[Politics] The General Election Thread

[NooBHA]

I do understand that, but please also remember that limited company owners pay corporation tax as well, the payments made by each entity are significant. Unless they lie about costs .... I know someone who did this in a big way.

My views are based on the honest people who have several customers, a true business, with risks. We can be envious of a plumber, landscaper or one man band accountant who’s ended up doing ok, but they could and do lose it all tomorrow, 100,000’s lose their businesses each year.

I actually agree with you about those who run a limited company, but with just one ultimate engager. From my experience, earning between £300 and £900 a day. You and I know that they’re a de facto employee, it’s a tax ruse. But they’re not the instigator in any shape or form. The ultimate engager is doing it to save 13.8% in employers NIC, plus they don’t get lumbered with employment rights. The ultimate engagers include the BBC and NHS, I know people making fortunes that way.

I guess that you and I can agree that those arrangements must be once and for all obliterated?

The BBC are beginning to comply with IR 35. Many clients of mine are engaged by the BBC and 90% of them are taxed under PAYE now. By the end of next year. Only the genuine freelancers will be treated as such. That said they have had to be dragged kicking and screaming by HMRC to do so

 

[theonlymikey]

Labour Manifesto. Rival think tank confirms although they believe further taxation may be required, they say:

"With high inequality and stagnant productivity, none of us should be satisfied with the status quo."

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/publications/doubling-down-on-a-bigger-state/

 

[Ninja Elephant]

There are so many "famous" people wading in who are looking at just one topic that interests them, specifically. The election isn't about one topic, it's about all of them. It's not about Brexit, it's also about housing and education and the NHS and reducing the reliance on food banks and a million other topics. You're not going to be aligned 100% with the party you think should be in power, but there's no expectation that you have to be in order to vote. Rachel Riley says she doesn't endorse Boris Johnson, but is 100% against Jeremy Corbyn for the anti-semitism row which keeps hanging around like a cloud of flies around a freshly laid cowpat. Is there really anything to it, any actual substance? Or is it being publicised all of the time for the benefit of the Conservatives?

I see this election as being very similar to the American presidential election of 2016 - two unpopular choices but you've got to vote for one of them!

Luckily for me, it's easy on a local level. It's Peter Kyle.

 

[Baldseagull]

This notion that someone sitting on the political fence is some kind of enlightened position of political freewill or intellectual flexibility I find frankly ludicrous. You are political centrists simple as that, as wedded to an ideology as anyone else, the only difference is political parties skirt into your politics at different times, but you are no different to someone who believes in the politics of the left or the right. Centrists are as entrenched as anyone else. Their fall back position of "I voted Labour in 1997, but Libs in 2005, then Tory in 2010, I'm so above those that follow a party..." is a delusion.

Politics is about passion, believe, ambition. It can be exciting, but it can also deliver huge lows, feel desperate. The parallels with watching a football team are in some respect are relevant, and true. You don't always agree with your football team's decisions, their manager, their owner or chairman, their tactics – but it's better than following the another team.

Please tell me, these enlightened individuals who take this higher ground on not following a particular party, who does a person who believe in policies of the left vote for other than Labour or Green? There is no one else. Even Blair's Tory-lite Labour was still more left than the other main parties have ever been.

Get off your fences, start ignoring the personalities and looking at the policies. You have to pick a side. If you don't like what you see, you have to pick the lesser evil. It is that simple.

I would say Lib dems were further left than Blair during that period, and certainly the Greens.

 

[portslade seagull]

Pathetic ! I have worked hard for years and the only " Pay Rise" I ever get is if/when the government raises the Income Tax personal allowance.

Yes I have worked hard you ****. From council house beginnings I put myself out to improve and not wait for handouts as my mum and dad struggled. My jobs haven't been great but I went to college to improve things. Try it and stop blaming everybody else ffs

 

[Baldseagull]

Amusing that a chart lifted from an article in the Times titled Labour manifesto: Big plans don’t bear real scrutiny by the director of the IFS is being used on here to suggest Labours plan are in any way credible....

Labour is looking to increase public spending by more than £130 billion a year. That’s on a base of about £810 billion. This would increase public spending by about six percentage points of national income. It would take the share spent by government to levels not sustained in peacetime.

These numbers ignore the costs of nationalising water, energy, rail, mail and BT Openreach. They also ignore the long-term consequences of a particularly imprudent pledge: that state pension ages will not rise beyond 66. That would mean spending on state pensions rising by more than £60 billion a year by the 2050s relative to today.

Of that £130 billion of extra spending, £55 billion is earmarked for capital investment. That would double investment spending. There is a strong case for more investment spending, but increases on this scale probably couldn’t be achieved in an effective and efficient manner over a parliament. Labour would be content to borrow the additional £55 billion a year required to fund its spending, and would hence be comfortable with public sector debt rising over time. But it has said it wants to raise taxes by £80 billion a year.

That too is a vast increase, and it would take our tax burden to its highest level in history. About half of that £80 billion increase would supposedly come from increases in corporation tax. That would take our corporation tax revenue from about the OECD average to among the very highest, and right to the top of the G7 league table.

The claim that the scale of public spending that Labour desires can be financed entirely by taxing companies and “the rich” does not stand up to scrutiny. Corporation tax is in the end paid by people — increasing it would mean higher prices, lower wages, or less valuable pensions and savings. If you really want to raise an extra £80 billion you are almost certainly going to have to raise broad-based taxes, which directly affect large numbers of people.....

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/labour-manifesto-big-plans-dont-bear-real-scrutiny-g9cg7ncxx

..... amazing indeed.

A little bit misleading that chart, it might be correct in that the German State takes less than the UK State does in corporation tax, but there is a municipal surcharge on businesses for local Government. A German Company pays more tax on it's profits than a UK company.
In the UK, central government takes all the tax and distributes some back to local Government, in Germany, local Government takes it directly.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

There are so many "famous" people wading in who are looking at just one topic that interests them, specifically. The election isn't about one topic, it's about all of them. It's not about Brexit, it's also about housing and education and the NHS and reducing the reliance on food banks and a million other topics. You're not going to be aligned 100% with the party you think should be in power, but there's no expectation that you have to be in order to vote. Rachel Riley says she doesn't endorse Boris Johnson, but is 100% against Jeremy Corbyn for the anti-semitism row which keeps hanging around like a cloud of flies around a freshly laid cowpat. Is there really anything to it, any actual substance? Or is it being publicised all of the time for the benefit of the Conservatives?

I see this election as being very similar to the American presidential election of 2016 - two unpopular choices but you've got to vote for one of them!

Luckily for me, it's easy on a local level. It's Peter Kyle.

the bloke that didn't want an election , along with Lucas
regards
DG

 

[vegster]

Yes I have worked hard you ****. From council house beginnings I put myself out to improve and not wait for handouts as my mum and dad struggled. My jobs haven't been great but I went to college to improve things. Try it and stop blaming everybody else ffs

Maybe you should work on your manners next ? Certainly room for improvement there. As for my position. I'm not blaming everybody else, I will however lay the blame on a non unionised culture of corporate greed that has been tolerated and encouraged over the last 10 years or so at the expense of those that generate the wealth.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Maybe you should work on your manners next ? Certainly room for improvement there. As for my position. I'm not blaming everybody else, I will however lay the blame on a non unionised culture of corporate greed that has been tolerated and encouraged over the last 10 years or so at the expense of those that generate the wealth.

sounds like the 1901, do you sit there by any chance ?
regards
DF

 

[Hugo Rune]

Shouty and Stupid. Well he's certainly not helping a certain stereotype

What I want to know is who would employ him on over 80K (I assume it's not in a role that requires any sort of basic Maths)

He seemed to be very angry and upset about Doctors earning more than him. I’m sure he is benefiting society more than any of us will ever know!

 

[portslade seagull]

Maybe you should work on your manners next ? Certainly room for improvement there. As for my position. I'm not blaming everybody else, I will however lay the blame on a non unionised culture of corporate greed that has been tolerated and encouraged over the last 10 years or so at the expense of those that generate the wealth.

Sorry Veg not normally that irked

 

[Baldseagull]

When you lie so much, your lies about your lies in your mind become some kind of truth...

Interesting that Gove keeps referring to polemics:
A polemic is contentious rhetoric that is intended to support a specific position by aggressive claims and undermining of the opposing position. Polemics are mostly seen in arguments about controversial topics. The practice of such argumentation is called polemics
He's using that argument in defence of setting up the Tory twitter account as FactCheck...can you believe this guy? Honestly....why would you vote for them...why?

I can hear mooing in the background, can't see any cattle, but the Bullshit is in plain view.

 

[vegster]

Sorry Veg not normally that irked

Thanks for being honest, you are forgiven.

 

[Baldseagull]

Well I'm glad that's been cleared up then.

[tweet]1197560606494281729[/tweet]

The word "second" is the problem, it will be a referendum on Corbyns Brexit or Remain, not a second in or out referendum.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

The word "second" is the problem, it will be a referendum on Corbyns Brexit or Remain, not a second in or out referendum.

You are saying Corbyn's Brexit isn't really leaving the EU then ... I understand your confusion.

 

[beorhthelm]

The word "second" is the problem, it will be a referendum on Corbyns Brexit or Remain, not a second in or out referendum.

not really. its a second referendum on the subject with leave better defined, and i cant see why the politican cant just say that. things change, views change, arent we allowed to say so any more?

 

[Weststander]

Worth putting these to together given the attempts at misinformation on recent posts...

Unfortunately that bar chart is too simplistic, and contains exaggerations. Amendments required are:

1. Tories announced this week that CT will stay at 19% (the 17% proposed for future fiscal years, has been ditched).

2. USA company tax rate on its domestic companies is 21%, with an enhancement to that depending on individual states.

3. France small companies pay 28%, being rapidly reduced year on year, eg soon 25%.

4. Italy’s CT rate is 27.9%

Then, onto the socio-economic paradises all us NSC’ers have a passion for:

Sweden 21%
Finland 20%
Denmark 22%
Ireland 12.5%
Netherlands 19% small companies

I’d bet not one person on NSC had a clue about these low CT rates, other than the ultra knowledgeable [MENTION=30752]NooBHA[/MENTION].

To add, CT rates across the EU not very so long were circa 33%, but to retain businesses/employers/wealth creators in an ever competitive world, governments of all persuasions have been reducing CT rates at a pace.

 

[The Clamp]

sounds like the 1901, do you sit there by any chance ?
regards
DF

Better than where you sit on match days.

 

[dazzer6666]

QT Election Leaders Special just kicking off on BBC1........

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Steptoe just walked on stage ... Q: Should business be scared of Labour . A: No