Don't vote Conservative ... We've came to far as human beings. Watch

QuantumOverlord
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#281
Report 4 years ago
#281
(Original post by Lauren.12)
You see this is why I'm angry because it's not that the poor have been 'worst' hit because the rich seem to be flourishing as if they haven't been hit at all. Progressive taxation has been proven to work in the past and I believe Labour is returning to it's roots and deserves another chance. After all, it is the the Attlee Labour Government that provided us with the welfare reforms that make up the basis of what we have today. Another 5 years of the Conservatives and I honestly believe all that Bevan worked so hard for will be destroyed! Plus, I honestly believe Cameron is no longer completely fit for the job, he seems tired of it all and all parties eventually have to stop and recuperate in order to return ready for the fight. Anyway, regardless.. as long as UKIP aren't in power I'll be content!
Did you read what I said in my last post? There is no policy that will benefit the poor more than the rich.
0
reply
InArduisFouette
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#282
Report 4 years ago
#282
(Original post by QuantumOverlord)
Did you read what I said in my last post? There is no policy that will benefit the poor more than the rich.
Except of course the higher personal allowance for income tax as an easy first drop without having to explain at length.
0
reply
QuantumOverlord
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#283
Report 4 years ago
#283
(Original post by zippyRN)
Except of course the higher perdonal alloeance for income tax as an easy first drop without having to explain at length.
I've already gone into the issues of raising income tax, it only works if GDP is not already maximised by current taxation rates, and that is something that it is very difficult to know. So yes you can raise taxes, but the higher the taxes, the lower the economic productivity. There comes a point where the later outweighs the former and long term revenue decreases. In other words, if you tax too high, then you make the poor poorer, not richer.
0
reply
InArduisFouette
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#284
Report 4 years ago
#284
(Original post by QuantumOverlord)
I've already gone into the issues of raising income tax, it only works if GDP is not already maximised by current taxation rates, and that is something that it is very difficult to know. So yes you can raise taxes, but the higher the taxes, the lower the economic productivity. There comes a point where the later outweighs the former and long term revenue decreases. In other words, if you tax too high, then you make the poor poorer, not richer.
are you a bot ? as the above has nothing to do with the personal allowance for income tax.

the personal allowance is the amount you can earn before paying income tax .

someone wanted an example of the current government's policies that support ' the poor'

arguably the personal allowance changes do that, especially with the tapering of the personal allowance for very high earners ... the most benefit is felt by people earning under the median average and some benefit felt by the majority until the tapering of the personal allowance hits ...

you do understand what the personal allowance is for income tax purposes don;t you ?
0
reply
QuantumOverlord
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#285
Report 4 years ago
#285
(Original post by zippyRN)
are you a bot ? as the above has nothing to do with the personal allowance for income tax.

the personal allowance is the amount you can earn before paying income tax .

someone wanted an example of the current government's policies that support ' the poor'

arguably the personal allowance changes do that, especially with the tapering of the personal allowance for very high earners ... the most benefit is felt by people earning under the median average and some benefit felt by the majority until the tapering of the personal allowance hits ...

you do understand what the personal allowance is for income tax purposes don;t you ?
If you had spelt personal correctly, then I wouldn't have made that mistake. Look, I'm not a spelling nazi, but if it isn't readable then I will just skip over it.

Anyway what is your point? We already have the personal allowance, are you suggesting it should be raised because that is not a problem free strategy either.
0
reply
Appeal to reason
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#286
Report 4 years ago
#286
This thread lasted longer than I thought. I'm voting conservative because without a strong economy we can't have a welfare state, we can't deliver the top service expected from the nhs, we can't reduce tuition fees, etc. (Improve any of the other big sources of public spending.)

Let them have another term to sort out the economy (fixing it in 5 years was ambitious at best), then you can consider voting someone else in. As it is though, the Tories are the only ones who will sort out our economy. The economy is on the up, we're the fastest growing economy in the g7, let it continue instead of undoing all of the work that has gone in over the past 5 years. We know what the Tories are doing is working, let it continue for one more term.



Think about fixing the economy in terms of getting fit and healthy, the government is your exercise and eating regime. If you change your exercise regime (government) every chance you get, you'll never achieve your end goal, you'll be one of the people who goes to the gym for months on end and still looks like they did when they started (****arounditis). You stick with it for a long period of time and get the body/fitness (economy) that you want. Then you can swap routines.
2
reply
Pliskin1989
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#287
Report 4 years ago
#287
It is precisely this sort of arrogant, 'world owes me a favour' attitude that means I categorically WILL be voting Conservative.
The notion that one should 'expect' a high salary purely on the basis that they have been in higher education is laughable, and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding as to how the economy works.

I have a wonderful idea - how about you stop trying to peer pressure others into voting for a particular party based on your own pathetic delusion.

Same goes for UKIP, same goes for The Greens.

