What do you think a Tory gov will or should do?

[KZNSeagull]

I was always under the impression that it takes 5 years for the full effects of an economic policy to be felt. So, if that is the case, GB inherited stability from Kenneth Clarke and kept things stable during their first term when they promised to keep to the Tories spending plans. You can continue arguing about what happened after that....

What this also means, of course, is that it could take another 5 years for the economic policies in effect now to be fully felt, so any new government is going to have a tough time sorting everything out and it will not happen quickly.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Thats all very well Larus/Bushy but if you think that Brown and Blair before him were doing anything other than carrying on the previous "tory" financial structure you are wrong. Brown and Blair admired Thatcher thats why they had her round to tea so often

Being a left wing tory doesn't make you a socialist or even left wing.

The point being is that all main parties are variations of the same thing (unfortunatley).

 

[simmo]

It's so easy to say that Conservatives are selfish. That's just crapno it isn't.; the point is that Conservatives are for wealth creation;for the few without that you can't provide the public services. But I guess that some just don't get it; after all, it's easy to tax someone else, so long as it ain't you; the politics of envy.

What the Tories don't get is that in a civilised society you have to look out for everyone rather than just step over them on the way to buying your next mercedes.

Your last reply does you no favours, it looks just like pure jealousy

I and millions of other Tory voters do not own a Mercedes nor even a semi decent car, but what we have realised is that it is up to the private sector to fund what the public sector provides, we as a country need to create wealth from our private industires to allow us to finance public schemes.

I believe also that we generally now (there are some exceptions) live in a meritocracy (under both Labour and Conservatives), if you work hard and are skilled at what you do then you will be rewarded accordingly. If you want to work hard you too will be suitably rewarded. Why if you then do this must you then be forced to hand over your hard earned cash in taxes for the state to spend (in reality waste) on their pet projects. How does Gordon Brown know what is better for your hard earned money to be spent on than you? (Obviously we need to be taxed at some rate but I trust you get my drift)

On an individual note, the less (as a % of your wage slip) that is handed over also more encourages individuals to work harder (overtime etc) so therefore must be good for the overall economy in the long run. All Labour voters ALWAYS think lower tax rates mean lower tax revenue but it will surprise them to know it quite often doesn't because 2 things happen 1) ordinary people work more overtime etc as stated above and 2) very rich people instead of going abroad to other countries stay in the UK because it is not financially necessary for them to find other tax boltholes.

 

[drew]

Bushy, you are so comical it's unbelievable. Most of your comments have no foundation in fact, just diatribe.

MRSA rates are down if you check your facts. I can't be arsed to go through the rest of them.

 

[drew]

It's so easy to say that Conservatives are selfish. That's just crapno it isn't.; the point is that Conservatives are for wealth creation;for the few without that you can't provide the public services. But I guess that some just don't get it; after all, it's easy to tax someone else, so long as it ain't you; the politics of envy.



Your last reply does you no favours, it looks just like pure jealousy

I and millions of other Tory voters do not own a Mercedes nor even a semi decent car, but what we have realised is that it is up to the private sector to fund what the public sector provides, we as a country need to create wealth from our private industires to allow us to finance public schemes.

I believe also that we generally now (there are some exceptions) live in a meritocracy (under both Labour and Conservatives), if you work hard and are skilled at what you do then you will be rewarded accordingly. If you want to work hard you too will be suitably rewarded. Why if you then do this must you then be forced to hand over your hard earned cash in taxes for the state to spend (in reality waste) on their pet projectsyou see education and the nhs as pet projects?. How does Gordon Brown know what is better for your hard earned money to be spent on than you? (Obviously we need to be taxed at some rate but I trust you get my drift)

On an individual note, the less (as a % of your wage slip) that is handed over also more encourages individuals to work harder (overtime etc) so therefore must be good for the overall economy in the long run. All Labour voters ALWAYS think lower tax rates mean lower tax revenue but it will surprise them to know it quite often doesn't because 2 things happen 1) ordinary people work more overtime etc as stated above and 2) very rich people instead of going abroad to other countries stay in the UK because it is not financially necessary for them to find other tax boltholes.

Ordinary people work more overtime just to keep their heads above water. Never spend quality time with their family and we end up with latch key kids etc etc (just read the Daily Mail for further comment on the breakdown of families etc.) As for rich people staying in the country, they continue to employ clever accountants to pay low taxes. Look at that Hedge fund chap who admitted he paid a lower rate of tax than his cleaner. Is that right or wrong.

 

[beorhthelm]

However, it's not really fair to say that we're f***ed because Labour spent too much, the global recession is not Labour's fault

yes it bloody well is! they spent freely as if the economic would never change, they beleived their own hype of a "new paradigm". also as chancellor of the then 3rd largest western economy, and LARGEST financial sector, Brown had more say over regulation and oversight policy than anyone other the US fed chariman. yes, even more than the US president who cannot directly control the US economic policy. It was HIS creation of a limp FSA that didnt or couldnt see the wood for the trees (similar to the US equivilent) that lead to us being hit so hard.

would the tories done any different? irrelevent, they were not in power, we'll never know. Brown was and did. He claimed the glory in the good years, then tried to pretend its was out of his control when it went pear shapped. this two positions cannot both be true. the fact is, he just let the markets run away with themselves as it suited his other policy aims, while claiming credit for "no boom and bust".

 

[simmo]

Ordinary people work more overtime just to keep their heads above water. Never spend quality time with their family and we end up with latch key kids etc etc (just read the Daily Mail for further comment on the breakdown of families etc.) As for rich people staying in the country, they continue to employ clever accountants to pay low taxes. Look at that Hedge fund chap who admitted he paid a lower rate of tax than his cleaner. Is that right or wrong.

You really do you not seem to live in the real working world. Are you at Uni or something?

If people are having to work longer hours to keep their heads above water it is because they are losing too much money out of their wage packets in taxes to pay for government expenditure. With NI and tax I think the governement takes around 1/3 of our wages.

The breakdown of the family structure is not due to decent fathers working hard but is due to absent/no father (whom go missing completely, even before the birth at times, and do not have feel they have any obligation to bring up their children).

Much as you may loathe rich people.....again pure jealousy, it is surely better to keep these people in the country than for them to leave because if they just spend £1 in our countries economy it is better than if they don't and do in another countries.

 

[simmo]

Ordinary people work more overtime just to keep their heads above water. Never spend quality time with their family and we end up with latch key kids etc etc (just read the Daily Mail for further comment on the breakdown of families etc.) As for rich people staying in the country, they continue to employ clever accountants to pay low taxes. Look at that Hedge fund chap who admitted he paid a lower rate of tax than his cleaner. Is that right or wrong.

Out of all that narrative you find one phrase "pet projects" and then you put in something that your own brain has concocted. You said that not me, but I do see the Millenium Dome, the inquiry into Bloody Sunday, devolution of Scotish assembly, devolution of Welsh assembly (at the cost to the British taxpayer for Holyrood and any Welsh assembly, plus no doubt these MSP's/MWP's? salries) as examples of pet projects that I can think of straight away.

 

[stevey-o]

You really do you not seem to live in the real working world. Are you at Uni or something?

If people are having to work longer hours to keep their heads above water it is because they are losing too much money out of their wage packets in taxes to pay for government expenditure. With NI and tax I think the governement takes around 1/3 of our wages.

Can we have a poll on how many people get paid for overtime? Maybe it's just me and the many companies I've worked for but I've never worked anywhere multinational or local, big or small, that has paid me anything extra for the overtime they expect as a matter of course.

