Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

[Fox Ulike]

Just now, Webbo said:

Ah, obviously official govt statistics aren't as accurate and impartial as "The Tax Justice". 

It's not that. It's that you don't understand what the statistics that you're quoting mean.

 

My source is Parliament, whose job it is to hold the Government to account. And Parliament say:

 

"We cannot judge how effective HMRC is at reducing the tax gap because the way it reports its performance is too confusing"

 

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmpubacc/674/67405.htm

 

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

I would totally replace some benefits with a payment card.  For a start you would get massive discounts from retailers, and secondly you could restrict them so they don't buy booze and fags.

I wouldn't go that far. People should allowed to spend their money, even benefits, how they like, but we should expect them to meet their responsibilities and not make excuses for them.

[Webbo]

2 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

It's not that. It's that you don't understand what the statistics that you're quoting mean.

 

My source is Parliament, whose job it is to hold the Government to account. And Parliament say:

 

"We cannot judge how effective HMRC is at reducing the tax gap because the way it reports its performance is too confusing"

 

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmpubacc/674/67405.htm

 

So it's quite possible that they're doing even better than they claim?

[Alf Bentley]

1 hour ago, MattP said:

I don't understand the comparison at all here, why would me (or anyone) call on May, Hammond, Green & Rudd to tell their Tory followers why they're pro-Remain? They already have, they did it during the referendum campaign or have still done afterwards. Makes no sense at all to compare that to Corbyn.

 

No Tory I know is kidding themselves that these people geniuinely want to leave, they just now expect them to carry out the decision they handed over to the people.

 

McDonnell said just a few months ago on the Andrew Marr that staying in the single market would not be respecting the referendum result - https://www.politicshome.com/news/europe/eu-policy-agenda/brexit/news/86604/labour-rules-out-trying-keep-britain-eu-single-market.

 

Corbyn barely ever asks a question on the subject at PMQ's and he wanted to invoke Article 50 the next day! Had he been PM we'd now have about 6 months to wrap this up - http://labourlist.org/2016/06/corbyn-article-50-has-to-be-invoked-now/

 

What is the natural Tory position? As far as I can from the government it's still to leave the single market, it's still to leave the customs union and it's still to seek a transitional period, I still can't see anything that is different from the aims that were set out in either the Lancaster Houise speech or the Florence speech.

 

What is Labour's current position? I'd love to know, I've seen ten Labour MP's on TV over the last couple of weeks and still not a single one can explain if they want to stay in the single market or customs union, we just get cliche after cliche about "jobs first" or "not taking anything off the table" - must like we have done with every other thing on the issue when they are asked about it.

 

The point of the comparison was that the Tory Remainers very reasonably adapted to the changed circumstances: they had lost the referendum, it was now their party policy to implement Brexit, so they got on with it, while seeking a Softer Brexit than the likes of IDS, Fox and Gove want.

 

Similarly, Corbyn adapted his position to changed circumstances, although the reasons and timescale were a bit different. He had a long track record of Euroscepticism but by the referendum was advocating a grudging Remain vote (maybe because his own views had shifted, maybe because he had compromised with the dominant stance in his party). Like the Tory Remainers, he then adapted to the referendum result, accepting that Brexit had to happen but opposing the sort of Brexit that would damage our economy, cost jobs, isolate the UK and allow rights to be stripped away through deregulation. He had shifted his position before the referendum campaign, but his shift since the vote mirrors that of the Tory Remainers.

 

If you want a more precise comparison to your call for Corbyn to advocate pro-Brexit sentiments, then how about Farage, Hannan, Paterson & co advocating that we stay in the Single Market as they used to?

(Propaganda alert: no dates specified in video, but then it's a fair while since Corbyn called for us to leave the EU, I think)

 

McDonnell's comment was wrong (the single market wasn't on the ballot paper). Likewise, Corbyn's call to trigger Article 50 immediately was wrong. Maybe those comments did stem from continued hostility to the EU, but maybe they were just clumsily trying to keep on-side with the 1/3 of Labour voters who voted Leave. I assume Corbyn doesn't raise Brexit at PMQs precisely because he knows that May will just quote his past Eurosceptic comments back at him. Personally, I'd like to see him take that on, justify his changed stance (particularly as she has also changed hers) and address the biggest issue of our era.....but I can understand why he ducks it, and leaving it to Starmer does seem to work, as you say.