We are a democracy, and everyone had the right to vote for who they wish, for the reasons they seem valid. it is people like you who are at risk of putting us back to the stone age.
4
reply
sookywooky
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#288
Report 4 years ago
#288
(Original post by billydisco)
What exactly has been reversed? You mean spending on the nation's credit card? Yeah reversing that is generally a good thing mate

A country cannot spend spend spend beyond its means.
I'll post a few neat graphs to more accurately portray exactly what I mean..

Name:  untitled-540x374.png
Views: 133
Size:  69.7 KB

Name:  b6pzRcV.png
Views: 130
Size:  46.9 KB

Name:  Child-poverty-rates-1970-2020.jpg
Views: 139
Size:  52.9 KB

Name:  wages-inflation-2000-2012.jpg-500x391.png
Views: 127
Size:  90.1 KB

Name:  info-britpoor0610-rate.gif
Views: 130
Size:  6.6 KB

Notice how the Labour government that was elected in 1997 ushered in a dramatic fall in child poverty, homelessness and strong growth in wages. In fact, homelessness - as in, rough sleeping - was on the path to nonexistence if Labour had continued with its policies. The Tories can't even blame the recession for that because this didn't start UNTIL they were elected in 2010.

Overspending is the go-to argument for any Tory, because nothing else works. I think most Tory voters secretly know that the party they profess to support is actually damaging to our country, and that when they are elected, all sorts of important social measures go down the toilet. It happened during Thatcher (I could seriously ramble on here about all sorts of heinous crimes Thatcher allowed to happen, but I won't), it happened during Major, and it's happening with Cameron.

Actually, the overspending argument doesn't even make sense, considering debt to GDP was occasionally below 50% during the 2000s..
Name:  UK-debt-to-GDP-chart-1949-2011.png
Views: 122
Size:  8.5 KB

And, they managed to have a budget surplus - albeit a small one, and when the government began running a deficit again, it was no worse than what the Conservatives oversaw in the 90s.

So really, the Tories are left with very little to go on, and basically rely on smearing the opposition based on silly things like demeanor and physical appearance, and a gullible electorate who will believe 30-second soundbites about how awful Labour were and how they spent all of our money.

So no, I will not be voting Conservative in May, and I advise anyone with a conscience to do exactly the same, or at least vote for any party that isn't right-wing.
1
reply
LaBrigade
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#289
Report 4 years ago
#289
So you prefer Nigel Farage and his band of monkeys to destroy Britain? The way I see it, Britain has been steady for the past couple of years thanks to Cameron. If Farage wins, and the Britain quits the EU, we are officially f***ed.

Labour will probably join on with Farage if they haven't already and bye bye goes Britain.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#290
Report 4 years ago
#290
(Original post by sookywooky)
I'll post a few neat graphs to more accurately portray exactly what I mean..











Notice how the Labour government that was elected in 1997 ushered in a dramatic fall in child poverty, homelessness and strong growth in wages. In fact, homelessness - as in, rough sleeping - was on the path to nonexistence if Labour had continued with its policies. The Tories can't even blame the recession for that because this didn't start UNTIL they were elected in 2010.

Overspending is the go-to argument for any Tory, because nothing else works. I think most Tory voters secretly know that the party they profess to support is actually damaging to our country, and that when they are elected, all sorts of important social measures go down the toilet. It happened during Thatcher (I could seriously ramble on here about all sorts of heinous crimes Thatcher allowed to happen, but I won't), it happened during Major, and it's happening with Cameron.

Actually, the overspending argument doesn't even make sense, considering debt to GDP was occasionally below 50% during the 2000s..


And, they managed to have a budget surplus - albeit a small one, and when the government began running a deficit again, it was no worse than what the Conservatives oversaw in the 90s.

So really, the Tories are left with very little to go on, and basically rely on smearing the opposition based on silly things like demeanor and physical appearance, and a gullible electorate who will believe 30-second soundbites about how awful Labour were and how they spent all of our money.

So no, I will not be voting Conservative in May, and I advise anyone with a conscience to do exactly the same, or at least vote for any party that isn't right-wing.
Did you conveniently forget or not know that for 97-01 Labour pretty much just followed the conservative plans? So you can say it was Labour's doing, but being in power does not mean it was you that did it, particularly if it's something with a lagged effect and/or you're just continuing the plans of the guy before. You might also want use some up to date graphs, not ones from years and years ago with forecasts when actual figures exist.

As for the "they weren't overspending" argument, that's because this is back in the days where people seemed to think a deficit is fine as long as the economy is growing faster than teh debt. It may have been going down as a percentage of GDP, but the debt was still going up, which means the interest was going up, which means the amount to be spent on services would be going down.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#291
Report 4 years ago
#291
So Jeremy Hunt today said that the tories inherited a contracting economy. Not true, it was growing 1.9%.

So in addition to making up labour's policies, attacking ed personally and making unfunded pledges on the NHS, they are now resorting to outright lies.

