I do not call myself an economist: I was awarded that dubious title by Ron following various postings on the Share thread and others. It would seem that Labour’s housing policy is evolving so fast that their Shadow Housing Minister, Emma Reynolds, had already ruled out rent controls but nobody had bothered to tell her the policy had been changed. Speaking on the Daily Politics, she reckoned that the stamp duty relief for first time buyers will be funded by clamping down on tax avoidance by landlords. Surely if you are a first time buyer, you own the house, so where does a landlord come into it? According to Patrick Stevens of the Chartered Institute of Taxation, all parties are over reliant on what they can claw back from tax avoidance measures. Why does it seem that everything that Labour is promising to spend is going to be paid for by clamping down on tax avoidance or by the Mansion Tax, which is going to raise £1.2bn according to the LibDems’ Danny Alexander? Why is every party in such a rush to help first time buyers? Just how big a percentage of the electorate are they? What about second time buyers who will have to pay more (i.e. stamp duty) for the same house as a first time buyer?
fair enough QM - the truth is all parties are promising to run capitalism better than the others....its a choice of turds on sticks, some have glitter, some syrup and some are plain --but under neath its all the same essentially ....
Surely we should all be pro-Europe. Without easy access to the European market we will stagnate and have no prospect for growth. The key to being in Europe is to make sure you are in there on the right terms. God bless her Maggie had us on a very good deal in Europe but sadly Blair folded on Europe and landed us with a very poor deal. I am more Liberal than anything else but it worries me that we might let the weasel that is Milliband govern our country. Even his own family cannot trust him. For what its worth I think the coalition has done a great job of steering the country through an extremely difficult time. I would love to see more of the same for the next term but I do understand that many will feel hard done by at the moment. What really rankles me about Labour is that it doesn't feel like the party of the working man any more. It feels more like the party of the scrounging man who cannot be bothered to get off his backside to better his lot. Final point. Its always amusing to read political threads like this as nobody, but nobody ever seems willing to take on board the opposite view. Nobody ever sees the lies its own party tells. Who was the last decent politician we had? Final final point. Paying for wars??? When were we last not paying for a war, we have been constantly at war for as long as I can remember and you are right, they don't come cheap!
If Labour was the party of the working man then I'd vote for them. But they aren't so I won't be. There was a program on tonight about Sports Direct and their very shady work practices. They have 5000+ employees but only 300 are on direct contracts. It beggars belief that such conditions are allowed and tolerated by us as consumers in the 21st Century. In the last 12 months I've seen 2 other similar programmes involving Amazon and Tescos. Now these companies operated like this well before 2010. Yet Miliband says he will outlaw zero hours contracts if elected. I don't believe him. No offence to any Geordies but I would absolutely luv it if the Magpies got relegated in a few weeks time. Mike Ashley is a 24 carat c*nt!
I am convinced that the country in general has no confidence in Ed Milliband, and in my opinion rightly so, and due to this I see a tory victory with a small possibility of a majority but likely a coalition along the lines we have now. I am still sadly of the opinion that none of the candidates deserve to be PM at present and it is a choice between rubbish and garbage.
not many people will be voting FOR something, but many will be voting AGAINST the tories and their greedy.and divisive policies, the alternative is only slightly less appealing, democracy ? you1re havin a laugh !
Great post by Stick there and i pretty much agree with all of it. As for Chan's comment - if Mike Ashley operated his business out of a van on a market stall he would have been banged up long ago. I don't understand how he gets away with it. I wanted Newcastle to stay up as I know a fair few of their fans and they're great lads -- and i'd be able to get a ticket for SJP when the mighty 'orns show up next season - but I wouldn't shed any tears for Ashley.
