Raising the tax threshold to £10k?

Raising the tax threshold to £10k?

2. Expanding the Academy schools programme.

3. Free schools

4. Simplifying benefits in favour a flat payment which the newly employed keep as they move into a job therefore making work pay.

5. Cancelling EMA. Not sure why we pay kids to go to school. Do what I did, get a job stacking shelves, paper round, butchers-boy, milk round. It’s good for you.

6. Cancelling compulsary ID cards

7. Set a firm date for withdrawl from Afghanistan

and lastly, if you can get over all this tiresome Bullingdon-boy nonsense, whatever your political persuasion, how is Cameron an extremist right-winger? He’s a very middle of the road One-Nation Tory, much like Churchill, Eden and MacMillan. Have a read on the Spectator Coffee House blog, see the comments below the line for what the blue rinse brigade think of him.

Cancelling EMA. Not sure why we pay kids to go to school

we don’t pay kids to go to school. ema is to assist parents in putting their kids through higher education on account of the fact that wages are now comparatively much lower now than they’ve ever been.

i suppose we could always borrow some money to get them through school. oh, hang on………………………….

It ignores the doubling in debt under major for example and the lack of surpluses during his time

As I said before – it was a global recession, so either you say that governments have to borrow money during times of global recession, in which case you cannot criticize Major, OR you accept that Gordon was at fault for his profligate borrow and spend policies.

we don’t pay kids to go to school. ema is to assist parents in putting their kids through higher education on account of the fact that wages are now comparatively much lower now than they’ve ever been

yeh that sounds ok, but where does it stop? can we really afford it? My sister is a teacher, pretty left-wing…..even she is against the EMA, far too many of her kids (inner city London) just show up to get to get their money, arent in the slightest interested in doing any work. It sounds incredible but thats her talking not me……and really poor families are going to continue to get it am I wrong? Isnt there something wrong with taking other peoples money in taxes and giving it to a kid who gets a free state education?

I think that crosses right over the line of what the state should and shouldnt be doing. Feel free to disagree but please don’t shout and call me a Tory idealogue for holding that view.

and one more thing. Isnt it just a teeny bit to the good that we have a guy in No10 who looks suited to the job, is comfortable in his skin, projects a little bit of optimism? I wasn’t Brown’s biggest fan but he wasn’t a terrible guy……but as a PM he was an absolute horror story. I’m pretty interested in politics but even I couldn’t watch him on TV for more than a few seconds before switching channel. Poor guy was just tortured by the job, was totally unsuited to it. Put your own political prejudices to the side for a second, wasn’t that terrible for the country?

Stoner – Member

I wouldnt want to join a party that would have TJ and me as members. It’d be too contradictory.

Green party?

mcboo – Member

Raising the tax threshold to £10k?
reasonable idea – its what all governments tend to do – raise tax thresholds as inflation movbes more peoiple into tax

2. Expanding the Academy schools programme.

stupid idea. stops strategic planning of education, more expensive per pupil, worse outcomes.

3. Free schools

As above

4. Simplifying benefits in favour a flat payment which the newly employed keep as they move into a job therefore making work pay.

While a good idea in principle it means that those with special needs get huge cuts and also creates a huge poverty trap that means its actually harder to get into work – stupid idea

5. Cancelling EMA. Not sure why we pay kids to go to school. Do what I did, get a job stacking shelves, paper round, butchers-boy, milk round. It’s good for you.

So poor kids can no longer do a levels? where are all these jobs schoold kids should get? Working and being at school is a good way to reduce outcomes as well

6. Cancelling compulsary ID cards

good idea no doubt

7. Set a firm date for withdrawl from Afghanistan

I’ll believe it when I see it

and lastly, if you can get over all this tiresome Bullingdon-boy nonsense, whatever your political persuasion, how is Cameron an extremist right-winger? He’s a very middle of the road One-Nation Tory, much like Churchill, Eden and MacMillan. Have a read on the Spectator Coffee House blog, see the comments below the line for what the blue rinse brigade think of him.

