Politics - Post Election 2015

[Crem]

He might not be a millionaire or a billionaire but I would hazard a guess he’s employed by one. Think about that.
 

It’s the Labour Party that don’t care about your average family, not the Tories. If they cared they wouldn’t set out against the very people who are employing and making the vast majority of people their money. They’ve never understood business which is why they rely on ‘big state’ rather then the private sector.  It’s the Tories that encourage small business setups.

Its amusing how people think the Tories only care about the rich when you couldn’t be further from the truth.

 

[Crem]

Boris Johnston who I assume you voted for has called black people ‘picannines’, Muslim women ‘letterboxes’, called homosexuals ‘tank top wearing bum boys’, made a comment about black people having ‘watermelon smiles’ & compared gay marriage to bestiality.

Laughable that a Tory would even attempt to discuss inappropriate comments made by senior political figures within opposition parties. 

No it isn’t. I’m simply pointing out the issue is not simply confined to one party. And I’ve given you hard evidence not cut and paste quotes.

 

[EdinburghBlue]

No it isn’t. I’m simply pointing out the issue is not simply confined to one party. And I’ve given you hard evidence not cut and paste quotes.

I actually cannot believe I’m debating you about this but what exactly do you think a quote is? As in these are words that came out of Johnston’s mouth. As opposed to a politicians twitter. He said these things. That is a hard evidence. It’s fact. Look up the numerous interviews if you want.
 

Jesus Christ. Speechless.

 

[Crem]

Eh ? Most of the quotes you have given are from articles,  not interviews. Not sure by you think writing things in a paper is different to typing things on Twitter 

Could you be literally speechless please, rather than metaphorically? ?

 

[yorkleyblue]

@EdinburghBlue

It's the typical whataboutery that the right always use when called out on racism, homophobia, misogyny, and general hatred of anything slightly foreign.  And you are correct, these people also completely ignore any facts or evidence that you provide and keep  on with their right-wing fallacies. 

It's also indicative of a person's mindset that, when so many Labour people have said so many stupid things in public, the one that these people always pull out is a quote from a black woman.  Makes me wonder about their underlying views,  anyway.

The quotes you used and that I used above were copy and pasted directly from Boris Johnson articles in the Telegraph, still available online today.  Perhaps the right forgot to delete it, or perhaps they have no shame about having a leader with those attitudes.

I truly fail to understand how any one with any decency could vote Tory.  Vote for anyone else, but never them.

Still, trying to have a rational dicsussion with the modern-day tory supporter is very much like banging your head against the wall.  They have their Mail/Sun-induced paranoid fantasies pinned onto a single personality, and their fear of and hatred for foreigners ( except the good, white, english-speaking ones from America, Australia, NZ and Canada, obviously) triggered and encouraged by the disgusting right-wing nationalist politicians, the worst of which are the ones who have cultivated a pleasant or jovial public persona to make you think that they are nice people, whilst engendering the divisiveness that allows them free rein to control  society to their own benefit.

It's no surprise that a Labour party that said they would enforce a fair tax policy on billionaires and millionaires was so viciously and nastily attacked with outright lies by a mainstream press owned by billionaires, in support of a party of billionaires and millionaires.

 

[yorkleyblue]

The media here are obviously Conservative biased, but it's not that black/white, if you look at advert costs, Labour have spent the most money on Adverts, much more than the Tory's particularly on social media like Facebook and Snapchat. 

I posted a picture a little while ago, I think, but whoever spent most money is irrelevant.  It was proven that 88% of the Conservative ads were lies, and none of Labour's were.

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-12-06/88-of-conservative-ads-on-facebook-misleading/

No I didn’t. I said IF we left and it was obvious we would be better off. Read the whole thing in context.

Edit. This is what I said :

“The simple fact is it was never going to be in the EU’s interest to allow us to leave easily. Doing that would open a door for other countries to do so ( the EU would fall apart if we left and it was obvious that , by doing so, we were going to be, or are, better off ). So obstacles were always going to be put in our way. “

I also said previously that I voted remain which should have been a clue as to what I think of it all.

OK, I apologise for the misunderstanding of what you were saying there.  Has any other Tory or Leaver got a single tangible benefit of leaving Europe they can tell me about?  I've been asking this for nearly four years yet, and still haven't heard a single one.

Boris Johnston who I assume you voted for has called black people ‘picannines’, Muslim women ‘letterboxes’, called homosexuals ‘tank top wearing bum boys’, made a comment about black people having ‘watermelon smiles’ & compared gay marriage to bestiality.

Laughable that a Tory would even attempt to discuss inappropriate comments made by senior political figures within opposition parties. 

But it's a black woman.  Ticks several right-wing hate boxes.  If only she would admit to being a muslim  lesbian and chop one of her own legs off, they'd have a full house

 

[Crem]

Uses whataboutery to complain about whataboutery. Interesting .

A fair tax policy ? How is making someone pay proportionately more than someone else ‘fair’ . By its very definition it’s not fair is it ?

Here is an example.

1.  Person X earns £20000 and pays tax at 25% so £4000 ( I’ll ignore allowances because that’ll be even worse for you). Person Y earns £200000  and pays £40000 tax. Earns 10x more , pays 10x more. Fair.

2. Lefty nonsense. Person Y now pays 50% tax. £100000. He now earns 10x and pays 25x more in tax.

Im out. We are poles apart and I’m sure we are both happy about that ?

 

[PloKoon13]

 

[yorkleyblue]

Uses whataboutery to complain about whataboutery. Interesting .

A fair tax policy ? How is making someone pay proportionately more than someone else ‘fair’ . By its very definition it’s not fair is it ?

Here is an example.

1.  Person X earns £20000 and pays tax at 25% so £4000 ( I’ll ignore allowances because that’ll be even worse for you). Person Y earns £200000  and pays £40000 tax. Earns 10x more , pays 10x more. Fair.

2. Lefty nonsense. Person Y now pays 50% tax. £100000. He now earns 10x and pays 25x more in tax.

Im out. We are poles apart and I’m sure we are both happy about that ?

So it's greed that's the driving factor then?  How is making everyone pay a fixed percentage of their income above a certain rate making them "pay proportionally more"? 

No-one ever suggested your option 2.  Isn't that referred to as a straw man?

 

[Crem]

So it's greed that's the driving factor then?  How is making everyone pay a fixed percentage of their income above a certain rate making them "pay proportionally more"? 

No-one ever suggested your option 2.  Isn't that referred to as a straw man?

I’ve told you how it’s paying proportionately more. I’ve given you an example. I said I’d ignored allowance as it simplifies the point.

And yes, Corbyn wanted option 2. He wanted to increase the tax rate on those earning more than £80000 to 45% . He suggested those on more than £125000 pay 50%. My point is that high earners already pay more than their fair amount ( as there is not a simple flat tax rate ). Increasing that unfairness is even worse,

 

[bisright1]

I’ve told you how it’s paying proportionately more. I’ve given you an example. I said I’d ignored allowance as it simplifies the point.

And yes, Corbyn wanted option 2. He wanted to increase the tax rate on those earning more than £80000 to 45% . He suggested those on more than £125000 pay 50%. My point is that high earners already pay more than their fair amount ( as there is not a simple flat tax rate ). Increasing that unfairness is even worse,

If you think a flat rate is fair then there's no hope for you. 

You are literally sdvocating by that we should tax the poorest in society more and give the richest a tax break. Is that what you actually believe?

 

[Crem]

If you think a flat rate is fair then there's no hope for you. 

You are literally sdvocating by that we should tax the poorest in society more and give the richest a tax break. Is that what you actually believe?

How am I suggesting they are given a tax break ? They would still pay tax on every pound they earn.

Of course a flat rate is fair. I’ve said why. I’ve given an example. Nowhere have I said I would make the poor pay more ( I took out allowances to simplify my point. I wouldn’t ACTUALLY  remove allowance . I even said it would make the comparison worse if I did include it as the low paid  already pay proportionately less tax due to them having  the first 10k free of it ).I suggest you look up what the word fair is rather spending time worry about my hope.

 

[Ewell CFC]

Opposing the far right is not being a ‘Corbyn groupie’. There is a middle ground between the Tories and the ultra left. 
 

You’ve literally ignored everything in the article I’ve sent you and failed to understand it’s about more than ‘the oil’. 
 

interesting you call others fools when you I assume are not a millionaire or billionaire? yet vote for a party who could not give a single f**k about you. The tories are for the elite and if you don’t fall in to that category then they couldn’t give a single f**k about you or your family.

But as I say, you fail to address the point I made around the finances between England and Scotland. Hopefully we will soon both get our way.

My financial status is my own business, however if your into the childish class warfare, the Tories only about the idle rich narrative that’s your own funeral Jock me old son.

You probably think anyone with money inherited it and rides around on a pushbike waving a tennis racket saying “ Pip pip old sport” rather than consider the possibility that they took gambles and worked very hard.

You seen very offended by misuse of language ( misuse in the snowflake/ I’m so offended sense), however no doubt you’ve referred to Johnson as a posh, Eton educated xxxx in your time, bit offensive normal folk would agree, however in your silly little world you can kick up, but not kick down.

On a serious note why during TV weather forecasts do they spend so much time telling the viewers what the weathers doing in the Highlands and Islands.

Other than grouse and beef cattle no f**ker lives there- I’m exaggerating slightly however the population above Aberdeen is roughly the same as the London Borough of Bromley. They might as well pontificate about the forecast in the Irish Sea.

” See you later Jimmy”

 

[Crem]

I can’t believe there are so many lefties on here who support Chelsea from the Borough of Kensington and Chelsea in London. Home of the silver spoon.

You lot need to support some downtrodden northern team.

( joke, btw )

 

[Davey Baby]

I also take your point on the fact some think austerity could have continued, but I guess the public have completely lost their appetite for it and lost the understanding of just why it was a necessary evil ?

It was only a necessary evil depending on your ideology, and to claim it wasn't ideological is disingenuous. Not all economists will tell you it was necessary, far from it.

When you're the fifth biggest and richest economy in the world, hitting those in society who need help most can never be justified, in my opinion. The disabled, the old, the cold and the hungry, hit hardest in the pocket. Homeless people dying on the streets, many of them ex-servicemen and women, while the bankers got bonuses?

You can justify that to your kids? You can tell them it's absolutely necessary? It's ideological mate, and it's completely unjustifiable. You may ask why the Tories won again in that case, and the simple answer in my opinion is Brexit. Despite having unpopular leaders, Labour and the Lib Dems would have cleaned up were it not for their self-sabotaging Brexit policies, and the Tories were able to exploit that, mercilessly.

That's my opinion though not necessarily the opinion of the Chelsea fanbase as a whole.

 

[bisright1]

How am I suggesting they are given a tax break ? They would still pay tax on every pound they earn.

Of course a flat rate is fair. I’ve said why. I’ve given an example. Nowhere have I said I would make the poor pay more ( I took out allowances to simplify my point. I wouldn’t ACTUALLY  remove allowance . I even said it would make the comparison worse if I did include it as the low paid  already pay proportionately less tax due to them having  the first 10k free of it ).I suggest you look up what the word fair is rather spending time worry about my hope.

If it's a flat rate then mathematically the poorer pay more and the richer pay less. I just pointed out if we moved to a flat rate then that is what would happen. 

Fair for me is that tax is paid by those who have been successful to pay back society and improve it. I'd genuinely make anyone earning under 20k not have to pay income tax and increase the richest more - of which I am one. 

Unfair is that the gap between the richest and poorest is increasing significantly every year. Something needs to be done. 

 

[bisright1]

It was only a necessary evil depending on your ideology, and to claim it wasn't ideological is disingenuous. Not all economists will tell you it was necessary, far from it.

When you're the fifth biggest and richest economy in the world, hitting those in society who need help most can never be justified, in my opinion. The disabled, the old, the cold and the hungry, hit hardest in the pocket. Homeless people dying on the streets, many of them ex-servicemen and women, while the bankers got bonuses?

You can justify that to your kids? You can tell them it's absolutely necessary? It's ideological mate, and it's completely unjustifiable. You may ask why the Tories won again in that case, and the simple answer in my opinion is Brexit. Despite having unpopular leaders, Labour and the Lib Dems would have cleaned up were it not for their self-sabotaging Brexit policies, and the Tories were able to exploit that, mercilessly.

That's my opinion though not necessarily the opinion of the Chelsea fanbase as a whole.

Let's not disguise as well that throughout austerity, the richest earnt more and house prices went up. It wasn't just that the poorest suffered, the richest benefited as well. 

 

[bluedave]

I’ve told you how it’s paying proportionately more. I’ve given you an example. I said I’d ignored allowance as it simplifies the point.

And yes, Corbyn wanted option 2. He wanted to increase the tax rate on those earning more than £80000 to 45% . He suggested those on more than £125000 pay 50%. My point is that high earners already pay more than their fair amount ( as there is not a simple flat tax rate ). Increasing that unfairness is even worse,

I don't think you understand how marginal tax rates work. This picture breaks it down for you. My understanding is that, under Labour's plan, somebody earning 100k would have their total tax rate increased from 27.5% by at most a couple of percent. It's not that that big of a deal to the individual (and they can definitely afford it). Your argument is basically 'a flat tax rate is fair because it's a flat tax rate', which is silly.

 

[coco]

View attachment 11237

Interesting.

56% of the highly educated electorate were not united and split their votes between Lab/Lib

45% of the lowest educated electorate figured out it was better to not divide their vote between Con/UKIP/Br

So much for education.

 

[coco]

I don't think you understand how marginal tax rates work. This picture breaks it down for you. My understanding is that, under Labour's plan, somebody earning 100k would have their total tax rate increased from 27.5% by at most a couple of percent. It's not that that big of a deal to the individual (and they can definitely afford it). Your argument is basically 'a flat tax rate is fair because it's a flat tax rate', which is silly.

If you turn the page over it has 500k earners on the other side, its a full green BAR with 'overseas' written on it.