The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[meregreen]

The Tories paid for tax cuts to the rich by cutting welfare and services, if you want to know where the money is coming from to fund Labours commitment to help those struggling under Tory dogma driven austerity, we could try reversing those tax cuts for a start. 

Edited May 4, 2017 by meregreen

[Jon]

My mate is standing for the Labour Party in Macclesfield! He's a councillor who has done loads of good work for the town:

https://www.facebook.com/PuttickForMacclesfield/

It may get me to vote for him/Labour, as opposed to the Greens, which would be my natural choice.

 

[Jon]

4 minutes ago, meregreen said:

The Tories paid for tax cuts to the rich by cutting welfare and services, if you want to know where the money is coming from to fund Labours commitment to help those struggling under Tory dogma driven austerity, we could try reversing those cuts for a start. 

agreed. I would however also like Labour to raise direct taxation. It's been off the agenda since Thatcher, but it's progressive, and needs to be done to continue adequate funding to the likes of public services and the NHS. I don't know why it would necessarily be a vote loser. People can see that pretty much all public services are underfunded. 

[TrentVilla]

23 minutes ago, meregreen said:

Oh please, not this old chestnut again, it was the Tory bankers who "bankrupted" the nation. Public finances under Labour were healthier than they had been for decades. Don't equate private debt from the casino banking industry with public finances. Incidentally if the Tories had been in power during the global banking crisis, chances are things would have been much worse as they were strong advocates of less regulation in the sector. Let's stick to facts shall we and not peddle Daily Heil bullshit.

I agree. But chief amongst Labour's many problems is that they have failed to make this case convincingly or rather the Tories have succeeded in peddling their line better.

People can blame an ill informed electorate or question their sanity if they wish, it is still Labour's problem.

The Tories dodged the bullet of the crash, agreed with the bail outs then crucified Labour for them and with them. Cutting public services and blaiming Labour for them doing so even though there was a large degree of ideological motivation to their actions.

Meanwhile the Turkey's vote for Christmas.

Even now all these years later Labour haven't successfully refuted this, they've not really driven home the message about the ideological cuts by the Tories and the smokescreen of austerity. They've not got the message home to people, in part because they've been to busy fighting amongst themselves.

Sure some will blame the right wing media and claim Corbyn doesn't get the coverage or fair coverage he deserves, there is some truth in that I guess. It doesn't change the fact that the problem exists.

Then you have Dianne Abbott.

It might be BS but the Tories have a strong narrative and no matter how weak their leader may be that is enough because they aren't the ones that need to change people's opinions.

 

[JB]

Exactly. Labour let the Tories peddle that narrative relentlessly and are too scared to fight back. They only have themselves to blame that a very large proportion of the general public accept it as fact and ill-informed people lap it up and regurgitate it. 

As I said before, a Labour party that comes out all guns blazing could win this election. 

Edited May 4, 2017 by JB

[sharkyvilla]

11 hours ago, darrenm said:

You're actually quoting the telegraph as a fair source for information about Jeremy Corbyn?

Like I say, I can't find any actual details (e.g. from unbiased sources)

You're starting to sound a bit like Darren M Trump with this stuff.

[MakemineVanilla]

1 hour ago, meregreen said:

Oh please, not this old chestnut again, it was the Tory bankers who "bankrupted" the nation. Public finances under Labour were healthier than they had been for decades. Don't equate private debt from the casino banking industry with public finances. Incidentally if the Tories had been in power during the global banking crisis, chances are things would have been much worse as they were strong advocates of less regulation in the sector. Let's stick to facts shall we and not peddle Daily Heil bullshit.

Yeah, but let's not peddle the BS of the Morning Star either.

New Labour failed badly.

 

[Demitri_C]

1 hour ago, meregreen said:

Oh please, not this old chestnut again, it was the Tory bankers who "bankrupted" the nation. Public finances under Labour were healthier than they had been for decades. Don't equate private debt from the casino banking industry with public finances. Incidentally if the Tories had been in power during the global banking crisis, chances are things would have been much worse as they were strong advocates of less regulation in the sector. Let's stick to facts shall we and not peddle Daily Heil bullshit.