The only way the Tories can get a majority is if a combination of two things occurs: they manage to swing some of the LibDems marginals their way, especially in the South West; and UKIP supporters in some of the seats that UKIP cannot win decide to tactically vote Conservative because otherwise the seat will go to Labour. Note that Cameron only promised a referendum on EU membership if he got a majority government because he knows that the LibDems would not agree to it if they formed another coalition (unlikely) and also he does not want to fall into the trap that Nick Clegg is in having promised no tuition fees and then reneged on it. We at the None Of The Above Party already have approximately thirty five per cent of the vote in the bag as we did at the last election and most previous ones. We have been laughing since January when they were arguing about debates not lying about policies. Ladbrokes currently have Ed Miliband at 4/6 to be Next Prime Minister. As the latest polls suggest that Labour and the LibDems are going to be virtually extinct in Scotland (one seat each), Alex Salmond’s puppet Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP’s pseudo anti-austerity “progressive” policies look like the route to ruin that we will wake up to on 8th May – less than one tenth of the population dictating what Ed described as “democratic socialism”.
That is around 700,000 people out of some work then. He might want to crack down on the contracts where the terms are exploitative, such as the ones where the worker is expected to show up and sit around for hours in the hope of being required for a few hours or the ones where the worker is called up at virtually no notice and is expected to be available; however, there are a substantial number of workers on zero-hours contracts, such as full time students or people with just a few spare hours that fit in around the rest of their lifestyle, for whom they are no issue. So the usual taking a sledgehammer to crack a nut that we get from the Nanny State...
Europe all went wrong starting in 1993 and John Major was in power at that time; Blair and Brown just made it worse. We originally signed up for a trading organisation in 1973 and it is that to which we should return. Unfortunately most of Europe is mired in deflationary recession because of their failed economic policies and the failing Eurozone, so we cannot rely on them as a trading partner because they do not have the means to buy many of our exports but are keen to sell us imports as our economy is doing well relative to all of theirs. Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has been laying out Labour’s immigration policy and it is no surprise that this just amounts to more red tape to try and deter thousands of Europeans coming here rather than actual reform of the failed European Union, which Labour and the Liberal Democrats both love. No word from the Tories on immigration because Cameron is still deluding himself that he can renegotiate “open borders” when all the other EU members have to agree to it. Watching Labour’s David Hanson on Daily Politics, their policy quickly started to unravel as history shows that Blair/Brown did nothing to enforce the minimum wage and it would seem that ‘in work’ benefits are not included in Labour’s benefit cap for immigrants. You would think that they would have learned by now to brief their spokespeople before they send them in front of the cameras so they did not put their foot in their mouth.
I'm afraid you can't return to the past, however much you might wish to. And however many comeback tours Slade might do. The EU still accounts for over 50% of the UKs total exports.
Finally the unpalatable truth of the election has escaped. It should be top of the headlines on the TV news and all over the newspapers. Instead it is hidden away in the Business section of the BBC News website: “IFS: Households can expect lower incomes, whoever wins the election” The apolitical Institute for Fiscal Studies could have told everyone what they need to know in a much simpler statement: it does not matter who you vote for because they are all lying to you in one way or another. Or what about a simple lesson in economics? The only way to sustainably raise low income wages is greater productivity. We run one of the least productive economies in the developed world. If you want more wages you have to produce more because that is the only way to generate more wealth for everyone not just the few at the top.
Yep QM, productivity is the key mate, but just how do you get it kick started? The scare that the GFC put into the financial sector was huge. Of the four economic meltdowns since since 1973, the latest has had by far, the worst effect. After the initial crashes of 73, 80 and 90, all managed to climb past pre-crash production levels within 18 months, this has not happen after the 08 affair. This was a crash of seismic proportions that put a large stopper on investment in businesses. Companies can't really be blamed for not pumping cash back into themselves, especially in light of the the problems with other countries lack of consumption. Having stagnant production forced upon them, companies had to either lay off workers or cut the the carry home pay of a host of employees. That's why there are something in the order of 5 million or more people toiling away on zero hour deals. I don't know exactly where productivity stands today in comparison to 08, but here we are 7 years down the track, and things are still a bit of a struggle. And that the UK is one of the "lucky" countries in that part of the globe, says a lot about the parlous state of the European economies. It's hard to see an easy way out of this. A massive injection of publicly funded projects might help, but at what cost to other measures within the budget? And will the populace wear the stripping away of other services? I'm no economist, but buggered if I can see a painless solution to the problem.
