[Politics] General Election 2024 - 4th July

[Surrey Phil]

Sadly I have heard very little that I can believe from any of the Parties. Billions more for everything but no increase in taxes !!!

Don't worry, I've heard the new government from 4th July 2024, plan to borrow enough money to get the Country completely out of debt!!

 

[chickens]

I hear the phrase 'taxation at record levels' a lot and was just wondering what it meant? Is that in pure numerical terms, or percent of GDP, or percent of income, or some figure adjusted for inflation, or what? Does it include all taxes or just some? Because it doesnt feel like we're getting much bang for our buck if we're paying more than ever before.

Quite simply the tax is still going into central government, but it isn’t then being passed out to the usual degree to local authorities, who retain responsibility for vital services such as social care, transport, planning etc.

There are a number of different solutions, the simplest would be to increase the settlement paid out to local authorities, and undo Osborne’s darkest work. Another, which appears to be Labour’s solution, is to create a National Care Service, centralise the administrative functions, and effectively take responsibility away from local authorities for providing social care.

If social care isn’t coming out of their budget any more, then the reduced local authority budget is less problematic.

It should be remembered that apart from the absolute failure to regear our health service toward a “top heavy” older population, and ensure we have enough GPs, nurses, doctors and hospitals, another contributing factor to the NHS’s woes is the number of beds blocked with patients who can’t access appropriate social care (there’s simply nowhere for them to go that can cope with their complex needs)

 

[Audax]

another contributing factor to the NHS’s woes is the number of beds blocked with patients who can’t access appropriate social care (there’s simply nowhere for them to go that can cope with their complex needs)

Can add here that another part of the problem is that many of the social care settings that *should* be able to cope, and often *claim* to be able to cope, abdicate responsibility at the first sign of any "complexity". Complexity that is often generated because the patient is being sent into those care settings too late; such as dementia / Alzheimer's patients who are kept at home as long as possible and then react very badly to the changes that happen as part of moving into care, in many cases becoming violent and thus a very complex case. A very well known (and therefore theoretically should be well understood how to manage!) possibility, but not one that the social care system currently seems to be bothered about proactively managing.

 

[beorhthelm]

I hear the phrase 'taxation at record levels' a lot and was just wondering what it meant? Is that in pure numerical terms, or percent of GDP, or percent of income, or some figure adjusted for inflation, or what? Does it include all taxes or just some? Because it doesnt feel like we're getting much bang for our buck if we're paying more than ever before.

it's the measure as % of GDP. risen from 33% to 36%, mostly from rising corp tax and more recently freezing tax bands. we dont seem to get much bang for buck because funding for services have to go further, even when they rise its not enough for increased demand.

 

[Machiavelli]

Thought he was very shifty seems incapable of giving an answer to any questions that is contentious.Labour will hit us with taxes despite taxation being at record levels and amidst a cost of living crisis.Depressing,from one shower of shit to another.

Will take some doing to eclipse this shower of shite:

The Conservative Effect, 2010–2024

Cambridge Core - European Studies - The Conservative Effect, 2010–2024

www.cambridge.org

 

[Machiavelli]

I hear the phrase 'taxation at record levels' a lot and was just wondering what it meant? Is that in pure numerical terms, or percent of GDP, or percent of income, or some figure adjusted for inflation, or what? Does it include all taxes or just some? Because it doesnt feel like we're getting much bang for our buck if we're paying more than ever before.

One of the things that you need to factor in and will become more prominent in the future, is that although the range of public services government's provide has reduced (eg through privatisation), the cost of those increases because of demographic shifts whereby the % of the working age population reduces due to an ageing population. This means that the cost of delivering the big ticket spending items is inexorably on the rise -- pensions, healthcare and social care especially. We do, however, need to make a decision about this. It might mean the state withdrawing from the provision of those services, or it might mean higher public spending and, as a consequence, higher taxation.
I think it should be the latter, and keep on saying that the way to do this is to shift the burden of taxation away from labour and towards assets and conspicuous and/or carbon-intensive consumption.

 

[Gabbiano]

it's the measure as % of GDP. risen from 33% to 36%, mostly from rising corp tax and more recently freezing tax bands. we dont seem to get much bang for buck because funding for services have to go further, even when they rise its not enough for increased demand.

Is there also an effect from having to start paying back the huge debt incurred during COVID?

 

[beorhthelm]

Is there also an effect from having to start paying back the huge debt incurred during COVID?

a bit, not really much. the deficit is so large each year from not matching revenue and spending, COVID spending just swallowed into the debt pile. this year and next budgets are larger than 2020.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

it's the measure as % of GDP. risen from 33% to 36%, mostly from rising corp tax and more recently freezing tax bands. we dont seem to get much bang for buck because funding for services have to go further, even when they rise its not enough for increased demand.

Thanks, so i guess this figure is partly a consequence of lower than predicted GDP, from brexit, covid, etc

 

[Bodian]

The problem here is that fuel duty is collected by the government, but roads repairs and maintenance are paid for by local authorities. There's no direct connection between the duty collected and the day-to-day spending.

The Tories have gutted council budgets during austerity, leaving them in a position where they can't afford to do everything they are supposed to be responsible for. Hence the pothole problems - where 15 years ago even minor surface damage or signs of shoulder crumbling would be jumped on, they are now left until they reach ever-increasingly-larger thresholds before they qualify for repair. And we also see cost-cutting measures in the repairs themselves (which in the long run cost more, but in the short term yearly budgets are smaller) - for example the A22 through Forest Row which should have been fully resurfaced years ago (they partially resurfaced a few years back, but should have done the whole lot, and the bit they didn't do and instead tried applying a much cheaper solution for is now crumbling).

