as they were told by just about everyone who actually knew anything about it.

All the parties agreed significant cuts were required to get debt under control. There is no example of any other country in the world that managed to spend it’s way into a boom over the last 10 years. (And Greece tried spending their way out and went utterly tits up.)

If growing an economy was as simple as borrowing and spending there would be no poor countries and every country in the world would be spending like crazy.

Interesting that there’s been little focus on how Labour’s WASPI promise may influence voting intentions of women affected.
There are about 4 million; surely they’re not all existing labour voters?

A couple of LBC presenters talked about it in one of their podcasts. It wasn’t a reliable sample but they were saying in a one hour show dedicated to the issue only one voter who believed it was going to actually be delivered got through to their researcher.

That matches my perception. All the parties have gone so blatantly pork-barrel this time I don’t think anyone gives any credibility to any of the bribes. So incredibly, it seems offering a 31k bribe to 4 million people might have won very few votes.

Moreover, the most Labour could find for the NHS is 9bn. Yet they had 58bn un-allocated all along! Mental.

It’s not that difficult to understand working class Tory voters:

Many will have memories of the terrible Labour government of 74-79. Corbyn’s Labour, with its nationalisation agenda and general left wing stance will remind many of these voters of this era.

Others will see a lack of fiscal responsibility. The Tories can be just as reckless, but as they are generally perceived as being more careful with spending (which does have some historical precedents) they are more likely to get away with it in voters’ eyes.

Aspirational working class types will also not vote Labour, almost as a matter of principle. Ditto many of those who have risen to the ranks of the lower middle class.

JP

My annual metro card (West Yorkshire) costs me about 120 quid a month through salary sacrifice.
It’s cheaper than driving of you factor in parking charges in Leeds. But if you don’t commute to a city it’s debatable whether it’s worth it. And the service is a nightmare at times.

It’s not that difficult to understand working class Tory voters:

Many will have memories of the terrible Labour government of 74-79. Corbyn’s Labour, with its nationalisation agenda and general left wing stance will remind many of these voters of this era.

Others will see a lack of fiscal responsibility. The Tories can be just as reckless, but as they are generally perceived as being more careful with spending (which does have some historical precedents) they are more likely to get away with it in voters’ eyes.

Aspirational working class types will also not vote Labour, almost as a matter of principle. Ditto many of those who have risen to the ranks of the lower middle class.

All of that, plus I’m not especially poor and I can think of far better things to spend many thousands of pounds of my money than nationalising a load of stuff. If money was really tight how does that decision go. Shoes for the kids, or buy out the shareholders of some seriously massive firms… Which is most useful… Let me think…

Also don’t forget there are a vast number of working class people with small Ltd Company businesses. The medium and big firms will just move HQ abroad and avoid the corporation tax rise, small shop owners and plumbers can’t.

We have the highest fares and most profitable rail companies in the world

When taken as a whole they don’t seem very profitable ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business-46398947

oob – yes, it’s all pork barrel politics but voters can be easily persuaded by the illusion of money; particularly when it’s allied to a feeling of a wrong being righted.
Regarding small number of callers to LBC, perhaps most were out working to earn money to supplement/replace their deferred pensions…..

Channel 4 10pm tonight. Dispatches Growing Up Poor: Britain’s Breadline Kids

This is the real picture of what austerity by the tories for a decade has created. This is a very common picture in my local area and our Tory MP said it was lies created by labour supporters!

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but if you can watch that and still put a x in the Tory box then you are a very selfish person.

There is no example of any other country in the world that managed to spend it’s way into a boom over the last 10 years.

Portugal was cited:

Portugal’s Economic Recovery: How Much Came from Ditching Austerity?

Quite a few other hits about spending out of recessions. It’s a thing.

I can think of far better things to spend many thousands of pounds of my money than nationalising a load of stuff. If money was really tight how does that decision go. Shoes for the kids, or buy out the shareholders of some seriously massive firms…

They won’t be taxing poor people who can barely afford kids shoes. Not doing that is literally the entire raison d’etre of the Labour party. You really are talking absolute rubbish, it’s quite strange how selective your perception is. You utterly mis-udnerstood my point re the WASPI compensation. I knew it wasn’t costed (as I said) so my original comment was NOT an attempt to say it was costed – just an invitation for the poster to read about stuff for himself. Point missed completely. And then you mock me for your own misunderstanding of my point. Please try to understand not just sling mud.

Also don’t forget there are a vast number of working class people with small Ltd Company businesses. The medium and big firms will just move HQ abroad and avoid the corporation tax rise, small shop owners and plumbers can’t.

Small businesses won’t pay more corporation tax, because it’s paid on PROFIT after costs such as salaries. So the only way they will pay more tax is if they are using bonuses and dividends to pay less tax than they should in the first place.

When you buy a rail ticket from a private rail company, to get to work, some of that money goes into the pockets of rich businessmen. Is that the way it should be? Should people be profiting from an essential service? I say no.

Precisely, is Avoidance the correct term?

the rules need to change to not allow tax to be paid in low tax havens for big companies trading in other countries.

Portugal was cited:

Did you read your link? [1]

Portugal simply benefited passively, along with others, from a strong recovery in Europe overall.

It raised the possibility ending Austerity did it, it certainly doesn’t conclude it. Hell of a coincidence that it turned around when Europe turned around!

They won’t be taxing poor people who can barely afford kids shoes.

They will. Corporation tax is just like VAT. The customer pays. It’s not remotely progressive. The greengrocer has to pass it on to his customers, he doesn’t create special money from an alternative source to pay his taxes, he makes all his money from his customers. There is no way to spend the sums Labour (and the Torys) are talking about without the vast majority of us paying. Very few people, if anyone believes the “other people will pay” mantra.

[1] In fact that’s the second time you’ve wasted my time tonight. First you claimed the Grey Book included costings for all Labours promises, now you’ve shared a link without bothering to read it yourself. I’ll hit send on this because I’ve already written it but I won’t be replying to you again for a while.

Shameless. Who paid off your mortgage and paid you over £60k redundancy when left your job to became an MP Ian? https://t.co/j2Vv0unIii

— Hopi Sen (@hopisen) December 2, 2019

the rules need to change to not allow tax to be paid in low tax havens for big companies trading in other countries.

That’s easy, VAT does exactly that. It’s not politically very popular though.

Unless you’re talking about changing the rules to make companies HQ and pay *corporation* tax in a specific countries. That isn’t so easy. If it was somewhere would have cracked it. (Ok, North Korea & East Germany solved it…)

All the parties agreed significant cuts were required to get debt under control. There is no example of any other country in the world that managed to spend it’s way into a boom over the last 10 years. (

I actually don’t think labour did. Plus there is a massive difference between cuts and austerity.

Must be a coincidence that the places that borrowed and spent and avoided austerity budgets recovered more fully and more quickly than those that didn’t. And that the ones that didn’t were getting ample evidence of it but chose to pursue ideology instead of good advice.

Austerity continues to be a drag in the UK economy today while other places are doing really quite well.

The Tories are not what they were.

Not at all, this new breed bears little resemblance to the party of old.

https://www.ft.com/content/8075e68c-7857-11e8-8e67-1e1a0846c475

The Conservatives stole the miners’ pension fund.

Stole? According to the FT it was guaranteed in exchange for 50pc of any surplus (if there was one).

https://www.ftadviser.com/pensions/2019/06/11/govt-mulls-pension-guarantees-for-mineworkers/?page=1

Most of the largest U.K. headquartered PLCs derive the majority of their revenue (and hence profit) overseas.

that is fine and they can pay tax on the % of their overseas profits wherever they make them.

but it seems unfair that it is possible to benefit from the infrastructure and market of a given country and then export those profits outside of its borders to pay a lower rate of tax to a goverment that has little if anything to do with the creation of that profit.

Small businesses won’t pay more corporation tax, because it’s paid on PROFIT after costs such as salaries. So the only way they will pay more tax is if they are using bonuses and dividends to pay less tax than they should in the first place.

You really don’t understand this do you? We pay significant sums in corporation tax every year, and we’re a very typical small business with 4 employees. The notion that small businesses wouldn’t be affected by an increase is nonsense. The only businesses not affected are large organisations that can afford to use arcane offshore structures to stop paying any corporation tax at all.

If corporation tax were reduced to a sensible level we’d probably re-invest our additional revenue, primarily in creating jobs, thereby generating income tax revenues, or increase dividends, which would also generate tax income. Larger companies would also be less likely to try to avoid paying the tax if it were set at a lower level. But let’s not let the facts get in the way of a good ‘all companies are evil and should be taxed to death’ doctrine, shall we?

JP

Well, if you can make up rules that stop that happening without going all “North Korea” you can sell it to governments throughout the world and fix the problem for good.