| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' 21:19 - May 10 with 11188 views | ElderGrizzly |
Obviously planned, but still looks amateurish
I particularly like this snippet
[Post edited 10 May 2017 21:22]
|  | | |  |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:43 - May 10 with 2667 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:33 - May 10 by StokieBlue |
If Labour can't match the Tory immigration targets the kippers won't vote for them so it's irrelevant with regards to the election result.
Sorry state of affairs but that's the realistic viewpoint.
You're right, it's all total nonsense.
SB |
Haven't Labour already said they won't commit to an immigration target? So yes, that's them sunk (again) even if they are being more realistic.
I'm not sure how May can get away with it when Davies is publicly contradicting her. But there we are - nobody's challenging them and we are where we are. [Post edited 10 May 2017 23:50]
|  |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:45 - May 10 with 2668 views | Dolly2.0 |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:06 - May 10 by StokieBlue |
Everyday you post something supporting labour. Do you not get bored of it?
SB |
I don't though. |  |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 00:01 - May 11 with 2646 views | footers |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:30 - May 10 by StokieBlue |
That's total nonsense on corporation tax.
It's massively lower in Ireland and is soon to be massively lower in the US. We are leaving the EU and should be trying to attract companies to these shores, not taxing them to the hilt. With the companies comes jobs and revenues - no chance of them coming here under the rates Labour are proposing.
I reiterate, total nonsense and the way to completely ruin this country.
SB |
Ireland has a population of 4m. It has to have taxes that low to attract investment. Not a good comparison.
We have one of the most affluent and well-educated markets in the world. Pay the price to do business here or someone else will. It didn't put them off 20 years ago, but Brexit will put that in danger of course. Why continue to tax those who can't afford it though? There has to be some happy medium, which isn't by continuing to reduce corporation tax imo. |  |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 00:02 - May 11 with 2649 views | Sarge |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 22:35 - May 10 by lowhouseblue |
the most expensive suicide note in history |
Spot the daily mail reader |  | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 00:14 - May 11 with 2640 views | jaykay |
i always like the way people always hammer the labour party over taxes. as if the tories never use taxes to raise money.
v.a.t. is a good one introduced by the tories. it replaced purchase tax a.k.a. luxury tax.
there the only party who keep putting it up. labour did reduce it once. when introduced by the tories they said it wouldnt go on fuel bills but it has. v.a.t now. v.a.t. hurts the low paid the most.
now they want to do away with the triple lock on state pensions , saying pensions have gone up 25% compared to 15% in wage rises in the last few years. so 25% of 110 = a rise of .£27.5. 15% of say £250 = a rise of £37. |  |
| forensic experts say footers and spruces fingerprints were not found at the scene after the weekends rows |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 00:44 - May 11 with 2623 views | Clapham_Junction |
Perhaps I am being cynical, but was there this sort of inquisition when corporation tax was being lowered over the last few years? It has the same net effect as increased spending (i.e. increasing the difference between revenue and spending) and will be costing us at least £12bn a year (IFS) in lost public revenue.
Was corporation tax so bad in 2010 that we can't go back to a level that is slightly lower? I am not convinced it's a problem. |  | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 06:57 - May 11 with 2595 views | No9 |
OK but; we have a society where every public service is in crisis.
The NHS, education, mental health, childerns welfare, poverty is all a major problem.
What are your proposals if tax increases are not a way? We are moving to a point where the UK public can't afford to buy the products these businesses are trying to sel - 19 million in poverty =
http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-mays-jams-joseph-rowntree-foundation-finds
We have a situation where the government gives money to farmers to provide food that go to the supermarkets at a price that keeps many farmer on the breadline but the supermarkets charge so much people can't afford it so it goes in the skip, along come charities take the food out of the skip,cook it abd distribute it to the poor.
That is a stupid way to run country
Now the education authorities are being told to make further & deeper cuts in education spending and to put metal detectors in to seek out the knives going into schools.