Rubbish – he pretends to be a one nation tory and in some areas his instinct is good but in others its awful. He is far further to the right than thatcher – and authoritarian not libertarian to boot. he is hated b some because he is authoritarian

bit to the good that we have a guy in No10 who looks suited to the job, is comfortable in his skin, projects a little bit of optimism?

not really as he is still a smug **** and his policies stink
he may be more presentable but that is all- hat about his attitude to women and his calm down dear? Rumours of temper tantrums? He is meia savvy nothing more.
GB was obviously piss poor but probably a nicer person.

Well Jeremy count them up, we agree they arent all bad as a government then. Not a bad score.

Working and being at school is a good way to reduce outcomes as well

I’m pretty sure the two most important factors in my relative success (beyond coming from a poor but loving family) were playing team sport and learning about life and the value of money by having part time jobs while I was school and university. Of that I am sure. We shouldnt be denying kids that opportunity.

Expanding the Academy schools programme.

And which party started that programme?

Free schools

Lovely idea; trouble is it will potentially allow private business interests to dictate type of education. Allows state-funded schools to much freedom in selecting the type of pupils they want. Will lead to a tiered education system which will, inevitably, favour those with wealth and leave poorer kids at a disadvantage. Socially divisive and unconducive to integration and true social mobility. Stealth privatisation of the Education System.

Cancelling EMA. Not sure why we pay kids to go to school. Do what I did, get a job stacking shelves, paper round, butchers-boy, milk round. It’s good for you.

Or do what most Tory MPs did; enjoy free university education and a nice allowance from mummy and daddy each month. Students whose families are wealthy enough to be able to finance them through education will have an obvious advantage to those who have to get a part-time job as well as needing to study. EMA levels the playing field a bit more.

Cancelling compulsary ID cards

Fair enough. Daft idea and too much public money wasted on researching it etc.

Set a firm date for withdrawl from Afghanistan

And this woon’t have happened if we had a Labour government?

Why is it, in ‘discussions’ of this kind, people on here always descend into arguments about money? Is that all you can think of? What about other issues, such as social stability, access to adequate housing, healthcare and decent education?

I don’t see the Tories coming up with any firm plans to address these issues at all. They just keep prattling on about ‘reducing debt’. It’s all about money, not people.

Truth is they just want to use their term in power to decimate the public sector, and create opportunities for themselves and their cronies to then take advantage of the mess that will be left once they’ve done so. None of this current government show any signs of actually giving a shit about the people they are supposed to represent, none of them. If they are allowed to continue as they mean to, we will be left with a society with a lot more crime, far poorer health amongst it’s people, and a poorer educated population. Tory short-termism will see the creation of wealth for a veery tiny minority of people in the UK, and leave Britain in a far worse state than it was under Labour.

Those riots we’ve seen this summer; get used to it. we’ll be seeing a lot more of that.

Oh, and you might not want to flash yer iPad/iPhone/spensive mountain bike around too much either…

We’re all in it together. You’ll understand this, when you’re lying in a pool of blood after some scrote has robbed you. Oh, and don’t bank on the ambulance or getting to you too quickly, cos they’ll have had their service cut right back. Then, when your health insurance has run out, and you’ve lost your job cos you’re no longer able to work, you’ll have to rely on state benefits to survive. Good luck with that. Embrace the Iceland Experience.

But at least you’ll be able to console yourself with the fact that you won’t be the only one. 🙂

Boy’s I’m going to go now. Lot of personal stuff I just can’t understand.

Bye! 🙂

Is this a clever device to push the Tories as humanist good guys, or did they actually say something decent this time?

If a liar tells you he’s not lying, do you believe him?

I think theresa may blatantly lying about a cat preventing an immigrant from being deported as a pretext to pulling out of the human rights act tells you all you need to know about this government

and macboos suggestion that Cameron is some kind of moderate tells you all you need to know about how effective pr and spin can be on the electorate

Like it Eviljoe, like it! 😀

Cameron ………… He’s a very middle of the road One-Nation Tory, much like Churchill, Eden and MacMillan

😀

Harold “The Council House Builder” MacMillan was considerably to the left of New Labour, let alone Cameron. Just as an example under MacMillan’s watch a quarter of a million council houses were built every year.

