The Starmer Years - Can The New Broom Sweep Clean?

[egg]

24 minutes ago, iansums said:

Although Lord Kinnock suggested recently there should be.

Inevitable I suspect. 

[Sir Ralph]

10 minutes ago, egg said:

The point is that they don't have to. It's a choice. A luxury if you will. I remain of the view though that it and health should be exempt, but the view that someone has paid once for something that they elect not to use, so shouldn't pay a value added tax on something they elect to subscribe to, doesn't hold water. 

I understand the point that’s it’s a choice and but my personal opinion (and I think yours) is that the case I made for no VAT is a better one. In the long run I think the impact to the UK educational system will not be a positive one. 

[whelk]

30 minutes ago, iansums said:

Because someone who pays for private schooling is still paying for state schools as part of their taxes, they don't get a deduction on their income or council tax.

So surely anyone without children shouldn’t be contributing to taxes going on education?

Once you start breaking it down to individuals’ contributions then there are endless arguments to be made.

 

[Sir Ralph]

36 minutes ago, whelk said:

You sound like a scratched record constantly trotting out your silly mantra. Why do you assume it is driven by envy? I guess someone self-centred can’t fathom anyone not thinking solely of themselves at all time

We all have our personal views - you might say my world view is stupid but dismissing somebody cause you disagree doesn’t help anyone. You don’t like my view because I maintain a position you disagree with.

i take this view as your opinions seem to be linked to a dislike of those which have money and I’m not the only person who has said this. Other people have said it. Whilst I think that there are those on the right and left that look for the greater good I think that a lot of people that espouse this greater good view by taxing more are actually beneficiaries of that approach and hide behind a facade of greater good. In this scenario, those that attack conservatives are actually being hypocritical.

Edited Thursday at 07:34 by Sir Ralph

[whelk]

22 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

linked to a dislike of those which have money and I’m not the only person who has said this. Other people have said it

I think you have a caricature of what a socialist is and argue against that. You have made assumptions that I am not wealthy and envious of those that are. I do not feel need to repeat myself to debunk this view.

Posters obviously build up a persona however  people like hypo and egg have years of disagreements and agreements with me. You have turned up recently and formed an opinion on very little in woudl appear

[Sir Ralph]

1 minute ago, whelk said:

I think you have a caricature of what a socialist is and argue against that. You have made assumptions that I am not wealthy and envious of those that are. I do not feel need to repeat myself to debunk this view.

Posters obviously build up a persona however  people like hypo and egg have years of disagreements and agreements with me. You have turned up recently and formed an opinion on very little in woudl appear

As we don’t know each others personal circumstances then yes we do all caricature each other. I’ve also met socialists and have formed my opinion on them based on that. You will also have formed your opinion on conservatives based on meeting them. You have taken a view on me when you said this so it works two ways:

I guess someone self-centred can’t fathom anyone not thinking solely of themselves at all time

[Farmer Saint]

...

Edited Thursday at 08:22 by Farmer Saint
Double post

[Farmer Saint]

11 hours ago, Sir Ralph said:

Its an unjustified policy. How can you tax someone for a school place, they dont take the school place and decide to pay out of their own pocket for another school place, and you tax them more for that extra place. If anything you should get a tax rebate if you pay for a private school place. Its a dumbass politically driven tax which keeps the left happy because they get to raise more tax by taking more money off what they perceive to be wealthy people, even though a reasonable proportion arent.

Do you understand what VAT is? Considering you don't seem to understand other taxes as we clearly demonstrated earlier in this thread, I am being serious. Do you know the history of VAT, what it is, and why it is charged?

[Farmer Saint]

1 hour ago, whelk said:

So surely anyone without children shouldn’t be contributing to taxes going on education?

Once you start breaking it down to individuals’ contributions then there are endless arguments to be made.

 

I am very lucky in that in my 41 years of this mortal coil I have never been into a hospital, and I have only been to the doctor once. I realise how rare that is. We also have private health care for all 4 of us. 

Where do I get my NHS refund from, because I must be owed a shit load?

Edited Thursday at 08:30 by Farmer Saint

[Sir Ralph]

3 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Do you understand what VAT is? Considering you don't seem to understand other taxes as we clearly demonstrated earlier in this thread, I am being serious. Do you know the history of VAT, what it is, and why it is charged?