It's funny you say it's the Tory government but it's the responsibility of the powers in charge to regulate them. But Blair was more interested j  taking us into a war we didn't need to be involved in wonder how much that also cost? Let's not forgot that impressive Gordan Brown selling all our gold too. Slate the Tory party fine but making excuses for that pathetic party at the time is laughable.

[meregreen]

Never read the Morning Star in my life. So can't comment. Actually I think Labour were pretty good in office from 97 to 2010. Not perfect by any means, I'm old Labour by instinct, so would have liked to see more done to address the obscene levels of wealth distribution in this country. But hey ho, if the Tories get in with a large majority then you ain't seen nothing yet. Were standing on the edge of a precipice, and this lot it seems, are quite happy to jump off it. 

[Demitri_C]

7 minutes ago, meregreen said:

Never read the Morning Star in my life. So can't comment. Actually I think Labour were pretty good in office from 97 to 2010. Not perfect by any means, I'm old Labour by instinct, so would have liked to see more done to address the obscene levels of wealth distribution in this country. But hey ho, if the Tories get in with a large majority then you ain't seen nothing yet. Were standing on the edge of a precipice, and this lot it seems, are quite happy to jump off it. 

I am not saying the Tory party are great whatsoever, but that time was pretty shit in my view. Countless lies and corruption under bliar and his cronies.

Bliar for me is a criminal and complete scum

[meregreen]

15 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

It's funny you say it's the Tory government but it's the responsibility of the powers in charge to regulate them. But Blair was more interested j  taking us into a war we didn't need to be involved in wonder how much that also cost? Let's not forgot that impressive Gordan Brown selling all our gold too. Slate the Tory party fine but making excuses for that pathetic party at the time is laughable.

The Tories were in favour of the war in Iraq , indeed the only serious opposition came from Labours own back benches, including one Jeremy Corbyn. The Gold sold was actually a drop in the ocean in the general scale of things. He also presided over the longest period of sustained growth in the economy since records began. Not quite the pathetic party you like to portray when you actually get past that right wing bullshit espoused by the Tory press.

[snowychap]

35 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Let's not forgot that impressive Gordan Brown selling all our gold too.

Aaargh, not this gold nonsense again.

[Demitri_C]

24 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Aaargh, not this gold nonsense again.

Snowy I've missed you welcome, knew that would being you back 

[Demitri_C]

45 minutes ago, meregreen said:

The Tories were in favour of the war in Iraq , indeed the only serious opposition came from Labours own back benches, including one Jeremy Corbyn. The Gold sold was actually a drop in the ocean in the general scale of things. He also presided over the longest period of sustained growth in the economy since records began. Not quite the pathetic party you like to portray when you actually get past that right wing bullshit espoused by the Tory press.

The Tories were in favour of the war in Iraq , indeed the only serious opposition came from Labours own back benches, including one Jeremy Corbyn. The Gold sold was actually a drop in the ocean in the general scale of things. He also presided over the longest period of sustained growth in the economy since records began. Not quite the pathetic party you like to portray when you actually get past that right wing bullshit espoused by the Tory press.

So it wasn't bliar that went round kissing bushes arse and dragging us into a needless war? He put it into the commons for the vote. I hold him responsible more than anyone with his lies and people getting killed for absolutely nothing 

The guy is scum

[Jon]

2 hours ago, JB said:

 

As I said before, a Labour party that comes out all guns blazing could win this election. 

They'd certainly do better than a timid, apologist Labour.

I don't know why Corbyn appears to want to do/be both. Given his track record, he could go full anti austerity and propose proper wealth redistribution. But he's already gone down the 'no increase in taxes' route. Once you've gone down that route, various spending pledges hold less water ....  

