[Politics] The General Election Thread

[Gwylan]

Funniest statement of the General election campaign so far ... Corbyn was to the left of Michael Foot

Nonsense. Foot's manifesto included the nationalisation of aerospace, telecoms, the steel industry and shipbuilding (none of which have been suggested by Labour), it included the abolition of the House of Lords (again, not expected to be part of the manifesto), a big increase in corporation tax from its 30% (Labour's last manifesto also increased this tax but to 26%), a wealth tax (not expected to be part of the manifesto) and five year national plan, drawn up in conjunction with the trade unions (not expected ...blah, blah)

As i said, Labour's last manifesto is not that different from the situation in Germany - it's a long, long way from Foot's vision.

 

[Diablo]

Whatever your job entails on that fifth day, I hope its not maths.

The two possible correct answers, are:

1. It represents a 25% pay rise (if measured by salary / days worked)

2. It represents no pay rise (the salary remains unchanged)

2. No pay rise ? 100% of wage for 80% of time worked sounds like a bloody good pay rise to me .

 

[blue-shifted]

Funniest statement of the General election campaign so far ... Corbyn was to the left of Michael Foot and his choice of Shadow Chancellor has the stated goal of bringing down capitalism FFS

If you look at Labours policies, especially the fiscal ones and compare them to other similar countries, they are unremarkable. What's remarkable is how they are presented, by a truly rabid press with a vested interest in a deregulated society.

 

[Bold Seagull]

If you look at Labours policies, especially the fiscal ones and compare them to other similar countries, they are unremarkable. What's remarkable is how they are presented, by a truly rabid press with a vested interest in a deregulated society.

and not forgetting the intellectually challenged who think anything left of Tony Blair is Marxism or outright Communism.

Perhaps they'd benefit from 6 years free education?

 

[Pavilionaire]

Our electorate does not realise just how low the UK's taxes are compared to other countries in the EU. Corbyn's spending plans would be considered normal in many of those countries but in order to fund them without exorbitant borrowing he'd have to raise tax rates. Compare UK with Sweden:

VAT: UK 20%, Sweden 25%
Basic Rate tax: UK 20%, Sweden 32%
Corporation tax: UK 19%, Sweden 22%
Capital Gains Tax: UK 10% non-residential property rising to 20%, 18% residential property rising to 28%. Sweden - flat rate 30%
Employer NI: UK 13.8%, Sweden 31.42%.

 

[Bob!]

Our electorate does not realise just how low the UK's taxes are compared to other countries in the EU. Corbyn's spending plans would be considered normal in many of those countries but in order to fund them without exorbitant borrowing he'd have to raise tax rates. Compare UK with Sweden:

VAT: UK 20%, Sweden 25%
Basic Rate tax: UK 20%, Sweden 32%
Corporation tax: UK 19%, Sweden 22%
Capital Gains Tax: UK 10% non-residential property rising to 20%, 18% residential property rising to 28%. Sweden - flat rate 30%
Employer NI: UK 13.8%, Sweden 31.42%.

Just to make it clear though, Labour are not proposing to increase Basic Rate Tax nor NI,

 

[Bold Seagull]

Just to make it clear though, Labour are not proposing to increase Basic Rate Tax nor NI,

Bloody centrists!

 

[nicko31]

Bojo gets duffed up in Donny

https://twitter.com/i/status/1194592831479963649

They will return the Brexitty Flintmiester. Don't bother son....

 

[beorhthelm]

Spending is a different graph to the debt as a % of GDP. Any road they were re-elected on a new manifesto in 2001 so your argument doesn't stack up, and of course 2009/10 was post global financial crash when GDP fell dramatically so of course % of public spending went up even though the actual spend may have gone down.

spending never went down, though the lower GDP meant less tax revenue, hence the continued debt accumulation.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

2. No pay rise ? 100% of wage for 80% of time worked sounds like a bloody good pay rise to me .

Apologies for the ongoing maths pedantry, but £x for completing y tasks in 32 hours' attendance, instead of £x for completing y tasks in 40 hours' attendance, is still £x. Its zero increase.in the salary paid.