I understand what VAT is and its purpose. I don’t agree that it should be applied to school fees. The system worked fine before and I don’t believe it’s fair or the outcomes will be positive. Of course having tax for only using certain services would be challenging from an admin perspective but the private school approach was already in place and worked. It didn’t need changing. 

Also stop being patronising. You seem to think you’re smart and the owner of “the truth” - you aren’t. Less of the “I’m the big man” and a bit more humility.

[Farmer Saint]

2 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I understand what VAT is and its purpose. I don’t agree that it should be applied to school fees. The system worked fine before and I don’t believe it’s fair or the outcomes will be positive. Of course having tax for only using certain services would be challenging from an admin perspective but the private school approach was already in place and worked. It didn’t need changing. 

Also stop being patronising. You seem to think you’re smart and the owner of “the truth” - you aren’t. Less of the “I’m the big man” and a bit more humility.

If you know what VAT is, and the fact that is was originally a concept for luxuries, how can you argue? There is no more luxury than being able to send your kids to private school. End of.

My kids go to private school, you just have to suck it up.

Edited Thursday at 08:34 by Farmer Saint

[Sir Ralph]

14 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

If you know what VAT is, and the fact that is was originally a concept for luxuries, how can you argue? There is no more luxury than being able to send your kids to private school. End of.

My kids go to private school, you just have to suck it up.

Just because I understand what VAT is it doesnt mean to say I agree with it in this circumstance for the reasons set out. I'm not an outlier in my view on this - its a well discussed perspective and plenty of other centrists and conservatives have taken the same view. The consequences to the educational system seem to have been ignored in view of a political tax. You are making the case on the principle of the application of VAT generally. I don't dismiss your point but I think that there are counter arguments which are stronger.

Edited Thursday at 08:48 by Sir Ralph

[skintsaint]

26 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

We also have private health care for all 4 of us. 

Where do I get my NHS refund from, because I must be owed a shit load?

We got a yearly tax rebate in Aus for having private health care. Surprised not offered here to be honest.

[Farmer Saint]

7 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Just because I understand what VAT is it doesnt mean to say I agree with it in this circumstance for the reasons set out. I'm not an outlier in my view on this - its a well discussed perspective and plenty of other centrists and conservatives have taken the same view. The consequences to the educational system seem to have been ignored in view of a political tax. You are making the case on the principle of the application of VAT generally. I don't dismiss your point but I think that there are counter arguments which are stronger.

But you're not going to get rid of VAT are you? The problem with reducing VAT is that the elasticity of pricing on that product is already there, so it means that the prices won't change, but the money will just be going to shareholders instead of into government coffers.

VAT is on there now, it's a bit shit but if you look at it from a holistic non-centric viewpoint it is the correct thing to do.

[Farmer Saint]

2 minutes ago, skintsaint said:

We got a yearly tax rebate in Aus for having private health care. Surprised not offered here to be honest.

Is that similar to the French system?

[Sir Ralph]

Just now, Farmer Saint said:

But you're not going to get rid of VAT are you? The problem with reducing VAT is that the elasticity of pricing on that product is already there, so it means that the prices won't change, but the money will just be going to shareholders instead of into government coffers.

VAT is on there now, it's a bit shit but if you look at it from a holistic non-centric viewpoint it is the correct thing to do.

Well we disagree on it then.

[east-stand-nic]

1 hour ago, Sir Ralph said:

We all have our personal views - you might say my world view is stupid but dismissing somebody cause you disagree doesn’t help anyone. You don’t like my view because I maintain a position you disagree with.

i take this view as your opinions seem to be linked to a dislike of those which have money and I’m not the only person who has said this. Other people have said it. Whilst I think that there are those on the right and left that look for the greater good I think that a lot of people that espouse this greater good view by taxing more are actually beneficiaries of that approach and hide behind a facade of greater good. In this scenario, those that attack conservatives are actually being hypocritical.

I am sorry to say he (and many others) will not listen. be reasoned, bring up valid points and all you get is vitriol and abuse. 