Though I share your lack of regard for Ed Milliband I suspect the % of folks on zero hours contracts which suit their lifestyle is very small. In this instance I'd welcome the nanny state intervening. What would be even better would be if we as consumers were more discerning and put these bastards out of business.
That is why UKIP are right. The only way to get back to controlled immigration is to quit the failing super state and trade with them like Norway. Given the balance of Imports/Exports, Europe need us more than we need them. Not according to the statistics. The latest official UK figures dated 9th April are for February 2015: Total Exports = £41.31bn Total Imports = £44.17bn EU Exports = £10.95bn (top 5: Germany £2.3bn, Netherlands £1.6bn, France £1.5bn, Ireland £1.3bn, Belgium £0.9bn) EU Imports = £17.91bn (top 5: Germany £5.0bn, Netherlands & France £2.2bn, Belgium £1.7bn, Italy £1.3bn) EU Trade Deficit = £6.96bn Percentage of Exports to EU = 26.51% (10.95/41.31)
According to the ONS statistics that I posted previously, only 34 per cent wanted to do more hours than they were getting, so we are looking at a quarter of a million people. They might be unhappier if Miliband outlaws their zero-hours contracts and leaves them with no work at all. Unfortunately consumers are not more discerning because the likes of McDonalds and KFC exist all around the planet; and they probably have the equivalent of zero-hours contracts in many other countries too.
Are the only people voting in this election members of poverty-stricken families dependent upon benefits? It is starting to seem that way on the campaign trail. It used to be all about ‘Middle England’. Ed Miliband went to consult Russell Brand, the man who is telling everyone not to vote and advocates some sort of anarchy. Ed has managed to avoid being seen eating anything in the last few weeks so no new banana skin there, just the old bacon sandwich footage. In the next week, can Labour avoid a Kinnock/Brown moment by making sure that Ed does not meet any members of the public who are not vetted Labour voters? On BBC Radio 5 Live, the late morning show was live from the Glasgow East constituency, where unemployment is rife as is drug abuse, alcoholism and low life expectancy. The incumbent Labour MP defends a 37-point majority, which would need a 19-point swing to overturn. The problem for Labour is that the SNP have a 23-point swing according to the polls, so Glasgow is about to become entirely SNP. What can the SNP actually offer other than more benefits? Labour reckon that the Conservatives are going to cut all sorts of benefits because they have pledged not to raise income tax, National Insurance or VAT. As a non poverty-stricken single person with no dependents paying a five figure tax bill for 2014/15 but eligible for absolutely no benefits whatsoever, why would I vote for Labour? Why do they keep getting William Hague – who is not standing for election – on the Daily Politics to argue the case for the Conservatives? He just echoed what Cameron had said earlier and ducked questions about possible tax credit cuts. Not sure why Labour put up Stephen Timms, who Andrew Neil ran rings around, as he could not work out that the £200m that Labour are going to raise by two tax measures (50p top rate and no winter fuel allowance for rich pensioners) is less than a quarter of a per cent of the £90bn deficit. The Daily Politics: Health Debate was a bit of a waste of time. Totally predictable muck slinging by all concerned but nobody from BBC graphics had thought to put Pinocchio noses on all the candidates so the public could gauge who was telling the most porkies.
David Cameron today has claimed he will write into law that there will be no increases on VAT, National Insurance and Income Tax until 2020. This has to be the most ludicrous piece of politics for quite some time. How does he know what circumstance will need be met in the next 5 years? yet he is handcuffing himself from using some of the basic tools for dealing with fiscal circumstances. If you could take the best of all of these current party leaders you would still end up with one poor politician.
This is just about the most surreal election since Hunter S Thompson tried to become mayor of Aspen Colorado on a platform of legalising all drugs, ripping up the city streets, and publicly flogging property developers. He nearly succeeded too.
Yep it's completely nuts. As for zero hours contracts QM, if the stats you've quoted are correct (and I doubt that to be honest - how the hell do they get these figures?) that's still a 250000 folk who are getting an awful message about the value of working for a living.