Very obviously if you choose to consider the final sum as an hourly rate, then that hourly rate has increased (by 25%).

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I've pointed before that the last Labour manifesto wasn't greatly different from the one offered by the centre-right government in Germany. Anyone who thinks that Corbyn is a far-left politician is really not someone with much knowledge of politics - Labour's policies are pretty mainstream in Europe (and for more centrist than Labour's manifestos in the 80s)

Funniest statement of the General election campaign so far ... Corbyn was to the left of Michael Foot and his choice of Shadow Chancellor has the stated goal of bringing down capitalism FFS

Nonsense. Foot's manifesto included the nationalisation of aerospace, telecoms, the steel industry and shipbuilding (none of which have been suggested by Labour), it included the abolition of the House of Lords (again, not expected to be part of the manifesto), a big increase in corporation tax from its 30% (Labour's last manifesto also increased this tax but to 26%), a wealth tax (not expected to be part of the manifesto) and five year national plan, drawn up in conjunction with the trade unions (not expected ...blah, blah)

As i said, Labour's last manifesto is not that different from the situation in Germany - it's a long, long way from Foot's vision.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Apologies for the ongoing maths pedantry, but £x for completing y tasks in 32 hours' attendance, instead of £x for completing y tasks in 40 hours' attendance, is still £x. Its zero increase.in the salary paid.

Very obviously if you choose to consider the final sum as an hourly rate, then that hourly rate has increased (by 25%).

Thanks. It's astonishing that people are failing to understand this. The WHOLE POINT of the citied studies on this thread is that productivity goes up - ergo more is being achieved in less time. Can't be many salaried people who are literally paid by the hour?

 

[clapham_gull]

Funniest statement of the General election campaign so far ... Corbyn was to the left of Michael Foot and his choice of Shadow Chancellor has the stated goal of bringing down capitalism FFS

Simply not true and I'm not fan of Corbyn for a variety reasons. As stated many of their policies are pretty mainstream elsewhere.

The problem is that the press in this country respond to certain ideas (like reducing working hours) in the same way as right wing republicans respond to a National Health Service.

Before the last election the Conservatives were looking at a number of German workplace ideas, but were pulled when lost their majority.

Ideas like workers on the board, work councils (Joint Consultative Committees), a percentage of the company given over the staff etc....

All the sort of things that a right winger like yourself would be against because you confuse them with socialism.

 

[WATFORD zero]

View attachment 117066



I'm off out to dinner. I'm seriously worried that the level of stupidity being shown by some on this thread may be infectious

Why have you posted a picture of a five-pound note in response to someone asking when we used our veto?

Because he doesn't understand that we didn't actually use our veto to stay out of the Euro. For someone that thinks he's such an expert he does show rather a lot of simpleton tendencies.

Because we used our opt-out from the Maastricht Treaty and therefore vetoed the use of the Euro and kept Sterling.

I did try to warn you that the type of stupidity Ppf was displaying could be infectious

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/veto

 

[Diablo]

Thanks. It's astonishing that people are failing to understand this. The WHOLE POINT of the citied studies on this thread is that productivity goes up - ergo more is being achieved in less time. Can't be many salaried people who are literally paid by the hour?

I def don`t understand your thinking... More is being achieved in less time ??(Bollocks).

I`m making metal sheets. I can make 15 per hour x 39 hour week 585 ??

You are saying if I work 32 hour week I can make more than 585.

please explain how ?

 

[Bozza]

I def don`t understand your thinking... More is being achieved in less time ??(Bollocks).

I`m making metal sheets. I can make 15 per hour x 39 hour week 585 ??

You are saying if I work 32 hour week I can make more than 585.

please explain how ?

Probably not, no. As I said way up this thread, there will be exceptions - lots of them.

