangible issues for a large number of people.

If youre a socialist, you divide the world into good people i.e. you and me, and bad people i.e. evil elites who are out to fleece me. This is the narrative.

Growing up as a labour supporter, believing in merit and hard work and equal rights and all these things, some people can suddenly find themselves to have passed the invisible line where they are no longer people like me, they are the other.

This guy hasnt objected to the tax increases, which are as you say modest. He objects to being othered; he is used to being told by Labour that he is being oppressed, only now to realise that Labour see him as one of the oppressors.

Thats the problem

Thats fair enough. I get that labour have made a difficult choice here and targeted a small group for no other reason than somebody has to pay more. Personally i'd like to think I'd be happy to pay a little more in the knowledge it might make society a better place, but not everyone will share that sentiment.

I dont know enough about that guy to ascribe all those motives to him. If he'd had his facts straight it would have helped, but his whole central premise was wrong so i think trying to understand him on that basis is next to futile to be honest.

A Dub in Glasgo

He also comes out with the following gem which again is factually incorrent. I would say there is very little in his rant that was factual

'Every doctor in the country earns more than that [£80,000]. Every doctor, every accountant, every solicitor earns more than that'

Bannasidhe

Aegir wrote: »

So the answer is obviously to penalise the high earners to disincentive people going o college and getting a well paid job?

Hyperbole much?

The top earners are being asked to pay a bit more tax to help fund much needed infrastructure, health, and education.

I find it strange that people can justify (not saying you do!) paying people less than the living wage as some employers can't afford it, but ask people who earn in the top range of salaries to pay a bit more tax and it's talk of 'penalising' and 'disincentivising'.
Do only the wealthy need incentives?
How about the childcare workers? The care assistants? The retails workers? The nurses? The teachers? The chefs?
Personally I think they all contribute a hell of a lot more to society than any hedge fund manager.

c.p.w.g.w

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

He also comes out with the following gem which again is factually incorrent. I would say there is very little in his rant that was factual

'Every doctor in the country earns more than that [£80,000]. Every doctor, every accountant, every solicitor earns more than that'

When the Labour panellist said not all solicitors earn 80 grand, the reaction from the audience was really indicative of what the British electorate is...lacking any knowledge of the real world...

johnnyskeleton

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Personally i'd like to think I'd be happy to pay a little more in the knowledge it might make society a better place, but not everyone will share that sentiment.

As would I, in principle. But would you be happy to pay a little more when no one else has to, while being told its because youre part of an elite you never knew you were part of?

johnnyskeleton

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

When the Labour panellist said not all solicitors earn 80 grand, the reaction from the audience was really indicative of what the British electorate is...lacking any knowledge of the real world...

Converting the rhetoric of class warfare from proletariat vs capitalists into elites and ordinary people is going to yield these strange results alright

Joe_ Public

Joe_ Public wrote: »

A worker earning £85k is going to be asked to pay an extra £5 per week in income tax. Maybe i am completely out of the loop these days but i cant fathom how that would disincentive any student in college against seeking a high paid job. I'm baffled really.

If tax was a flat charge and not a percentage, it makes sense. But the £85k per year worker is already paying a **** load more tax than someone on minimum wage as it is.

Aegir

Aegir wrote: »

If tax was a flat charge and not a percentage, it makes sense. But the £85k per year worker is already paying a **** load more tax than someone on minimum wage as it is.

I earn roughly 80000 a year. I'd be happy to have slightly increased taxes for better services.

sid waddell

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Converting the rhetoric of class warfare from proletariat vs capitalists into elites and ordinary people is going to yield these strange results alright

Branding an extra £5 a week in tax for somebody earning £85k as classs warfare seems just a tad hyperbolic, doesn't it?

I do see a lot of class warfare in Britain, but I see it being overwhelmingly aimed at the those at the lower end of the wealth scale, not upwards.

I do find it interesting how language is framed so that the term "class warfare" is used exclusively against those who believe in a more equal society.

A more equal society by definition narrows class gaps.

Prosperity is created by demand, not unproductive wealth. Better social safety nets stimulate demand because they give people more freedom to live a better life, be that in terms of money or time or just general well being.

Investment stimulates demand.

The current Anglo-American model is all about class warfare, class warfare against the poor, the working class and indeed the middle class.

Yet this is never pointed out.

Joe_ Public

Aegir wrote: »

If tax was a flat charge and not a percentage, it makes sense. But the £85k per year worker is already paying a **** load more tax than someone on minimum wage as it is.

But without a total overhaul of the taxation system I'm not sure how that would operate. You want to ask minimum wage workers to pay more tax? At least the higher earners can afford it so its a no brainer to risk upsetting some of those. Many of them will stoically accept it.

This just strikes me as a sensible move by labour. With tax you'll upset somebody. Thats a given. In 2017 the tories upset nearly everybody by bringing in a carers tax (so-called dementia tax). That cost them whatever chance of a majority they had.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I earn roughly 80000 a year. I'd be happy to have slightly increased taxes for better services.

I would be as well, but first I’d like to see more people brought in to the tax net. A clamp down on those that work entirely cash in hand and a clamp down on those at the other end ( corporates as well) who avoid tax.

If that was done and money was still needed, then I would happily pay more tax. At the moment, middle to high earners are just a soft target.

sid waddell

Aegir wrote: »

If tax was a flat charge and not a percentage, it makes sense. But the £85k per year worker is already paying a **** load more tax than someone on minimum wage as it is.

A flat tax?

Jaysus, no thanks.

Inequality is already bad enough.

johnnyskeleton

sid waddell wrote: »

Branding an extra £5 a week in tax for somebody earning £85k as classs warfare seems just a tad hyperbolic, doesn't it?

Yet this is never pointed out.

You misunderstood. Class warfare is the technique of Labour. Setting up a false narrative there are distinct groups of "the many" and "the few" and that "the few" are exploiting "the many". This is a modern variant of classic Marxism, seeking to otherise the "capitalists" and the "bourgeoisie" so that the "proletariat" have an enemy to smash.

I am not saying that this guy being charged an extra £5 a week is evidence of a class war.

I am saying that Labour are trying to create a narrative of class war, and they are putting him on the wrong side of it.

Joe_ Public

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

As would I, in principle. But would you be happy to pay a little more when no one else has to, while being told its because youre part of an elite you never knew you were part of?

In truth, I'd have to be in that position first to answer truthfully, but i'd hate myself if i objected to it. I understand that most people (though not all it has to be said) have worked hard to earn that status, but far from feeling part of an elite, i think i would feel myself fortunate to be in that comfortable position. I got some breaks in my life through hard work, but others were simply a case of right time, right place. A couple of 100 quid per year? Cant honestly see myself losing a lot of sleep over it.

Zubeneschamali

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Class warfare is the technique of Labour.

So, the Tories with their gold-plated duck islands in the moat of their castles, their Eton and Oxbridge educations, their Bullingdon club pig-defiling antics, their dickensian cosplay, no hint or suggestion of class on that side of the house?

sid waddell

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You misunderstood. Class warfare is the technique of Labour. Setting up a false narrative there are distinct groups of "the many" and "the few" and that "the few" are exploiting "the many". This is a modern variant of classic Marxism, seeking to otherise the "capitalists" and the "bourgeoisie" so that the "proletariat" have an enemy to smash.

I am not saying that this guy being charged an extra £5 a week is evidence of a class war.

I am saying that Labour are trying to create a narrative of class war, and they are putting him on the wrong side of it.

Which is more important?

Narrative or reality?

The narrative has been continually spun by the Tories and their associated media - and it's the same in Ireland - that "welfare cheats" and "scroungers" and "single mothers" and "lazy layabouts" and the unemployed are the problem.

They are "the enemy within".

Immigrants are now "the enemy within".

The EU was "the enemy without".

In the 1980s it was the unions they wanted to "smash".

The Tories have continually manufactured imagined enemies and have always kicked down.

Yet welfare fraud is but a drop in the ocean compared to the vast amounts of untappped, unproductive wealth that are out there.

A small increase in tax on the wealthy does not a class war make.

And I certainly don't remember Labour using the terms "bourgeoisie" or "proletariat" or anything like it.

"For the many, not the few", is hardly full blown Marxist rhetoric, now.

An extra £2,500 tax on somebody earning £125k is not class war on that person. For sure, the narrative has been spun by the Tories and their associated media that is, but it doesn't hold up.

Millionaires and billionaires, perhaps.

But how are the public going to wake up to that vast pool of unproductive wealth that likes out there otherwise?

The Economist magazine, hardly a bastion of communism, has noted that Marxism succinctly identifies the key problems in modern society, even if it doesn't agree with its solutions.