Contrast that with New Labour’s appalling record – in their 13 years in government almost half a million council houses were sold off. And that same period Yorkshire and the Humber region which has the greatest social housing need in the UK, 24 council homes were built. On average, just a couple of thousand new social housing units were built per year under New Labour – despite a waiting list of 4 million.

But even New Labour’s shameful record on social housing was too much for the right extremists in the Tory Party, and after installing himself in Number 10 David Cameron immediately announced a 60% cut in social housing expenditure.

Harold MacMillan who famously described the the privatisation of the utilities as “selling the family silver”, was positively communist compared to the Blair/Cameron/Clegg shower of neo-liberal right-wing ****.

Are the tories ok after all..?

Of course not… while they may have some use economically, as a governing power they are a shockingly poor moral example to our young people.. such willful and blase hypocracy can only be a negative influence on our future generation’s view of their elders in society..

the tory will always put wealth before worth.. lucrativeness before love..

I’m not going to try and say that labour are the answer as they aren’t much better if we’re honest.. but the tories are despicable and I’m truly surprised that evolution hasn’t caught up them and their supporters yet..
I’m sure that a far-ranging study into the negative effects of inbreeding would probably shed light onto this anomolous sociological disaster..

I hope that my mature and measured contribution will help push the debate in this thread towards finding answers to the OPs original question..

Ernie, but should the councils, and us the tax p\yer, subsidise council and social housing, if theres a need then comapnies and corporations should build them, and charge realistic rents, so they get tennants into them, thats what happens to lot of student housing, theres also more control of sub standard tennants, no running to the council every few days to repair your damage, or for minor repairs.

project – and who pays the rents of the unemployed?

This condem lot have some gpood ideas, its just putting it out there that they get screwed, instead of cutting student grants,and the uni,s charging high tution fees, just perhaps can we have a cull of totally pointless courses , or run them a block release, with firms subsidising them and the kids, working for their employer.

Also selling off or handing the NHS, to foreign companies is going to be seen as a huge failure for all its users.

if theres a need then comapnies and corporations should build them, and charge realistic rents

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

‘Realistic rents’??

Are you for real?

The private sector will always, always charge as much as it can get away with, for anything. Less council housing = far, far greater cost to taxpayers for providing housing for those that need it.

TJ, who pays the high intrest charges for the unemployed on their mortgages, usually on houses that are top big for them, but they just took out a huge mortgage just because they thought they couls afford it, thats until they sadly loose their jobs.

Elfin, but if council or taxpayer housing wasnt there, private companies would build it.

if theres a need then comapnies and corporations should build them,

There is nothing to stop companies building social housing. why have they not yet? I doubt the reason is because they cant build on greenbelt land or planning problems . They can make more money selling them to richer people and get faster returns so this will never happen- certainly it has not in the last 60 years and I see little reason to be optimistic tbh

There are 4 million waiting for them to build it and council housing numbers are reducing and yet still nothing – are they not compelled to build some as part of developments? That how keen they are to build them we need to force them so it just wont happen as they can make more money other ways

Elfin, but if council or taxpayer housing wasnt there, private companies would build it.

Jesus wept…. 😯

Anyone else want to have a go? Can’t be bothered any more.

The Tories had no idea how to get them selves out of the last recession we was in
All they did was increase the interest rates to an alarming high crippled people
with the Poll Tax and then Council tax which is way over cost which the Tories
used estate agents to value areas to get a cost.

And we are all in this together LOL This country is a trash can and would not
put my life in line to save it.

As said above most developments now have to include social housing for the ex council house dweller type person.

We need to get away from this , “we will lend money for 25 plus years, at whatever intrest rate the bankers charge, just so that one day we may own that plot, if we keep up the payments, and dont die in between”.

I read The (free copy of) Daily Express in the pub after my bike ride today, and you know what, I’m convinced, the Tories are the new messiah! we’re not worthy! Good job I read the papers.

if theres a need then comapnies and corporations should build them

You would have thought so ……… if the claim that the market will always satisfy the needs of society was true.

There is a need…….. 4.5 million people are needing affordable housing. But yet companies and corporations are sitting on land banks and not building. You see, the profit isn’t good enough at the moment (it never is when it comes to affordable housing) and profit always comes before people. And anyway, banks, who call the shots, won’t lend money to build homes (nor will they lend money to buy homes)

I take it that Harold MacMillan was too left-wing for you then project ?

yes legislation forces them so that coupled with the lack of building This negates your point that the private sector will build them – they will but only if we make them – you seem to suggest they would if we did not and we are not building nay, have a housing shortage and 4 million waiting for houses.
In that there london, gawd bless her, build a shoe box and sell it for 250 k or rent it for £100 – this means it takes you circa 50 years to just get the 250 k and that ignores interest. Even at £200 it is 25 years…why would they do this? Only the govt can “afford” to do this.

Can we just agree that the Tories don’t give a toss about you or me they just care about the money. It’s all about money. So long as the money flows up and not down. Ok, Sorted.

As said above most developments now have to include social housing for the ex council house dweller type person.

They don’t. You’re confusing ‘Social Housing’ with ‘Affordable Housing’ which some developers are ‘obliged’ to provide a ‘certain percentage’ of in new developments as part of their planning application being granted.

‘Affordable’ is an arbitrary term which means bugger all in reality. Loosely based on what might be deemed ‘affordable’ to an ‘average earner’ or ‘average household income’ in an area. In practice it means many people on lower incomes are still excluded from being able to rent a property in particular areas where there is a massive housing shortage, such as Tower Hamlets, cos the ‘average’ income is relatively quite high.

In other words, it’s bollocks.

but thats the point, housing is well over priced, just tp pay the mortgage, and the percieved value of where you live,open up the brown field sites,job creation schemes,retraining, and build basic homes,well insulated,and limited parking, and youre on a win win circuit.

Don’t think you find any mug to build social housing
The returns will be very low and to the cost of borrowing to build and wages etc
Plus the cost cost of repairs to council accommodation is very high and on a constant
repair due to classy tenants.
Suppose thats why you only get part rent part buy.
But excludes the poorest type of council tenant.

Effin Developers do have to include a percentage but only in large developments.
This came to light when Chafford Hundred small town near Lakeside in Essex
it was built But with only property for buyers with no social housing included

housing is well over priced

Well unless you’re a Marxist project (Karl Marx had a very different theory of “value”) the correct value/price is simply what people are prepared to pay. And when there is a shortage and high demand, the price is very high…….but correct.

So unless you’re arguing for the overthrow of capitalism, then housing is not well over priced. It is realistically priced.

tbh project i cant keep up with your shifting argument or your fantasy version of reality.
Again they could have done all this anytime in the last 60 years and did not. In fact we needed to legisalte to get them to do anything and even then it was not social housing [ cheers for the clarification elf] Why you think they will despite these explanations is lost on me.

hmm, I wonder how all the employed millions of people on minimum wage or just above could afford “affordable housing”. Cos they’re not working their nuts off are they? for what? to scrape by till next payday.

Plus the cost cost of repairs to council accommodation is very high and on a constant
repair due to classy tenants.

Through my involvment with the local HA and through converstaions with local tenants, this is actually due to poor standard of materials and workmanship, and in fact a lack of basic regular maintenance by the HA and private landlords. Mine in particular is crap; I’ve fixed loads of things he or his cowboys screwed up, since I moved in. S’ok, I just charge him the going market rate for carrying out repairs. 😀

And cos local authorities scrapped maintenance depts in favour of using private contractors (back in the Thatcher years), the standard of repair has dropped significantly, as LAs are forced to use the cheapest contractors they can get, who are very often unconscientious shysters who bodge things so badly they need sorting again very soon.

Things improved somewhat with the influx of East Yerpeans who mostly do a decent job for very reasonable rates, but most of them seemed to have buggered off again, sadly, leaving us with greedy Bodgit and Leggit traders who shoon’t be left in charge of a teaspoon, let alone power tools…