If you don't increases taxes how do you solve alll these problems?
One day you may have children then you will be grateful for the NHS & other public services | | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 06:59 - May 11 with 2593 views | No9 |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 22:46 - May 10 by ElderGrizzly |
It won't be fully costed and they certainly won't have it independently verified.
Edit: Guardian confirm, there are no details on how they would pay for it:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/10/labour-party-manifesto-pledges-
My view is any 'policy' announced by any party should be independently checked. If untrue, they have to withdraw it.
Picking on the rich for everything will mean the rich go elsewhere eventually.
We need more money for the NHS, Social Care and Education and everyone should pay. Like we (LD) announced, an extra 1p or 2p on income tax is a start. [Post edited 10 May 2017 23:01]
|
"Picking on the rich for everything will mean the rich go elsewhere eventually."
Not true, there are plenty of examples to show so | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:20 - May 11 with 2578 views | Superfrans |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 22:27 - May 10 by J2BLUE |
I must admit I read that, and if true, it makes me wonder how they will pay for all of it? Just seems like they're going to tax the hell out of anyone their thresholds consider 'rich'. I'm not sure how workable that is.
If it's all realistically fully costed then it sounds great. Hopefully it is and they'll have it independently verified. |
I would happily pay more tax if it means we still have the NHS and other welfare state infrastructure as I reach my retirement and my kids have children, and look to educate and raise them. |  |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:28 - May 11 with 2571 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:24 - May 10 by footers |
It was verified by the independent IFS this morning.
Corporation tax in this country is criminally low. The higher tax bands are similar. The lower and middle classes have been paying a high price for the recession whilst the higher paid and corporations have had it so easy. Sadly Brexit will now make it much harder for us to collect taxes from those already avoiding it. [Post edited 10 May 2017 23:25]
|
Corporation Tax rate in 2010 28%. Tax take £43 billion
Corporation Tax rate in 2016 20%. Tax take £49 billion. |  |
| |
| on 07:28 - May 11 with 2570 views | _ |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 22:40 - May 10 by J2BLUE |
They have no chance of winning so they can promise whatever they like knowing they don't have to deliver it.
Agree though it sounds good. Not sure it's all that realistic though. |
| | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:29 - May 11 with 2569 views | No9 |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 00:14 - May 11 by jaykay |
i always like the way people always hammer the labour party over taxes. as if the tories never use taxes to raise money.
v.a.t. is a good one introduced by the tories. it replaced purchase tax a.k.a. luxury tax.
there the only party who keep putting it up. labour did reduce it once. when introduced by the tories they said it wouldnt go on fuel bills but it has. v.a.t now. v.a.t. hurts the low paid the most.
now they want to do away with the triple lock on state pensions , saying pensions have gone up 25% compared to 15% in wage rises in the last few years. so 25% of 110 = a rise of .£27.5. 15% of say £250 = a rise of £37. |
Your analysis is correct. Another way the tories hiked up tax on the low paid in the 80's they said they'd bring down the rate of tax - BUT to pay for it they cancelled what you could offset in allowances the net result was, at the lower end of the pay scale, you actually paid more tax not less.
There has been far too much corproate welfare & the fact corporation tax in the USA is 34% hasn't deterred too many companies for operating there | | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:44 - May 11 with 2543 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:24 - May 10 by footers |
It was verified by the independent IFS this morning.
Corporation tax in this country is criminally low. The higher tax bands are similar. The lower and middle classes have been paying a high price for the recession whilst the higher paid and corporations have had it so easy. Sadly Brexit will now make it much harder for us to collect taxes from those already avoiding it. [Post edited 10 May 2017 23:25]
|
The IFS?
As Mr Johnson of the IFS said on the Today programme: "The risk is, that while this [Labour plan] would raise knocking on for £20bn in the short run, it is probably going to raise rather less than that in the long run as companies invest less and take other opportunities to reduce the amount of tax that they pay.
And from today's Guardian
The IFS said this would raise £19bn in the short term, but “substantially less” in the medium to long run because companies would respond to the higher tax rate by investing less in the UK.
Helen Miller, the associate director of the IFS, said: “Cuts to corporation tax have been one of the largest and most expensive policy changes since 2010. They have bought the UK a more competitive tax rate and are likely to boost economic activity in the medium to long run. Seventeen per cent — the rate due to be in place in 2020 under current plans — is not a magic number and raising corporation tax can bring in substantial sums in the short run.
“But, as always, there are trade-offs. Were rates to be increased, the benefits of additional revenue would need to be weighed against any long-run effects on growth. We should always remember that all taxes are paid by people and that workers can feel the effect of corporation tax indirectly though lower wages.”
The IFS said there was a very high degree of uncertainty about the impact of higher corporation tax on growth, jobs and wages but said it could be “substantial”. [Post edited 11 May 2017 7:44]
| |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:44 - May 11 with 2541 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:28 - May 11 by GlasgowBlue |
Corporation Tax rate in 2010 28%. Tax take £43 billion
Corporation Tax rate in 2016 20%. Tax take £49 billion. |
I wondered how long before someone would pop up with some manifestly misleading figures that failed to take into account GDP growth, inflation etc.
The reality:
Cuts to corporation tax rates announced between 2010 and 2016 are estimated to reduce revenues by at least £16.5 billion a year in the short to medium run. Accounting for measures that raise revenue, including anti-avoidance measures, onshore corporate tax policies over this period reduce revenues by an estimated £12.4 billion a year. Changes to corporate tax have represented some of the largest giveaways in both parliaments since 2010.
Corporate tax receipts as a share of national income are set to be at the same level in 2020—21 as they were in 2010—11. This is not evidence that cuts to corporation tax rates have not reduced revenues. Instead, it reflects the effect of other factors, including the ongoing recovery of financial sector (and other) profits following the Great Recession. Corporation tax receipts are forecast to be 2.3% of national income by 2021—22, substantially below the pre-recession high of 3.2%.
https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9207 | | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:50 - May 11 with 2528 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 06:57 - May 11 by No9 |
OK but; we have a society where every public service is in crisis.
The NHS, education, mental health, childerns welfare, poverty is all a major problem.
What are your proposals if tax increases are not a way? We are moving to a point where the UK public can't afford to buy the products these businesses are trying to sel - 19 million in poverty =
http://uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-mays-jams-joseph-rowntree-foundation-finds
We have a situation where the government gives money to farmers to provide food that go to the supermarkets at a price that keeps many farmer on the breadline but the supermarkets charge so much people can't afford it so it goes in the skip, along come charities take the food out of the skip,cook it abd distribute it to the poor.
That is a stupid way to run country
Now the education authorities are being told to make further & deeper cuts in education spending and to put metal detectors in to seek out the knives going into schools.
If you don't increases taxes how do you solve alll these problems?
One day you may have children then you will be grateful for the NHS & other public services |
yes tax increases are required. yes borrowing to fund investment is required. BUT your sums have to add up. you can't spend the same money multiple times. what that means is that you can't produce a shopping list of every commitment that you think might be popular. you have to specify the priorities which will be met from the extra revenue you intend to spend. is nationalising the post office / ALL the railways / the energy companies really a top priority for the limited capital you have available? when an alternative is just to regulate prices more effectively? |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:52 - May 11 with 2525 views | Coastalblue |
We're a country on a steep downward trajectory which Brexit will most likely accelerate, giving companies less reason to invest here is not ging to help that.
What we should probably do is accept that we are going to end up taking our place as a middle of the pack average country, no longer a world leader, and cut our cloth accordingly. No one seems to want to accept that though. |  |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:53 - May 11 with 2522 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 22:35 - May 10 by lowhouseblue |
the most expensive suicide note in history |
It comes across as fairly middle ground.....which parts do you find suicidal ? Will be interesting to compare your results when the Tory one comes out !
Most of the media outlets would have had the 70s headlines written before reading it . In reality it's the Tories wanting to hold back to a 50's post Brexit reality. So even in the media's terms 20 years ahead with Corbyn ! |  |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:57 - May 11 with 2515 views | No9 |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:44 - May 11 by GlasgowBlue |
The IFS?
As Mr Johnson of the IFS said on the Today programme: "The risk is, that while this [Labour plan] would raise knocking on for £20bn in the short run, it is probably going to raise rather less than that in the long run as companies invest less and take other opportunities to reduce the amount of tax that they pay.
And from today's Guardian
The IFS said this would raise £19bn in the short term, but “substantially less” in the medium to long run because companies would respond to the higher tax rate by investing less in the UK.
Helen Miller, the associate director of the IFS, said: “Cuts to corporation tax have been one of the largest and most expensive policy changes since 2010. They have bought the UK a more competitive tax rate and are likely to boost economic activity in the medium to long run. Seventeen per cent — the rate due to be in place in 2020 under current plans — is not a magic number and raising corporation tax can bring in substantial sums in the short run.
“But, as always, there are trade-offs. Were rates to be increased, the benefits of additional revenue would need to be weighed against any long-run effects on growth. We should always remember that all taxes are paid by people and that workers can feel the effect of corporation tax indirectly though lower wages.”
The IFS said there was a very high degree of uncertainty about the impact of higher corporation tax on growth, jobs and wages but said it could be “substantial”. [Post edited 11 May 2017 7:44]
|
So, how much do you think we, the tax payer should give to corporations ?
Osboorne gave corporations £93 Bn in 2013.
We do not know what is being handed to Nissan but we do know the taxpayer is going to pay for the training of Tyota staff to stay here.
So in your world it is OK for a young person to have to hand out a whole bunch of money to try & educate themselves while we, the taxpayer pay for the training of staff for a Japanese care company who are making very large profits from that staff's endeavours? And it's OK to take money from pensioners then give £4 Bn a year to the shareholders of European (nationalised) rail companies?
And while the tories have agreed to double the wholesale price paid t European electricity generators they are making at home for under the wholesale price.
Meanwhile we have a third of our population in poverty. | | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:00 - May 11 with 2512 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:53 - May 11 by BanksterDebtSlave |
It comes across as fairly middle ground.....which parts do you find suicidal ? Will be interesting to compare your results when the Tory one comes out !
Most of the media outlets would have had the 70s headlines written before reading it . In reality it's the Tories wanting to hold back to a 50's post Brexit reality. So even in the media's terms 20 years ahead with Corbyn ! |
the sums, in so far as there are any, don't add up.
beyond southern rail there is no public support for nationalisation as an end in itself (which will be the headline proposal) - they want price and service controls not a return to british rail.
the more things you promise, the less clear your priorities become, and the less credible the programme you offer. voters already have zero trust that corbyn can deliver anything - offering the moon on a stick (with no plan to pay for it) just reinforces that. [Post edited 11 May 2017 8:01]
| |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:00 - May 11 with 2511 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:42 - May 10 by Dolly2.0 |
How can you write a suicide note if you're already dead? |
we may have found corbyn's only skill. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:07 - May 11 with 2507 views | No9 |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:00 - May 11 by lowhouseblue |
the sums, in so far as there are any, don't add up.
beyond southern rail there is no public support for nationalisation as an end in itself (which will be the headline proposal) - they want price and service controls not a return to british rail.
the more things you promise, the less clear your priorities become, and the less credible the programme you offer. voters already have zero trust that corbyn can deliver anything - offering the moon on a stick (with no plan to pay for it) just reinforces that. [Post edited 11 May 2017 8:01]
|
It is not just Southern the poll conducted by Archant showed a very high % of people wanted what has become Greater Anglia returned to public control.