Those problems are real - and they are caused by wealth inequality.

liamtech

Well the question time thing has started and straight away - GHASTLY format

Inquitus

liamtech wrote: »

Well the question time thing has started and straight away - GHASTLY format

Aye terrible, why is Bojo not taking on Corbyn, this is a stupid idea and doesn't give each other an opportunity to challenge each other, as well as allowing Boris to see Corbyn's performance and shape his own in light of it.

A Dub in Glasgo

If Johnson won't debate, these things should get pulled

A Dub in Glasgo

Inquitus wrote: »

Aye terrible, why is Bojo not taking on Corbyn, this is a stupid idea and doesn't give each other an opportunity to challenge each other, as well as allowing Boris to see Corbyn's performance and shape his own in light of it.

I think Johnson is refusing to do head to head debates

liamtech

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

I think Johnson is refusing to do head to head debates

This needs to be highlighted - CLEARLY highlighted

Professor Moriarty

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

You misunderstood. Class warfare is the technique of Labour. Setting up a false narrative there are distinct groups of "the many" and "the few" and that "the few" are exploiting "the many". This is a modern variant of classic Marxism, seeking to otherise the "capitalists" and the "bourgeoisie" so that the "proletariat" have an enemy to smash.

I am not saying that this guy being charged an extra £5 a week is evidence of a class war.

I am saying that Labour are trying to create a narrative of class war, and they are putting him on the wrong side of it.

Take a giant step back. They're suggesting that someone who earns £85000 a year can afford to pay £230 extra tax. That's all. No Marxism, no proletariat, no bourgeoise. No "false narrative". No wrong side of a "class war". Just pay an extra £5 a week because you won't miss it and it will help other people.

Rjd2

liamtech wrote: »

Well the question time thing has started and straight away - GHASTLY format

No such thing as a good question time whatsoever.

Is this format that bad though?

Grill the hell out of the main leaders,,if good enough they should be able to bat away the smears and may win some voters.

liamtech

Rjd2 wrote: »

No such thing as a good question time whatsoever.

Is this format that bad though?

Grill the hell out of the main leaders,,if good enough they should be able to bat away the smears and may win some voters.

Well this is NOT question time

This is 30 mins a pop

with Boris At the end

who will then get to slag, jeer, and insult those that have come before him

Say what you want about question time and i agree in a sense - but this is not a debate - its a 30 minute meet and greet

Rjd2

liamtech wrote: »

Well this is NOT question time

This is 30 mins a pop

with Boris At the end

who will then get to slag, jeer, and insult those that have come before him

Say what you want about question time and i agree in a sense - but this is not a debate - its a 30 minute meet and greet

Its crap but the Brits can't put on good debates.

Ideally no audience because you are going to get people cheer their guy no matter what and populists can't always go for cheap pops when in hassle.

Also a chance that plenty will tune out before Boris as its a friday night and a long show. I'd probably want to go first tbh.

Is Boris here tonight? Thought it was Rushi Sunak.

liamtech

Rjd2 wrote: »

Its crap but the Brits can't put on good debates.

Ideally no audience because you are going to get people cheer their guy no matter what and populists can't always go for cheap pops when in hassle.

Also a chance that plenty will tune out before Boris as its a friday night and a long show. I'd probably want to go first tbh.

Is Boris here tonight? Thought it was Rushi Sunak.

I dont believe its the UK's inability to put on good debates

I think its CLEARLY that Boris Johnson cannot debate - Period -

just wait it will be - jeering, teasing, insulting, joking, trying to get a laugh - the man is a comedian - honestly i am not trying to receive a warning - im describing the man accurately - that's what he is/does

Joe_ Public

Think the formats ok. Dont get leaders sniping at each other which can be good for entertainment value rather than any worthwhile insight. Thought corbyn did pretty well but made a slip up there when mentioning the tax on the "richest 5%". He means highest earners of course and that distinction is important.

LuckyLloyd

Corbyn was brilliant there! Really rose to the occasion. Clear, direct and human. Seems to genuinely believe in his policies, a mad concept for a politician!

liamtech

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Think the formats ok. Dont get leaders sniping at each other which can be good for entertainment value rather than any worthwhile insight. Thought corbyn did pretty well but made a slip up there when mentioning the tax on the "richest 5%". He means highest earners of course and that distinction is important.

I agree he did well - but i dont like the format - especially with BJ at the end - as i said i predict he just comes out and jokes and shouts about 'Getting Brexit Done'

and insults and jokes - thats what he does

EDIT

STURGEON - fantastic - the caliber of the people in the SNP - her and Blackford - awesome