Wealth starts top down, heavy corporate taxation results in less jobs it's not rocket science FFS. At the end of the day whatever I say is not going to change your voting intention and whatever you say ain't going to change mine
You come from a very similar background to me KIO. I was living on a god awful Council estate in Ipswich back in the 70s wasn't much fun! The only saviour back then was that I had a half decent football club to support!
Out of curiosity, what would? I'm not pushing any particular party as an alternative, so I'm just curious.
A lot of that is zero hour contracts and the rest is because the government has encouraged low productivity to increase job numbers. Basically, people are working just as hard but producing less so that it takes more people to do the same amount. In order to encourage this, the government has had to bribe them with massive tax breaks to corporations (as you raise) which has predominantly benefited the business owners. So yes, the policy has kept more in employment, but to the cost of our GDP, our national debt, the tax payer, innovation and overall wealth and at a greater benefit to corporations. In other words, yes the policy has helped bring the bottom 50% closer together. But it's done it largely by bringing the top part of that group down. And now they're known as JAMs. Meanwhile the top 5% are laughing.
Unfortunately the top 5% of whatever country work out a way to avoid tax. This is because politicians of whatever variety end up in that top 5% and insist that they still need the winter fuel allowance
What Corbyn and his cronies don't understand is that you need set Tax at a level that encourages enterprise and the wealth creators to invest more. Whether we like it or not we now live in a highly competitive global economy and businesses will invest elsewhere if we become uncompetitive. The lower the Tax rates the more revenue the Government brings in. Soaking the rich just isn't the answer!
I don't really get involved in this thread, but I do like to read through to gain everyone's point of view. I've always voted Conservative but I have been considering Labour this year (I can't stand May and I kind of get Corbyn), but the vote is about more than just the leadership. I thought I would take the Vote for Policies test at www.voteforpolicies.co.uk to settle who I should vote for based purely on Manifesto, expecting to come out with a Conservative result. WRONG! Apparently I'm Lib Dem, but there is no way I could have Tim Farron has PM!
I applaud your open mindedness. I think Corbyn has swayed a lot of detractors by being something that the other lot are not - human.
In reality though, there's a 0% chance of the Lib Dems winning this election, so you're voting for your local candidate, and for an increased Lib Dem presence in the House of Commons, rather than Tim Farron for PM. Equally, I guess it depends if you're more pro-Lib Dem, or anti-Conservative. In the latter case a tactical vote for whoever provides the best opposition in your area might be more valuable.
I'm still utterly depressed at the options available to me, I did the I side with thing and came out having never voted labour before as 63% Labour, 61% Tory, 59% UKIP & Lib dem and only 46% Green. But who to vote for? The commonly held wisdom is that Labour will destroy the economy and foist the country with unimaginable debt. Well welcome to Tory Britain. There performance on national debt is laughable. The employment stats hide that real wage growth is in a tail spin for anyone but the very rich. There is nothing to pick between the leaders in my opinion, Before the campaign I would have laughed if someone had suggested Corbyn as a better leader than May, But may has shown herself to be spineless and incompetent. Rather than the strong mandate she thought she was to cruise to, she faces in all probability s reduced majority and huge question marks over her fitness to run the country, leave alone negotiate an sort of decent deal with Brexit. Diane Abbot, Boris and doubtless others, are these really people we want representing us? As for policies, clearly Labours are more appealing for the main, but can they realistically be done? Will they result in those of us in the middle becoming poorer for the masses on Zero hours contracts or for the unambitious who never tried or had the oportunity to excel? Immigration - ha, no one can stop it! Even if i thought UKIP could, they don't even have a candidate in my area. In the past it was probably easier, knowing who you felt you must vote against. But I realy don't trust any of them. Must I vote for the greens just to show my displease at the Tories, Labour and the LD? Bah!
I completely agree, he comes across as someone very different to the usual candidate - like you say human, he actually gives off a sense of empathy when talking about the hard situations people are in rather than the apathy of others. It will be a close run thing this year, I think that Corbyn will be a popular vote among the younger generations in London and other cities, he has the backing of some popular figures that could influence votes.
But what if everyone took the test and came out with the same result as me, then voted accordingly!! Wouldn't that be a shock!!
With most politicians no matter what variety.....it's 'whatever question you ask......I'll answer a question I'm comfortable with'
Smells like vested interest, just like any other piece. That they come from an acedemic background and I'm not sure that makes them impartial, the assessment on employment for example seems ridiculous given the high rates of employment in the UK at the moment, maybe it is about quality of employment, but with no justifying comments I can't see it. It is the lack of any justification for their views, that makes it very hard to believe anything they say. Omissions of other things like defense or Brexit strategy leave it being fairly meaningless too. And I'm not sure how they justify any of them scoring higher on immigration, they all have a pretty much open door policy inspite of occational words to the contrary. Bah!
Looking on from out of the country, here are my musings.... I see one party that is offering vaguely realistic policies. They are not necessarily popular, but they are fiscally responsible. I remember when I was 17 in geography class so ~ 2004 arguing that we were in good economic times and the deficit was way too high and increasing. The chickens came home to roost when an external shock in 2008 smashed into already worsening finances. The Conservative government are trying to repair that damage. As much as I would like more money spent on various things, NHS, free tuition fees etc the government has to be fiscally responsible. The Labour spend would boost growth in the short term, but with spiraling debt someone would have to pay for it, earners over 80k are earmarked for it. Unfortunately when in the 1970s they tried the same by raising the top level of tax their take actually went down and it is well known that lower business rates stimulate the economy. Nuclear weapons, Corbyn says he won't use them, I hope whoever is in charge never has to. However why have them if you are never going to use them at all regardless I think it's the worst of both worlds. Spending lots of money on something you will never use, my attitude to nuclear weapons is like the song Thank Christ for the Bomb by the Groundhogs, listen to the words if you don't understand. When it comes to immigration, Britain is an island and has to be sensible with the quantity and quality of people to let in. There is only so much after all that the facilities can maintain and the huge numbers let in under Blair has continued at an unsustainable rate and there are places of festering Islamic resentment of the West. This needs to be put right or there will be more attacks, Isis and other extremists are trying to divide us, we must not let this happen. This is not to disregard our duty as a nation to help the vulnerable. People say Boris is an idiot, I would agree, but he can be somewhat effective and May has kept him on the leach. The less said about Diane Abbott the better if you are a Labour Supporter. If she becomes home secretary, I really wouldn't know what to think, especially if her recent interviews... yes that's even made it to our news in Australia! Finally Brexit. I do think May would be the better leader than Corbyn, If Corbyn was a man of principals he would have stuck to him backing Brexit, but he was limping around not really helping the Remain campaign and doing more hindering than anything else. I do believe if he had have stuck to his convictions he would be in a much better position than he is in now. If there was a coalition between Labour and the Scot Nats I think it would be a disaster for the country, weak negotiations, a new Scottish independence vote and after a couple of years of boosted growth I think the debt would catch up on them and an IMF bailout would loom big on the horizon like 1976. As long as we avoid becoming a new Venezuela! The markets are waiting and if Labour and the Nats do form a government external forces would try to create chaos by short selling the pound and manipulating the markets. I would buy the low pound to pay off my mortgage in the UK haha. However as I think you would be able to see, I would only vote for one party and that would be the Conservatives. Unfortunately socialists always run out of other people's money to spend, it's not a nice choice, but I think it is the only sensible party for the economy and managing the Brexit negotiations.