I've had managers walk around an office 45 minutes after closing to find out who is "hungry for success" and who is "just in for the ride". That, I suspect, is the "real working world" for a lot of us. My last job before going self-employed was 9- 5.30 but the expectation was 8-7 every day. That's typical for a lot of us I'm sure.

Also typical is contractors and others doing the "hedge fund" trick of paying themselves in dividends and eveything else possible to avoid income tax and NI on a significant part of their wages. How about hammering them so we all pay less tax? That'd be fairer because they don't work harder than us to earn more, often they are doing identical jobs...

I generally avoid political discussions but I can't help this one - I look at the shadow cabinet and I see nothing that represents me. I didn't go to private school, I don't have vast inherited wealth, I don't have a big house (or houses) in the country, and I don't think I've ever read anything from David Cameron that makes me think he is going to make the country better.

I'm probably a Tory target too - I'm mid-30's, I'm a skilled professional in demand, I'm married, have a child, a mortgage, my parents are retired, I could (and might) emigrate because other countries value my skills more etc etc etc. But the Tories seem like vapour to me. I can't pin down who they represent. I am from the Surrey Tory heartland and in fact, the only people they seem to represent are the people I do my best to avoid in the pub near the rowing club. Not jealousy of wealth (I'm not poor) but maybe an inverse snobbery, I'll grant you that. It's just I'd rather put my lot in with the majority of people who have a pint and an honest chat than with people who don't even acknowledge people like me exist until election time. God knows how the seriously underprivileged and deprived must feel. Maybe they are protected by lack of proximity.

Until the Tories start to tax inherited wealth and start a FAIR tax system based on earnings, not on how good you are at smoke and mirrors, they will be seen as a bit self-serving. And self-service shouldn't be part of a government.

 

[User removed 4]

Bushy, you are so comical it's unbelievable. Most of your comments have no foundation in fact, just diatribe.

MRSA rates are down if you check your facts. I can't be arsed to go through the rest of them.

Bollocks, you know full well that most of the ''achievements'' **cough, splutter,piss myself laughing** you've listed are a product of massaged figures , downright untruths or not available to english taxpayers, thats why you've only refuted one of my comments, the one about MRSA , you say its down , since when ? since it hit a peak under the wonderful stewardship of the NHS that we've had under the joke that masquerades as a government known as the labour party ?

 

[User removed 4]

Until the Tories start to tax inherited wealth

And you claim not to be jealous ?? how about bollocks Lets see how you feel about this issue if and when you pay off your mortgage and you realise that 40 % or more of the house you worked your nuts off for, rather than go to your kids, is going to be taxed and spunked away on mp's expenses or the absolute f***ing hordes of single mothers in this country , who are knocking out kids left right and centre with no support from the father , do people not realise what an absolute f***ing con trick labour are with their ''support the many not the few'' bollocks, they have created a client state and the welfare system, particularly in respect of teenage girls getting pregnant as a career choice needs root and branch reform, i know i will get snide remarks for admitting this , but i speak from experience, i am white, working class london and ive lost count of the members of my own extended family who have knocked out child after f***ing child without a thought as to who provides for it, the amount of times ive heard them tell me ''the governments got loads of money'', this country could have the health service , the education system it desires if we spent the money on the right things , as it stands , we dont.

 

[stevey-o]

For anyone interested in how the Tories will represent them with their tax plans this is where they were at before Christmas, and as far as I know unchanged - this is sourced from the press and again, as far as I know, unchallenged:

The top 2% wealthiest in the country will gain the most. That's fair then.

Their only known tax plans (as of October 2009) will give £1.2bn to the top 2% of wealthiest estates in inheritance tax. It'd be interesting to know how many of those top 2% are inherited rather than earned in the first place, but I'm going to speculate it'll be a lot.

Their marriage tax relief gives 13 times more cash to the top earners than the bottom. A truly awesome policy for fairness, encouraging marriage amongst the sections of society with biggest family issues, and avoiding latch-key kids. That's SURE to fix broken Britain. And that's before we even talk about them planning on stopping Sure Start and the other policies that have genuinely helped impoverished children.