[skintsaint]

2 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Is that similar to the French system?

Not familiar with the French system, but AI says...

 

[Farmer Saint]

1 minute ago, east-stand-nic said:

I am sorry to say he (and many others) will not listen. be reasoned, bring up valid points and all you get is vitriol and abuse. 

I think the problem you have is you tend to fail on both the above.

[Farmer Saint]

1 minute ago, skintsaint said:

Not familiar with the French system, but AI says...

 

I thought you were in Austria, apologies.

[skintsaint]

Just now, Farmer Saint said:

I thought you were in Austria, apologies.

....lazy typing on my part.

[east-stand-nic]

7 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

I think the problem you have is you tend to fail on both the above.

I rest my case, thanks. 

[Wade Garrett]

The irony is, that increasing various taxes invariably leads to less tax being collected.

A surefire way to drag an economy down is to increase taxation.  This is a proven fact.

Anyway, back to Starmer.  He has no political acumen.  His steadfast defence of Mandelson, a man that continued to defend and offer help to a convicted peadophile, is bad judgement at best.

I also heard that he wanted to move Miliband out of Environment, but he simply refused to move.  So not only has he got no political acumen, he is also a weak leader.

I thought Labour might last more than a year before disintegrating into a total shitshow but I was wrong.

[hypochondriac]

Mandy sacked. Absolutely appalling judgement from Kier once again.

[benjii]

 

8 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Mandy sacked. Absolutely appalling judgement from Kier once again.

Agree with you, here.

I was shocked he was given a role in this government. Everyone knows he's trouble.

[pingpong]

13 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Mandy sacked. Absolutely appalling judgement from Kier once again.

Are you suggesting he should have picked someone who could be a friend of trump and also not sympathise with paedophiles? Is that a thing?

[whelk]

2 hours ago, east-stand-nic said:

I am sorry to say he (and many others) will not listen. be reasoned, bring up valid points and all you get is vitriol and abuse. 

TBF Ralph makes his case and is generally respectful and reads replies. You are very different and seem a bit of an unhinged giggling idiot.

[whelk]

30 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Mandy sacked. Absolutely appalling judgement from Kier once again.

Don’t think it impacts the average voter really.I have never liked Mandelson and no loss there.

[iansums]

3 hours ago, whelk said:

So surely anyone without children shouldn’t be contributing to taxes going on education?

Once you start breaking it down to individuals’ contributions then there are endless arguments to be made.

 

I'm certainly not advocating that, and I think you know that. The point I am making is that someone who puts their children into a private school will still be paying for state schools, which is fine. I just don't think VAT should then be applied to private school fees. I'm lucky to have private health care through my company, but I'm taxed on it as a benefit in kind.

Edited Thursday at 11:13 by iansums
typo

[iansums]

1 minute ago, whelk said:

Don’t think it impacts the average voter really.I have never liked Mandelson and no loss there.

Shame, he speaks very highly of you.

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, whelk said:

Don’t think it impacts the average voter really.I have never liked Mandelson and no loss there.

I largely agree. Not really about that though is it. Who advised that this was a good idea?

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, iansums said:

I'm certainly not advocating that, and I think you know that. The point I am making is that someone who puts their children into a private will still be paying for state schools, which is fine. I just don't think VAT should then be applied to private school fees. I'm lucky to have private health care through my company, but I'm taxed on it as a benefit in kind.

Totally get your point but we are all taxed twice on multiple things. I am very much a net contributor I think

[whelk]

2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I largely agree. Not really about that though is it. Who advised that this was a good idea?

If you want someone who can connect with Trump they probably come with baggage though. Although I assume Epstein connection was known or researched. Gone early so will be out of the news and forgotten about v quickly

[Gloucester Saint]

6 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I largely agree. Not really about that though is it. Who advised that this was a good idea?

Favourite Mandelson story is when he allegedly went into a Hartlepool chippy when he was their MP with photographer to appear to man of the people.

Cod and chips please and could I have some of the guacamole over there? (mushy peas).

I don’t know if it is actually real or not but repeated a lot over the years and made me laugh at the time.

[east-stand-nic]

14 minutes ago, whelk said:

TBF Ralph makes his case and is generally respectful and reads replies. You are very different and seem a bit of an unhinged giggling idiot.