Even though Abillio (a Dutch nationalised company) only got 34% approval rating from passengers, Grayling still gave them the franchise and we look as though we are going to get substandard rolling stock.
Most people realise the way in which rail was pivatised it was basic robbery and the disposal of the ROSCO's even worse.
Forget Corbyn and worry how Hammond is going to balance the books | | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:10 - May 11 with 2499 views | No9 |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 23:30 - May 10 by StokieBlue |
That's total nonsense on corporation tax.
It's massively lower in Ireland and is soon to be massively lower in the US. We are leaving the EU and should be trying to attract companies to these shores, not taxing them to the hilt. With the companies comes jobs and revenues - no chance of them coming here under the rates Labour are proposing.
I reiterate, total nonsense and the way to completely ruin this country.
SB |
If your theory is correct and lower taxes attract corporations wahy are BP & Shell leaving the UK along with a whole rake of other companies? | | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:14 - May 11 with 2492 views | lowhouseblue |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:07 - May 11 by No9 |
It is not just Southern the poll conducted by Archant showed a very high % of people wanted what has become Greater Anglia returned to public control.
Even though Abillio (a Dutch nationalised company) only got 34% approval rating from passengers, Grayling still gave them the franchise and we look as though we are going to get substandard rolling stock.
Most people realise the way in which rail was pivatised it was basic robbery and the disposal of the ROSCO's even worse.
Forget Corbyn and worry how Hammond is going to balance the books |
people have forgotten what service was like under british rail. public control doesn't need to be the same as nationalisation - more effective regulation would amount to public control. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:21 - May 11 with 2484 views | No9 |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:14 - May 11 by lowhouseblue |
people have forgotten what service was like under british rail. public control doesn't need to be the same as nationalisation - more effective regulation would amount to public control. |
I haven't forgotten British Rail, on the Norwich Liverpool Street run they were imesuarbly better than any of the private operators and much cheaper.
The model that Andrew Adonis ran on the east Coast mainline was very good & returned money to the treasury.
For the £4 Bn a year being handed out to rail operators now we should all be travelling first class and getting free meals & wine.
Generally UK rail services are up to X6 more expensive then their continetal counterparts
Don't you find it intersting that the tories won't have a UK nationalised rail but they pay considerable sums of money to European (& others ) nationalised companies to run rail here? | | | |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 08:21 - May 11 with 2482 views | GlasgowBlue |
| Labour's manifesto 'leaked' on 07:44 - May 11 by Clapham_Junction |
I wondered how long before someone would pop up with some manifestly misleading figures that failed to take into account GDP growth, inflation etc.
The reality:
Cuts to corporation tax rates announced between 2010 and 2016 are estimated to reduce revenues by at least £16.5 billion a year in the short to medium run. Accounting for measures that raise revenue, including anti-avoidance measures, onshore corporate tax policies over this period reduce revenues by an estimated £12.4 billion a year. Changes to corporate tax have represented some of the largest giveaways in both parliaments since 2010.
Corporate tax receipts as a share of national income are set to be at the same level in 2020—21 as they were in 2010—11. This is not evidence that cuts to corporation tax rates have not reduced revenues. Instead, it reflects the effect of other factors, including the ongoing recovery of financial sector (and other) profits following the Great Recession. Corporation tax receipts are forecast to be 2.3% of national income by 2021—22, substantially below the pre-recession high of 3.2%.
https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/9207 |
So you agree that a lower corporation Tax rate made Business in Britain more attractive and contributed to the recovery and increased growth. Which means that the tax take in 2016 is £6billion more than it was in 2010.
The reduced amounts your link highlights are based in the growth we had. Would we have had that growth if British business remained uncompetitive whilst we were attempting to cone out if a recession?
So the reduced amounts are all "if my aunty had bollox she'd be my uncle". [Post edited 11 May 2017 9:07]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