 

I don't share your problem with Labour being vague about whether they'd like to be inside the Single Market and Customs Union or just closely aligned to protect UK economic interests. The situation is fluid both because we don't yet know what will be available in Brexit negotiations and because we don't know whether public opinion will shift. Also, to me there isn't a massive difference between those 2 options (both variants of Soft Brexit to me). Whereas there is a massive difference between either of them and the sort of Hard Brexit that the Brexiteer Tories want: no close alignment with single market/customs union, extensive deregulation, negotiating our own trade deals to undercut the EU in regulatory terms, an inevitable hard border in Ireland .....the sort of approach that will lead to minimal agreement with the EU, disastrous trading terms and severe economic/social damage to the UK.

 

There are differences on the Labour side between ardent Remainers and those (maybe still including Corbyn) who favour Brexit but with little deregulation and a close relationship with the EU. That might become a problem for Labour if Remain ever becomes an option again, but that may never happen. In the meantime, everyone on the Labour side can unite around a Soft Brexit stance, whether we're in the single market/customs union or just closely aligned.

 

The differences on the Tory side are much wider and more existential. I'd expect the EU to be prepared to do a half-decent deal on Soft Brexit terms (EFTA/EEA or close alignment) but certainly not if the UK wants to undercut EU traders, within the EU and globally, by slashing regulations/standards etc. Surely, if May persists along the lines negotiated last week, then her Brexiteer wing will never accept that, as Gove has intimated.....while if she goes for what you lot see as "proper Brexit" (regulatory and customs divergence, external trade deals on our own terms), then the likes of Hammond, Green & Rudd will never accept it....or will they? We'd then effectively have a UKIP govt by default.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

4 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

 

 

 

Nobody's asking people to do "everything for everyone all of the time" though, are they? They're asking for a bit of cash to help provide children - whose parents can't, or won't for whatever reason, provide breakfast - with a bit of grub to help them start their school day right.

 

Obviously one meal a day is better than nothing, by the way. Nothing means children will literally starve to death. It doesn't make it right though, that in 2017 in a country in the civilised world, that we allow children to go hungry in our schools. We should be embarrassed as a nation that we even think that's anywhere close to adequate.

I guess the question is where do you stop? If you feed these children, then when do you stop feeding children if Lazy parents decide to send in their kids hungry too?

 

If you help the hungry children in the mornings say it actually costs (a bit of cash) £1 billion to implement, there's thousands and hungry elderly people who need breakfast too and probably many thousands of people who for whatever reason are not making the correct choices. Obviously they all need help but we have limited resources sadly we cant help everyone or at least the government cant. This is where charities can step in.

 

My point is the government can not be expected to and can not do everything, even when it does government often does it in a rather inefficient way.

 

The only real way to have a more well funded system is for EVERYONE to pay more tax. Only the Lib Dems have been honest about this.

 

Labour think you can just punish the rich, that is not the solution.

[Rogstanley]

1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said:

Ditto.

 

My priorities are fine. You are the one believing that everyone is poor and dying in our streets. Saying its like Victorian Britain out there, wake up its not.

 

Also weak, extremely weak arguments, fact is (look outside, if you can maybe look up from whichever left wing news blog your read) the vast majority of people are getting on with life, they have jobs, they have a home, there might be a bit of a squeeze on budgets due to increasing inflation and wages not growing as fast due to cheap imported labour; artificially holding down wage growth, but you cut out a take away or a meal out you are fine. There might be a relatively small number of people with problems; I am sure some of them get help and some of them maybe let down by the system. That is always going to happen unfortunately, can it improve maybe, will throwing unlimited amounts of money and staff at it make a difference probably not. Its not bad out there, this country is still one of the best places to live in the world and will continue to be so.

 

The delusion that a mad hard left Socialist can fix the minor problems this country has by spanking the rich and business with extra tax, the ones who employ records numbers of normal average people who are doing fine seems a little bit like shooting yourself in the foot.

 

Now again I find it funny to read the remain posts on here saying business will desert Britain because of Brexit (I believe if it makes us less competitive this could be true) but they support Corybn a mad socialist and say that increasing tax wont cause business and individuals to move abroad. Both have the potential to cause a business and jobs exodus. A Labour government is certainly not in the interests of the many in work if they wish to keep their jobs.

I said nothing about Victorian Britain but it's a fact that this Tory government has overseen the worst fall in living standards since the mid-1800's.

 

It doesn't matter that living standards are ok for most, what matters is the direction of travel and right now things are going backwards for most at an alarming rate.

 

The reason for that is because we have a Tory government who prioritise the wealth of the super rich above all. That's why under this government the vast majority have had to take pay cuts while the very richest have got even more wealthy.

 

The fact of the matter is that by supporting this government you are complicit in the transfer of wealth away from people like you and me and to the super rich. You're not just being cucked by big business yourself but you're forcing other people into that situation as well. And not all of us want to bend over for big business whenever they click their fingers. Some of us have a bit of self-esteem, know our worth and are willing to fight for it. 