Our local Tory candidate.

I clicked the report button, and agreed that it was indeed time to fix the potholes. And went on to ask why, if he was keen on potholes being fixed, had the tories starved the highway authorities of money over the last 14 years, thus directly causing the problem.

I'll let you know the thoughts of the local populace on this matter on 5 July.

 

[beorhthelm]

Thanks, so i guess this figure is partly a consequence of lower than predicted GDP, from brexit, covid, etc

maybe, indirectly. if spending on services is rising faster than GDP, then revenue or borrowing needs to increase to cover.

makes for some awkward claims about spending cuts while revenue rises, or spending increases without more revenue. Labour is banking on naturally rising GDP to outpace spending, so they can increase it a bit, partially because less inflation, lower wage demands forecast. Conservatives are hoping the same rise will mean they keep spending flat and cut some taxes a little. expect them to be wrong.

 

[pb21]

Labour is banking on naturally rising GDP to outpace spending...

Which I read is based on some very optimistic OBR forecasts...

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Which I read is based on some very optimistic OBR forecasts...

They could fix it all, just by re-entering the customs union.

 

[pb21]

They could fix it all, just by re-entering the customs union.

True, but we voted to get our country back and make us poorer as a result, it is what it is.

Labour should be more favorable than the Tories to closer ties over the next few parliaments though...

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

One way of raising money for the NHS is to go after the PPE rip off merchants who each made millions in profit.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Three MRP polls have dropped... Says something doesn't it if the Tories got 155 seats the general reaction would be 'oh it could have been worse'. But jeez that Telegraph poll.......

Sunak to lose seat in Tory wipeout, major poll predicts

Exclusive survey for The Telegraph also shows party on track to slump to 53 seats, with around three-quarters of Cabinet voted out

www.telegraph.co.uk

Sunak to lose seat in Tory wipeout, major poll predicts

Exclusive survey for The Telegraph also shows party on track to slump to 53 seats with around three-quarters of the Cabinet voted out

Rishi Sunak is predicted to become the first sitting prime minister ever to lose their seat at a general election.

The Conservatives are also on track to slump to just 53 seats, with around three-quarters of the Cabinet voted out, a major opinion poll for The Telegraph has revealed.

The Liberal Democrats are on course to be just behind the Tories on 50 MPs, according to the Savanta and Electoral Calculus polling analysis, leaving them in touching distance of becoming the official opposition.

Labour is forecast to have 516 seats and an estimated House of Commons majority of 382 - double that won by Sir Tony Blair in 1997 - as Sir Keir Starmer becomes prime minister.

Meanwhile Reform, despite a surge in the polls, is predicted to get zero seats. For Nigel Farage, the recently returned Reform leader, it would mean an eighth defeat as a parliamentary candidate in a row.

The SNP, according to the poll, are predicted to slump to just eight MPs, down from 48 in 2019, with Labour once again the dominant party of Scotland as they were under Sir Tony.

The polling suggests Tory warnings of a Labour “super-majority” are accurate. It also lays bare the scale of voter disillusionment with the Tories and suggests an uncertain road for the party in the years ahead.

 

[Bodian]

Three MRP polls have dropped... Says something doesn't it if the Tories got 155 seats the general reaction would be 'oh it could have been worse'. But jeez that Telegraph poll.......

Sunak to lose seat in Tory wipeout, major poll predicts

Exclusive survey for The Telegraph also shows party on track to slump to 53 seats, with around three-quarters of Cabinet voted out

www.telegraph.co.uk

Sunak to lose seat in Tory wipeout, major poll predicts

Exclusive survey for The Telegraph also shows party on track to slump to 53 seats with around three-quarters of the Cabinet voted out

Rishi Sunak is predicted to become the first sitting prime minister ever to lose their seat at a general election.

The Conservatives are also on track to slump to just 53 seats, with around three-quarters of the Cabinet voted out, a major opinion poll for The Telegraph has revealed.

The Liberal Democrats are on course to be just behind the Tories on 50 MPs, according to the Savanta and Electoral Calculus polling analysis, leaving them in touching distance of becoming the official opposition.

Labour is forecast to have 516 seats and an estimated House of Commons majority of 382 - double that won by Sir Tony Blair in 1997 - as Sir Keir Starmer becomes prime minister.

Meanwhile Reform, despite a surge in the polls, is predicted to get zero seats. For Nigel Farage, the recently returned Reform leader, it would mean an eighth defeat as a parliamentary candidate in a row.

The SNP, according to the poll, are predicted to slump to just eight MPs, down from 48 in 2019, with Labour once again the dominant party of Scotland as they were under Sir Tony.

The polling suggests Tory warnings of a Labour “super-majority” are accurate. It also lays bare the scale of voter disillusionment with the Tories and suggests an uncertain road for the party in the years ahead.

Quite some difference between predictions of 155 and 53 seats. Bring on the latter. I really really want to see the Lib Dems as the official opposition.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

The LibDems on that Telegraph poll only need to gain another 4 seats to become the official opposition.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Quite some difference between predictions of 155 and 53 seats. Bring on the latter. I really really want to see the Lib Dems as the official opposition.

This.

However, it’s astonishing I’ll be so disappointed with the Tories getting 155 seats when that would achieve 10 more than in their 1997 drubbing which is widely considered their worst defeat in generations.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

This.

However, it’s astonishing I’ll be so disappointed with the Tories getting 155 seats when that would achieve 10 more than in their 1997 drubbing which is widely considered their worst defeat in generations.

10 less, they got 165 in 1997. But fully agree with the sentiment. That was with 30% of the vote in 1997, seems a long way off at the moment