But for a lot of office-based staff in administrative, clerical, professional and knowledge-based work, there will be the opportunity to achieve more in less time, particularly if there has been more allowance for rest, allowing greater focus when on the job.

I don't think I've had a job where, if someone had said "you can have every Friday off if you get your work done by Thursday night", I wouldn't be all set for a nice long weekend most weeks. I'd spend less time pissing around for a start.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I def don`t understand your thinking... More is being achieved in less time ??(Bollocks).

I`m making metal sheets. I can make 15 per hour x 39 hour week 585 ??

You are saying if I work 32 hour week I can make more than 585.

please explain how ?

Yes - we're all very clear that the idea cannot work in the same way for all types of work.

But even your specific example, of how it can't work, is worthy of analysis.

So - you operate a machine that can cut / press 15 sheets per hour? In your working week you knock out 585 units.
You don't just stand watching the machine - you're shifting raw material, carrying out maintenance checks on the equipment, carrying and packing / loading the finished product, etc, as well.

Now let's say, your company invests in a new machine, or a modification, that enables it to now process 20 units an hour. You'd still have all the other tasks around the machining to complete - you'd have to work physically harder and quicker to keep up with the machinery's new output, but in 30 working hours you could now theoretically produce 600 units.

Which would be a fairer outcome, for both you and your boss - that you work more efficiently, produce 15 units more than you did, and still have an extra few hours off? Or that you still work 39 hours, knock out 780 units a week, and go home every day completely ****ed?

Because one of those scenarios is the existing society trajectory, and the other is painted as the road to communist apocalypse.

 

[Stat Brother]

Yes - we're all very clear that the idea cannot work in the same way for all types of work.

But even your specific example, of how it can't work, is worthy of analysis.

So - you operate a machine that can cut / press 15 sheets per hour? In your working week you knock out 585 units.
You don't just stand watching the machine - you're shifting raw material, carrying out maintenance checks on the equipment, carrying and packing / loading the finished product, etc, as well.

Now let's say, your company invests in a new machine, or a modification, that enables it to now process 20 units an hour. You'd still have all the other tasks around the machining to complete - you'd have to work physically harder and quicker to keep up with the machinery's new output, but in 30 working hours you could now theoretically produce 600 units.

Which would be a fairer outcome, for both you and your boss - that you work more efficiently, produce 15 units more than you did, and still have an extra few hours off? Or that you still work 39 hours, knock out 780 units a week, and go home every day completely ****ed?

Because one of those scenarios is the existing society trajectory, and the other is painted as the road to communist apocalypse.

Not to mention the time employees actually start work, go for breaks, return from breaks, guarantee finishing as early as possible, stand around moaning about how hard they're working.

I'll hazard a guess the motivation of a 32 hour week would go someway to increase productivity even in the most demanding and/or machine lead workplace.


Oh and I'll add - the money saved by not running heavy machinery for 7 hours, every week.

 

[WATFORD zero]

I know it is - it's the example I often use when I try to explain why I don't think any vote is wasted. Even as recently as 2015, you'd have said it was a safe seat with no chance of anything other than a Tory return. But those who voted Labour last time should have given belief to others that a vote for Labour in the constituency is anything but wasted.

I'd hate to give Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott any power over this country, which makes it a real toughie.

I can see your predicament.

I guess it's whether your preference for Johnson, JRM and Cummings over Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbott

is greater than

your preference for a Customs Union deal/Remain decided by a second referendum over an Irish Sea border deal/No deal decided by Johnson

Have you thought about a SWOT analysis

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Because we used our opt-out from the Maastricht Treaty and therefore vetoed the use of the Euro and kept Sterling.

I did try to warn you that the type of stupidity Ppf was displaying could be infectious

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/veto

Sigh …. we didn't use our veto as ALL members of the EU at the time had the option to join or not join the Euro …. it was entirely optional. Our veto is an instrument to block policy in SOME areas ( not all ) ….. we didn't use it to stay out of the Euro.