[Strokes]

3 minutes ago, Fox Ulike said:

It's not that. It's that you don't understand what the statistics that you're quoting mean.

 

My source is Parliament, whose job it is to hold the Government to account. And Parliament say:

 

"We cannot judge how effective HMRC is at reducing the tax gap because the way it reports its performance is too confusing"

 

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201516/cmselect/cmpubacc/674/67405.htm

 

You can only claim what is known surely and you can only blame governments for creating or assisting with loopholes. Other than that it’s the job of HMRC who are in place regardless of who is in government.

This government have clearly attempted to recover tax and have called companies out publicly on it. I don’t think it’s fair to say that are not doing their job on it.

[Rogstanley]

There are no easy answers, the solution is to:

 

Right wing answer: force defenceless children to go to school hungry, take benefits away from defenceless disabled people; blame everything on defenceless immigrants.

 

Left wing answer: stand up to the super rich and big business and make them pay a fair share.

 

 

Not difficult to see the theme is it?

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, Foxin_mad said:

I guess the question is where do you stop? If you feed these children, then when do you stop feeding children if Lazy parents decide to send in their kids hungry too?

 

If you help the hungry children in the mornings say it actually costs (a bit of cash) £1 billion to implement, there's thousands and hungry elderly people who need breakfast too and probably many thousands of people who for whatever reason are not making the correct choices. Obviously they all need help but we have limited resources sadly we cant help everyone or at least the government cant. This is where charities can step in.

 

My point is the government can not be expected to and can not do everything, even when it does government often does it in a rather inefficient way.

 

The only real way to have a more well funded system is for EVERYONE to pay more tax. Only the Lib Dems have been honest about this.

 

Labour think you can just punish the rich, that is not the solution.

I agree, of course there has to be a line somewhere. The current situation can't be it though. No child should be going to school hungry.

 

In short, education is the long-term solution but you can't ignore the fact that a short-term solution is also needed in order to start righting the ship right now - or, as I say, you're doomed to let another generation go ahead and make the same mistakes/continue with that way of living.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

2 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

I said nothing about Victorian Britain but it's a fact that this Tory government has overseen the worst fall in living standards since the mid-1800's.

 

It doesn't matter that living standards are ok for most, what matters is the direction of travel and right now things are going backwards for most at an alarming rate.

 

The reason for that is because we have a Tory government who prioritise the wealth of the super rich above all. That's why under this government the vast majority have had to take pay cuts while the very richest have got even more wealthy.

 

The fact of the matter is that by supporting this government you are complicit in the transfer of wealth away from people like you and me and to the super rich. You're not just being cucked by big business yourself but you're forcing other people into that situation as well. And not all of us want to bend over for big business whenever they click their fingers. Some of us have a bit of self-esteem, know our worth and are willing to fight for it. 

Most of that is complete drivel.

 

Things are ok for most but also going backwards at an alarming rate, ok then!

 

No one has taken a pay cut at all, personal allowance has increased for all, wages have increased year on year by at least 1%. The cost of living for numerous reasons has increased, mainly driven by high housing costs which until a major building program is in place will continue. This is a failure of every government in the past 30 years.

 

None of my money is going to the super rich at all. I don't buy iPhones, I don't use Amazon, I don't drink Starbucks, I don't use Facebook. I use local shops and businesses.

 

So in essence you think we should go on strike and give the v sign to business and it doesn't matter if they close down and move elsewhere as we can stand proud and tall and belt out the red flag whilst saluting comrade Corbyn.

[Strokes]

8 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

 blame everything on defenceless immigrants.

 

 

What makes all immigrants defenceless? A bit condescending and dare I say it......racist.

[Guest]

24 minutes ago, Webbo said:

Ah, obviously official govt statistics aren't as accurate and impartial as "The Tax Justice Network". 

But the government figure doesn't include tax owed that HMRC don't know about.

 

You're just using government figures incorrectly 

[Jon the Hat]

10 minutes ago, Rogstanley said:

There are no easy answers, the solution is to:

 

Right wing answer: force defenceless children to go to school hungry, take benefits away from defenceless disabled people; blame everything on defenceless immigrants.

 

Left wing answer: stand up to the super rich and big business and make them pay a fair share.

 

 

Not difficult to see the theme is it?

Wow.   You actually do believe your own bullshit.  Amazing.

[Webbo]

Just now, toddybad said:

But the government figure doesn't include tax owed that HMRC don't know about.

 

You're just using government figures incorrectly 

If the govt don't know about it how do you?