I have done exactly as he does on many occasions but you and the other loons simply ignore my correct points and make jokes and be generally stupid. If you like I can collate some links for you to prove my point, ok? 

[whelk]

11 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

I have done exactly as he does on many occasions but you and the other loons simply ignore my correct points and make jokes and be generally stupid. If you like I can collate some links for you to prove my point, ok? 

Pay the fiver tightwad. All I get is notifications saying you have reacted to my posts. Of course it’s you giggling 

[whelk]

13 minutes ago, east-stand-nic said:

I have done exactly as he does on many occasions but you and the other loons simply ignore my correct points and make jokes and be generally stupid. If you like I can collate some links for you to prove my point, ok? 

And this place isn’t for faint hearted - abuse come back and forth but all you right wingers are such snowflakes 

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Mandy sacked. Absolutely appalling judgement from Kier once again.

Forensic detail by the adults in the room

[Farmer Saint]

Good, Mandy has gone. Goodbye to the prick.

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Mandy sacked. Absolutely appalling judgement from Kier once again.

According to reports Maurice Glasman was asked to look into whether he was suitable. Glasman was close to the Trump administration. He reported back concerns about his relationship with Epstein and concluded “wrong person, at the wrong time, for the wrong job”. What did this titan of standards, the man who will bring decency back to public like, “country before party” merchant do? Fucking appoint him. 😂😂

He really is an incompetent dud. Fucking one year, what a friggin clown show…
 

 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

5 hours ago, Farmer Saint said:

Where do I get my NHS refund from, because I must be owed a shit load?

Poster most likely to receive all the NHS bedpans as a shit load.

Poster most likely to turn this into a fertilising opportunity.

🙂

[OldNick]

Mandleson should be stripped of all his honours. 'Yum Yum' ffs. It makes the skin crawl, always seemed to me a creep of the highest order.

[Weston Super Saint]

Starmer's broom.  Like Trigger's but the bristles have been replaced by MPs and senior party officials.

Are the adults still in the room or are they the ones that have left / been fired?

[Holmes_and_Watson]

Phase 2 has got off to a flying start.

[Lord Duckhunter]

14 minutes ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

Phase 2 has got off to a flying start.

Are we still on phase 2? Surely with Ange and Petie standing down in disgrace, we’re now onto phase 3. 
 

 

 

[egg]

2 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Are we still on phase 2? Surely with Ange and Petie standing down in disgrace, we’re now onto phase 3. 
 

 

 

It feels like the start of phase out. 

[whelk]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

It feels like the start of phase out. 

Does anyone really give a fuck about the US Ambassador. This is such a Westminster bubble story - yes shows poor judgement but voters don’t give a shit about such things

[egg]

1 minute ago, whelk said:

Does anyone really give a fuck about the US Ambassador. This is such a Westminster bubble story - yes shows poor judgement but voters don’t give a shit about such things

In isolation, no. Crap timing as much as anything. No growth in July doesn't help either. If they were a footballer they'd have got a yellow ages ago for an accumulation of fouls. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

40 minutes ago, egg said:

In isolation, no. Crap timing as much as anything. No growth in July doesn't help either. If they were a footballer they'd have got a yellow ages ago for an accumulation of fouls. 

And the fact it’s a senior labour figure, not some career diplomat nobody has heard of. Add in the fact that it involves Epstein & appears that Starmer ignored others with reservations, it could well be pretty serious for Starmer.
 

Labour are a bit queasy about changing leaders, I’ve no doubt the Tories would be looking to ditch someone who had a first 12 months like this. It’s been an absolute shit show, nobody can have  thought he’d be this useless. 

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

And the fact it’s a senior labour figure, not some career diplomat nobody has heard of. Add in the fact that it involves Epstein & appears that Starmer ignored others with reservations, it could well be pretty serious for Starmer.
 

Labour are a bit queasy about changing leaders, I’ve no doubt the Tories would be looking to ditch someone who had a first 12 months like this. It’s been an absolute shit show, nobody can have  thought he’d be this useless. 

This is with a massive run up. They had been holding lots of meetings to firm up their strategy before getting into power.