Giving back extra tax relief on the pensions of the richest people will give £3.2bn to the top 1.5% of earners. Again, I don't expect them to be socialist but surely anyone can see this is a bit unfair. Top 1.5% of earners doesn't equate by any stretch of the imagination to either the hardest working or highest skilled in the country.

Reversing Labour's 50p income rate gives £2.4bn back to the top 1%. And that poor, poor top 1% really need the money.

The total sum taken from 98% of voters to donate to the top 2% is £11.7bn.

Is it really any surprise the Tories are seen as the party of toffs, inherited wealth, and top earners (rather than hard workers - not mutually exclusive but when you are talking that amount of money it is often the case)?

I'm not saying I'm going to vote Labour but I can't think of a single reason to vote Conservative either.

 

[User removed 4]

For anyone interested in how the Tories will represent them with their tax plans this is where they were at before Christmas, and as far as I know unchanged - this is sourced from the press and again, as far as I know, unchallenged:

The top 2% wealthiest in the country will gain the most. That's fair then.

Their only known tax plans (as of October 2009) will give £1.2bn to the top 2% of wealthiest estates in inheritance tax. It'd be interesting to know how many of those top 2% are inherited rather than earned in the first place, but I'm going to speculate it'll be a lot.

Their marriage tax relief gives 13 times more cash to the top earners than the bottom. A truly awesome policy for fairness, encouraging marriage amongst the sections of society with biggest family issues, and avoiding latch-key kids. That's SURE to fix broken Britain. And that's before we even talk about them planning on stopping Sure Start and the other policies that have genuinely helped impoverished children.

Giving back extra tax relief on the pensions of the richest people will give £3.2bn to the top 1.5% of earners. Again, I don't expect them to be socialist but surely anyone can see this is a bit unfair. Top 1.5% of earners doesn't equate by any stretch of the imagination to either the hardest working or highest skilled in the country.

Reversing Labour's 50p income rate gives £2.4bn back to the top 1%. And that poor, poor top 1% really need the money.

The total sum taken from 98% of voters to donate to the top 2% is £11.7bn.

Is it really any surprise the Tories are seen as the party of toffs, inherited wealth, and top earners (rather than hard workers - not mutually exclusive but when you are talking that amount of money it is often the case)?

I'm not saying I'm going to vote Labour but I can't think of a single reason to vote Conservative either.

Again , bollocks, you have selectively presented figures, you are a party political broadcast for the labour party, you're just a little bit too obvious.

 

[simmo]

I've had managers walk around an office 45 minutes after closing to find out who is "hungry for success" and who is "just in for the ride". That, I suspect, is the "real working world" for a lot of us. My last job before going self-employed was 9- 5.30 but the expectation was 8-7 every day. That's typical for a lot of us I'm sure.

Ok I am sorry you didn't get overtime but some people do and if you do the less of your money that is taken by the taxmen the more you are encouraged to work for your own personal and the economy overalls gain. It would seem that now you are self-employed? and I wish you the best of luck Just a general overall question. Do you think you would work more hours if your taxes were higher/lower

I generally avoid political discussions but I can't help this one - I look at the shadow cabinet and I see nothing that represents me. I didn't go to private school, I don't have vast inherited wealth, I don't have a big house (or houses) in the country

Neither did I, but does it really matter (what is this petty jealousy with some people) I don't give a flying what these people are. John Prescott was a shop steward on a ship I am not one of these either. Alistair Darling went to Scotland's oldest boarding school and was probably once a communist, I am not one of these either

I'm probably a Tory target too - I'm mid-30's, I'm a skilled professional in demand, I'm married, have a child, a mortgage, my parents are retired, I could (and might) emigrate because other countries value my skills more etc etc etc. But the Tories seem like vapour to me. I can't pin down who they represent. I am from the Surrey Tory heartland and in fact, the only people they seem to represent are the people I do my best to avoid in the pub near the rowing club. Not jealousy of wealth (I'm not poor) but maybe an inverse snobbery, I'll grant you that. It's just I'd rather put my lot in with the majority of people who have a pint and an honest chat than with people who don't even acknowledge people like me exist until election time. God knows how the seriously underprivileged and deprived must feel. Maybe they are protected by lack of proximity.