[Rogstanley]

3 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Most of that is complete drivel.

 

Things are ok for most but also going backwards at an alarming rate, ok then!

 

No one has taken a pay cut at all, personal allowance has increased for all, wages have increased year on year by at least 1%. The cost of living for numerous reasons has increased, mainly driven by high housing costs which until a major building program is in place will continue. This is a failure of every government in the past 30 years.

 

None of my money is going to the super rich at all. I don't buy iPhones, I don't use Amazon, I don't drink Starbucks, I don't use Facebook. I use local shops and businesses.

 

So in essence you think we should go on strike and give the v sign to business and it doesn't matter if they close down and move elsewhere as we can stand proud and tall and belt out the red flag whilst saluting comrade Corbyn.

Yawn

 

Been through all these points before with you, can't be arsed to do it again sorry.

 

You're wrong in just about every single thing you say, that's all I've got to add.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

3 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

I agree, of course there has to be a line somewhere. The current situation can't be it though. No child should be going to school hungry.

 

In short, education is the long-term solution but you can't ignore the fact that a short-term solution is also needed in order to start righting the ship right now - or, as I say, you're doomed to let another generation go ahead and make the same mistakes/continue with that way of living.

A short term solution would be to meet the immediate needs of the child and then sort out a long term solution. I think what we cant say unless it can be fully funded is that we are going to feed all children breakfast. Obviously if the money is free then do it.

 

[Guest Foxin_mad]

1 minute ago, Rogstanley said:

Yawn

 

Been through all these points before with you, can't be arsed to do it again sorry.

 

You're wrong in just about every single thing you say, that's all I've got to add.

Ditto

Edited 13 December 2017 by Foxin_mad

[Rogstanley]

3 minutes ago, Strokes said:

What makes all immigrants defenceless? A bit condescending and dare I say it......racist.

I didn't say "all" but surely it's obvious that people who have fewer rights and no voice are an easy target. 

Edited 13 December 2017 by Rogstanley

[Guest]

Just now, Webbo said:

If the govt don't know about it how do you?

So you don't think there's any tax liabilities due that HMRC isn't aware of?

[Strokes]

2 minutes ago, toddybad said:

But the government figure doesn't include tax owed that HMRC don't know about.

 

You're just using government figures incorrectly 

How do you propose to tackle unknown tax, how do know how much it is or where. It doesn’t exist until you find it.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said:

Most of that is complete drivel.

 

Things are ok for most but also going backwards at an alarming rate, ok then!

 

No one has taken a pay cut at all, personal allowance has increased for all, wages have increased year on year by at least 1%. The cost of living for numerous reasons has increased, mainly driven by high housing costs which until a major building program is in place will continue. This is a failure of every government in the past 30 years.

 

None of my money is going to the super rich at all. I don't buy iPhones, I don't use Amazon, I don't drink Starbucks, I don't use Facebook. I use local shops and businesses.

 

So in essence you think we should go on strike and give the v sign to business and it doesn't matter if they close down and move elsewhere as we can stand proud and tall and belt out the red flag whilst saluting comrade Corbyn.

How old are you fox?

You sound like a retiree.

[Rogstanley]

3 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Wow.   You actually do believe your own bullshit.  Amazing.

Wow. Sarcasm without any substantive point is so impressive. Amazing.

[Strokes]

Just now, Rogstanley said:

I didn't say "all" but surely it's obvious that people who have fewer rights and no voice are an easy target. 

Well I’ve never seen a right wing person say it’s all the fault of them defenceless migrants. You say they blame all and then call them defenceless, it’s the obvious conclusion you mean them all.

[Webbo]

1 minute ago, toddybad said:

So you don't think there's any tax liabilities due that HMRC isn't aware of?

I'm sure there is. I just don't know how you can accuse the govt of not collecting tax if you don't know what tax there is to collect. It seems like a cynical trope based on prejudice.

[Guest Foxin_mad]

7 minutes ago, toddybad said:

How old are you fox?

You sound like a retiree.

Mid to late 30s.

 

I just don't buy any of this modern world vanity and materialistic nature. I've done all of that stuff and its fake, unnecessary and expensive.

 

To be honest you can live in a reasonable house, with warmth, good food and be surrounded by good people. It doesn't cost anywhere near as much and life is a lot happier.

 

In some ways there is a lot to learn from retirees. Living a simple life, fixing stuff when it breaks, growing some veg, using local shops, having a wood fire and getting the logs from walks, reading, music, volunteering, eating and drinking with friends. And Obviously being a Tory Scumbag shitbag vile ****!

Edited 13 December 2017 by Foxin_mad