The desperation is getting to new depths now and it's absolutely hilarious to see it.
0
reply
Appeal to reason
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#292
Report 4 years ago
#292
(Original post by Bornblue)
So Jeremy Hunt today said that the tories inherited a contracting economy. Not true, it was growing 1.9%.

So in addition to making up labour's policies, attacking ed personally and making unfunded pledges on the NHS, they are now resorting to outright lies.

The desperation is getting to new depths now and it's absolutely hilarious to see it.
Inflation was 3.3% in 2010. If the economy was "growing" at 1.9% in 2010, then as the rate of growth was less than the rate of inflation, the economy was contracting.

http://www.rateinflation.com/inflati...inflation-rate

I have yet to meet a left wing voter who has any grasp of economics.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#293
Report 4 years ago
#293
(Original post by Appeal to reason)
Inflation was 3.3% in 2010. If the economy was "growing" at 1.9% in 2010, then as the rate of growth was less than the rate of inflation, the economy was contracting.

http://www.rateinflation.com/inflati...inflation-rate

I have yet to meet a left wing voter who has any grasp of economics.
That's just not true. Just like the rest of your party, in the absence of any political argument you are resorting to lies.The tories don't measure their own economic growth comapred to inflation but measure Labour's according to it?
Okay then.
0
reply
Appeal to reason
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#294
Report 4 years ago
#294
(Original post by Bornblue)
That's just not true. Just like the rest of your party, in the absence of any political argument you are resorting to lies.The tories don't measure their own economic growth comapred to inflation but measure Labour's according to it?
Okay then.
That's irrelevant, the point was that they inherited a contracting economy. (I presume you meant nominal growth of 1.9% anyway)
0
reply
Juichiro
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#295
Report 4 years ago
#295
(Original post by sacca)
Vote green for an eco feminist britain! The tories are misogynist, Cameron wouldn't even wear a 'I'm a feminist' T-Shirt. Also he called a women darling. **** the tories!

Not to mention they are all white upper class cis hetero males aka they have massive privilege and cannot be trusted to represent PoC or women or other oppressed groups.
You did not check your privilege so you got banned.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#296
Report 4 years ago
#296
(Original post by Appeal to reason)
That's irrelevant, the point was that they inherited a contracting economy. (I presume you meant nominal growth of 1.9% anyway)
Except it isn't irrelevant. You don't measure economic growth against inflation. The tories haven't for their term, why do they do so for Labour's?
0
reply
Appeal to reason
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#297
Report 4 years ago
#297
(Original post by Bornblue)
Except it isn't irrelevant. You don't measure economic growth against inflation. The tories haven't for their term, why do they do so for Labour's?
Jeremy hunt stated that the Tories inherited a contracting economy (I.e. nominal growth < inflation), you said this was false, I showed it to be true. Its not something you can argue.

2014 growth was 2.8% yes? Inflation was 2%, so not only did the nominal GDP increase, but so did the real GDP. So the economy did not contract in 2014.


As far as I understand it, you can use nominal growth to compare vs other economies, but real growth for comparing GDP against previous years.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#298
Report 4 years ago
#298
(Original post by Appeal to reason)
Jeremy hunt stated that the Tories inherited a contracting economy (I.e. nominal growth < inflation), you said this was false, I showed it to be true. Its not something you can argue.

2014 growth was 2.8% yes? Inflation was 2%, so not only did the nominal GDP increase, but so did the real GDP. So the economy did not contract in 2014.


As far as I understand it, you can use nominal growth to compare vs other economies, but real growth for comparing GDP against previous years.
You're just lying. It was growing 1.9% Growth is not measured against inflation.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#299
Report 4 years ago
#299
(Original post by Bornblue)
You're just lying. It was growing 1.9% Growth is not measured against inflation.
Real terms growth is
Wages aren't measured against inflation so labour's been talking crap about falling wages for years. Works both ways

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Appeal to reason
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#300
Report 4 years ago
#300
(Original post by Bornblue)
You're just lying. It was growing 1.9% Growth is not measured against inflation.
NOMINAL GROWTH OF 1.9%

An economy is contracting, if real GDP decreases(any NOMINAL growth is at a rate less than inflation). Which it was in 2010. Doesn't matter who says it, Tory, Labour, whoever, the economy contracted in 2010.

It still grew in GDP, but at a rate less than inflation, so the net effect was having had a lower real GDP. (It may be greater, but counts for less)

A stagnant economy is one growing (just looking at nominal GDP) at the inflation rate. From one year to the next there is no real change, the economy has grown, but it is no better or worse off than the previous year.

It is actually growing (I.e. you can say the economy is better off from one year to the next) if nominal growth is greater than the inflation rate.

It is contracting (I.e. from one year to the next you are worse off) if nominal gdp growth is less than the inflation rate. This is the case we are discussing.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (11)
6.04%
They might tell the bully (18)
9.89%
I don't think they'd understand (32)
17.58%
It might lead to more bullying (69)
37.91%
There's nothing they could do (52)
28.57%

Watched Threads

View All