Until the Tories start to tax inherited wealth and start a FAIR tax system based on earnings, not on how good you are at smoke and mirrors, they will be seen as a bit self-serving. And self-service shouldn't be part of a government.

Well if you decide to emigrate (I personally don't have this choice) don't forget you have been under a Labour government for the last 13 years with ample time to make any changes to anything in this country that they desire.

I also couldn't imagine having a pint with Cameron but then again I can't with Gordon Brown or Tony and Cherie Blair, either!

 

[User removed 4]

I've had managers walk around an office 45 minutes after closing to find out who is "hungry for success" and who is "just in for the ride".

Ive got to say, that sounds like some really wanky david brent type who would walk round an office spouting crap like that.

 

[stevey-o]

And you claim not to be jealous ??

Ha ha, I actually agree with you. People are too aware of their rights and not aware of their responsibilities. We need to cut back benefits massively, but I don't see how we benefit anyone by rewarding the rich so extravagantly.

I'm not talking about taxing inheritance of 100k any more than it already is, I'm talking about people with estates of 30 million (David Cameron) where generation after generation lives in a privilege that is patently unfair. Wanting a more equal society isn't jealousy and it's a slightly twisted view to think that anyone who wants more equality is just jealous.

Why should we expect poor people to work hard without benefits if we allow others to inherit wealth (a familial benefit) that means they never have to work? It swings both ways, to me anyway.

Vast inherited wealth also enables a perpetuation of a political class (Tony Blair was / is no better) that prohibits "normal" people from being part of the political system.

The Tories are a party that rewards the rich - not the hard workers, not the people who work to earn money (unless they earn exceptionally) but the people who have money. I don't know how people can't see that.

I'm not saying Labour are better, I don't think they are. But I think a Tory government will be certainly no better for the country, will be more divisive for sure, and could well be a disaster.

For the record, on devolution as I think that was one of the Labour pet projects, Cameron has come out in favour of fiscal devolution for Scotland, which is quite interesting I think.

 

[looney]

Correct. I understand he also believes the Americans have got it right with regards to the right to bear arms.

Wondered how long it would take Gimster to slither in here. So gun crime has fallen since the gun bans?

Dont let the facts get in the way of you mincing sessions Dimster.

 

[stevey-o]

Bushy, calm down, and keep reading what I've posted.

a) I'm not saying Labour are better and as things stand I don't see me voting for them.

b) I've not selectively chosen tax figures. If that's the only plans they've published that's facts.

c) Once again, I don't think Labour have made things better (except in child welfare - child poverty has greatly reduced under Labour) and I don't know if they deserve another chance

d) I simply don't see any way in which the Conservatives offer a better alternative. Show me a way they do and I might even end up voting for them. That's serious. But I'm not going to vote for them just because they are the "only alternative".

 

[stevey-o]

Ive got to say, that sounds like some really wanky david brent type who would walk round an office spouting crap like that.

spot on

 

[Simster]

Wondered how long it would take Gimster to slither in here. So gun crime has fallen since the gun bans?

Dont let the facts get in the way of you mincing sessions Dimster.

Superb. Young Puny, frothing at the mouth with RAGE again.

I wouldn't have thought so - you have to change the entire culture of a nation to see a fall in gun crime - there are too many ghettos in the US where carrying a gun is seen as a pre-requisite. I wouldn't expect you to understand this. Maybe you should post a 15 year old link from the NRA website to illustrate your point?