Poll
Question: Which Party Will You Be Voting For?
Conservative - 54 (30.5%)
Labour - 63 (35.6%)
Liberal Democrat - 29 (16.4%)
UKIP - 6 (3.4%)
Green - 5 (2.8%)
SNP - 0 (0%)
Plaid Cymru - 0 (0%)
Other - 2 (1.1%)
Not Voting - 9 (5.1%)
Spoiled Ballot - 9 (5.1%)
Total Voters: 153

Pages: 1 ... 40 41 42 [43] 44 45 46 ... 71   Go Down
Print
Author Topic: General Election - Who's Getting Your Vote?  (Read 195786 times)
horlock07

Offline Offline

Posts: 18726


Lives in Northern Bastard Outpost




Ignore
« Reply #630 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 08:22:13 »

I wonder if the Tories have a manifesto position on the Paris climate change accord, that Trump has refused to sign. This is the sort of thing that the EU does as a group.  So now we're on our way out will the Tories cosy up to Trump in denial  Hmmm

Mrs May has come out and said him refusing to sign it is not a great thing and we are still committed apparently. She was offered the chance to sign the statement put out by the French, German and Italians but declined, I assume as cavorting with the enemy would probably upset her bosses at the Daily Mail.
Logged
herthab
TEF Travel

Offline Offline

Posts: 12020





Ignore
« Reply #631 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 08:25:39 »

Mrs May has come out and said him refusing to sign it is not a great thing and we are still committed apparently. She was offered the chance to sign the statement put out by the French, German and Italians but declined, I assume as cavorting with the enemy would probably upset her bosses at the Daily Mail.

Strong & Stable. Strong & Stable.
Logged

It's All Good..............
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia

Offline Offline

Posts: 34913





Ignore
« Reply #632 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 08:40:15 »

Mrs May has come out and said him refusing to sign it is not a great thing and we are still committed apparently. She was offered the chance to sign the statement put out by the French, German and Italians but declined, I assume as cavorting with the enemy would probably upset her bosses at the Daily Mail.

I suppose we're still in the EU for another 2 years, so this will be another of the pieces of legislation that the Tories wish to unpick by increasing their majority... along with other environmental safguards.
Logged
Mister Lorenzo
Dirk Diggler

Offline Offline

Posts: 238





Ignore
« Reply #633 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 08:44:37 »

Saw this on another forum, it's a bit cheesy but thought it might give some balance to the debate;

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.?
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.?

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.?

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
Logged
Tails

Offline Offline

Posts: 10011


Git facked




Ignore
« Reply #634 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 08:53:47 »

Put a post up on Facebook about it but finally got a leaflet through for the local Tory MP... Theresa May takes up about 70% of the leaflet, a swipe at Corbyn is about 20% and the then there's a tiny bit about local issues. This is in a Tory safe seat which John Redwood has held for over 30 years.

The Tories are panicking.
Logged
horlock07

Offline Offline

Posts: 18726


Lives in Northern Bastard Outpost




Ignore
« Reply #635 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 09:03:54 »

Put a post up on Facebook about it but finally got a leaflet through for the local Tory MP... Theresa May takes up about 70% of the leaflet, a swipe at Corbyn is about 20% and the then there's a tiny bit about local issues. This is in a Tory safe seat which John Redwood has held for over 30 years.

The Tories are panicking.

This would suggest so....
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...c834f06?ir=UK+Politics&utm_hp_ref=uk-politics 
Logged
herthab
TEF Travel

Offline Offline

Posts: 12020





Ignore
« Reply #636 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 09:35:11 »

If you earn between 80-100,000 a year, the Labour plan would cost you, at most, 19 quid a week. There are approximately 500,000 people that fall into this bracket.

If you earn more than 500,000 a year, the Labour plan would cost you, at most, 440 quid a week (Bearing in mind the weekly salary would be £9,615, leaving you with over 9 grand a week).

It's hardly taxing the rich into poverty, is it?



Logged

It's All Good..............
horlock07

Offline Offline

Posts: 18726


Lives in Northern Bastard Outpost




Ignore
« Reply #637 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 09:37:27 »

Lovely stuff....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-40129826 The irony that it was to beat Ukip, which the Tories have now morphed into is even more delicious.
Logged
Ginginho

Offline Offline

Posts: 6848





Ignore
« Reply #638 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 11:08:14 »

Lovely stuff....

Anyone else read that in the voice of Alan Partridge?
Logged
jayohaitchenn
Wielder of the BANHAMMER

Offline Offline

Posts: 12507




« Reply #639 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 11:58:12 »

Saw this on another forum, it's a bit cheesy but thought it might give some balance to the debate;

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.?
So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.?

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.?

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.


Fucking hate this meme. Firstly it's total bollocks, The poor pay a higher proportion of their earnings in tax than the rich do:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-graph-that-shows-how-the-poor-are-paying-more-than-the-rich-in-tax-10353982.html

Secondly, it's wrongly attributed to an economics professor who has refuted it.

http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/howtaxes.asp
Logged
Exiled Bob

Offline Offline

Posts: 1514


Likes a moan




Ignore
« Reply #640 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 12:13:03 »

This is what the electorate can never seem to grasp when it comes to an election:
Quote
The reason why those on the lowest incomes are paying the biggest proportion of their income in tax is because indirect taxes, such as VAT and tax on tobacco, alcohol and fuel are charged at the same rate to all income groups.
Instead they believe the bullshit spouted by the rags such as the Mail and the Sun that they will pay more tax under Labour than under the tories.
Logged
The Grim Reaper

Offline Offline

Posts: 1726





Ignore
« Reply #641 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 20:58:02 »

JC apart from being rattled over the nuke question seemed to handle all questions thrown at him very calmly and professional. TM looked nervous and seemed a bit vague in her answers.
Logged
StfcRusty

Offline Offline

Posts: 793




Ignore
« Reply #642 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 21:41:29 »

Can someone explain to me why so many people get so angry that Corbyn doesn't seem keen on using nukes?

Isn't true that only about 9 countries have nuclear weapons? Only UK and France have them of European countries? How is it that Germany, Italy, Holland etc seem to cope without them?

Genuinely confused so keen to understand
Logged
Legends-Lounge

Offline Offline

Posts: 8155

Non PC straight talking tory Brexit voter on this




Ignore
« Reply #643 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 21:49:40 »

Can someone explain to me why so many people get so angry that Corbyn doesn't seem keen on using nukes?

Isn't true that only about 9 countries have nuclear weapons? Only UK and France have them of European countries? How is it that Germany, Italy, Holland etc seem to cope without them?

Genuinely confused so keen to understand
Because we have them and France has them. Why would they want to spend billions having them? Once again another situation where us Brits find ourselves at the bar buying drinks for everyone else. No wonder Trumps pissed off over NATO defence spending.
Logged
Arriba

Offline Offline

Posts: 21289





Ignore
« Reply #644 on: Friday, June 2, 2017, 22:04:45 »

Tweet of the night in my opinion.


Use #trident first it's suicide. Use it 2nd it was never a deterrent. Expensive vanity project benefiting nobody! #bbcqt #bbcquestiontime
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 40 41 42 [43] 44 45 46 ... 71   Go Up
Print
Jump to: