nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Labour are 7% in the polls - So who here is voting for them &why

bpb101

Nearly 1 in every 10 people are saying they are support labour. (going by the polls)

So , Why would you vote for labour. What have they accomplished in the last 4 years that wants you to say hey, I want them for the next 6.

Just what to hear people thoughts on the matter

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Godge

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

As someone who favours a welfare state and progressive taxation, one aspect of Labour policy doesn't sit well with me and that's this thing about taking x-amount of people "out of the tax net". FF and FG are fond of it too.

I think everyone who works should be some amount of tax, even a token amount. You feel like more of a stakeholder in a system that you're a contributor to.

I agree, and it can be done simply enough.

For example, increase the minimum wage by around 4% to bring it to €9. At the same time abolish the USC exemption and apply the 2% rate to all income below the current exemption rate. That way, those on the minimum wage still get an increase even though they start to pay USC.

Idbatterim

As someone who favours a welfare state and progressive taxation, one aspect of Labour policy doesn't sit well with me and that's this thing about taking x-amount of people "out of the tax net". FF and FG are fond of it too.

I think everyone who works should be some amount of tax, even a token amount. You feel like more of a stakeholder in a system that you're a contributor to.

I totally agree and they are at it again, they want to take another 90,000 out of the tax net, isnt it great though, tax less people, tax those paying less, increase all areas of spending... burning the candle at both ends, cant see where it can go wrong :rolleyes:

BoJack Horseman

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

Not exactly. USC and water taxes need to be adressed and incorporated in to the regular income tax system.

USC is already progressive.
As said, utilities / consumption taxes are not charged on the basis of earnings.

It seems labour voters feel betrayed, but they are equally uninformed as to how much more tax the far-left have in store.

Chips Lovell

Idbatterim wrote: »

I totally agree and they are at it again, they want to take another 90,000 out of the tax net, isnt it great though, tax less people, tax those paying less, increase all areas of spending... burning the candle at both ends, cant see where it can go wrong :rolleyes:

Election next year.

TheGoldenAges

Yeah at the moment Labour are probably my first preference. Since there's not really a party that comes close to meeting my political position (though Labour are probably the closest) I'll probably allign with them.

sarumite

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

Not sure what you mean by that, but it loooks like a loaded question. From what I've heard they favour a more progressive income tax policy where the more you earn the more you pay.

Even under a flat tax system, that would be the case since income tax is measured as a %age.

Idbatterim

Even under a flat tax system, that would be the case since income tax is measured as a %age.

exactly, I made this point earlier in response to the above quote...

sarumite

Godge wrote: »

I agree, and it can be done simply enough.

For example, increase the minimum wage by around 4% to bring it to €9. At the same time abolish the USC exemption and apply the 2% rate to all income below the current exemption rate. That way, those on the minimum wage still get an increase even though they start to pay USC.

Increasing the minimum wage will run into problems with business groups as they would be the ones increasing wages by 4% which would increase their costs whereas changes to USC wouldn't change impact them.

View

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

We're far from bankrupt

We aren't, precisely, because the government took the medium-term view not the short-term view. Hence, the "average worker" does not face the harsh reality of a bankrupt state.

Steppenwolfe wrote: »

if the government is flagging up tax cuts for the better off in the next budget. It's always about who pays. Always.

Indeed it is indeed. Remember though the purpose of the tax system is to collect the monies to pay the bills we have. It is - regrettably - better to have an efficient but unfair tax system rather than a fair one that is hopelessly inefficient.

SpaceTime

They've been consistently strong on things like reproductive rights, gay rights, secular policies (keeping Church and state separate).

That's quite important to me. FF and FG have a very poor record on all of that and SF is questionable.

Icepick

SpaceTime wrote: »

They've been consistently strong on things like reproductive rights, gay rights, secular policies (keeping Church and state separate).

big failure then
90+% of primary schools are still catholic and instead of opening secular schools, we have these multi-denominational ones.

Icepick

Some more facts: this year 881,700 people will pay no income tax at all. That’s 38 per cent of all income earners. Some 648,700 people, 28 per cent of workers, will pay neither tax nor USC.

low income workers can hardly complain

theaceofspies

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0304/684559-fatal-foetal-abnormalities/

The Labour Party now resemble Hitler in the Bunker. A Party totally resigned to end game. They were founded to represent the working class:pac:; all they can offer now is this tripe. These people know they are going down at the next election and are just scrapping the bottom of their own rotten barrell and will do anything to implement as much of their sad schemes as possible before they are voted out.
Champagne Socialists. The irony is that if they were to return to founding principles they would be in a majority government:o

BoJack Horseman

theaceofspies wrote: »

all they can offer now is this tripe...... just scrapping the bottom of their own rotten barrell and will do anything to implement as much of their sad schemes as possible

Strong & stupid words to describe the devastating plight of forcing women to carry non-viable foetuses to term.

Bold, is particularly pathetic.

Shurimgreat

Probably give them a second preference largely because the anti austerity parties are a bunch of moaners and whingers with nothing in the way of credible policies to offer.

View

theaceofspies wrote: »

They were founded to represent the working class:pac:;

Actually, they weren't.

They were founded as "The Irish Trade Union Congress & Labour Party" - the "political wing" of the trade union movement in other words.

The "working class" has historically favoured FF at election times and, unsurprisingly, we have largely gotten FF style conservative policies as a result.

And government decisions are above all accumulative, voting for Labour once when you are 18 and FF or FG in every subsequent election means you shouldn't be surprised if the country continues on with the status quo because it takes a lot more than one election to change public policy and have the time needed for the results to filter through on the ground.

tayto lover

View wrote: »

Actually, they weren't.

They were founded as "The Irish Trade Union Congress & Labour Party" - the "political wing" of the trade union movement in other words.

The "working class" has historically favoured FF at election times and, unsurprisingly, we have largely gotten FF style conservative policies as a result.

And government decisions are above all accumulative, voting for Labour once when you are 18 and FF or FG in every subsequent election means you shouldn't be surprised if the country continues on with the status quo because it takes a lot more than one election to change public policy and have the time needed for the results to filter through on the ground.

BUT Labour have morphed into those other parties.
Hard to tell them apart now.

Icepick

tayto lover wrote: »

BUT Labour have morphed into those other parties.
Hard to tell them apart now.

no, it's not and plenty of evidence has been posted in this thread