[Risso]

3 hours ago, meregreen said:

The Tories paid for tax cuts to the rich by cutting welfare and services, if you want to know where the money is coming from to fund Labours commitment to help those struggling under Tory dogma driven austerity, we could try reversing those tax cuts for a start. 

Which tax cuts are those then, and how much money is at play?

[blandy]

24 minutes ago, Risso said:

Which tax cuts are those then, and how much money is at play?

I think Labour have said that while the tories have pledged to cut corporation tax and capital gains tax that Labour would find an alternative use for the money involved in those cuts - spending it Laboury things, instead. They said the CGT change the tories plan will reduce Gov't income by 3 billion compared to what it is now. Labour will use that 3 billion for a bunch of other stuff.

Trusting either of them is another matter.

That's the future stuff. The past stuff is detailed by the IFS in a pdf file here

Quote

The last five years have seen considerable policy activity in the tax and benefit sphere: in total, some £56 billion per year of giveaways and £89 billion per year of takeaways by 2015---16. Most of the main tax reforms have simply changed rates or thresholds within current structures --- the increase in the main rate of VAT, cuts to the main corporation tax rate, real cuts to the rates of fuel duties and the big increase in the income tax personal allowance being the most important. Only for pensions and savings has there been a significant reshaping in terms of what is taxed and what is not. Changes to benefits have mostly been straightforward cuts in generosity, with more significant structural reform coming in the next parliament --- the introduction of the single-tier pension, the introduction of universal credit and the replacement of disability living allowance (DLA) with personal independence payment (PIP).

 

[TrentVilla]

1 hour ago, Risso said:

Which tax cuts are those then, and how much money is at play?

There are others far more well informed on this area of policy than me, most likely you included, but this question made me question my own perception. I would have answered, if asked that the Tories had cut tax for the wealthy but I wasn't sure if this was just an assumption on my part. But a quick look turned up the below, there were lots of other similar articles.

I appreciate these changes were introduced by Osborne and the article even says they go against May's "political mantra" but it was still this Government and the Tory party. Besides, May doesn't particularly strike me as someone with a political mantra, more as someone that blows with the wind.

So, it seems to me the point made by @meregreen has some merit but I'd be interested to hear a counter view on this one, if there is one, as I may still be being swayed by my deep rooted mistrust of of the Tories and assumption that this is just what they do.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/01/huge-tax-giveaway-for-rich-as-poor-are-hit-george-osborne-tax-benefit-budget-changes

Quote

The richest will reap 80% of the rewards from the tax and benefit changes that start to come into effect this week, while the poorest will become worse off, according to detailed analysis by the Resolution Foundation.

The independent thinktank’s research shows that the effect of £2bn of income tax cuts and more than £1bn of welfare cuts will add up to a huge transfer of wealth from low- and middle-income households to richer ones.

The reforms, set in train by former chancellor George Osborne, run directly contrary to the political mantra of Theresa May, who has said she wants to govern in the interests of everyone and “not just the privileged few”.

The changes include raising the personal tax allowance from £11,000 to £11,500; lifting the threshold for higher-rate tax from £43,000 to £45,000; freezing all working-age benefits; removing the family element (£545) from tax credits and universal credit for new claims or births; and applying a two-child limit to new claims or births in the tax credit system.

David Finch, senior economic analyst at the Resolution Foundation, said: “The overall package amounts to a £1bn net giveaway from the public purse. But the skewed nature of this generosity means that better-off households will receive four-fifths of the gains, while the poorest third of households will be worse off overall.”

[jon_c]

There were millionaire MP's on both sides of the benches who voted the bill to cut tax credits and welfare of the poor. 184 Labour MP's didn't vote against it. Corbyn to his credit, did. 

I won't list them here, but it's easy enough to google. 

[Demitri_C]

4 minutes ago, jon_c said:

There were millionaire MP's on both sides of the benches who voted the bill to cut tax credits and welfare of the poor. 184 Labour MP's didn't vote against it. Corbyn to his credit, did. 

I won't list them here, but it's easy enough to google. 

The working class party, my arse