Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Who Do you want as the next Tory leader ? Watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Who do you want as the next tory party leader ?
    Osborne
    23.42%
    May
    6.31%
    Johnson ( Boris )
    40.54%
    Gove
    2.70%
    Morgan
    0
    0%
    Fox
    4.50%
    Javid
    5.41%
    Hunt
    0
    0%
    Other
    17.12%

    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Its like asking, which is worse? diarrhea or vomit?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xxvine)
    From reading various sources the problem with Kendall was that she came across as another Blarite and somebody who wouldn't look out of place in the Conservative party. Many thought that she would struggle to debate Cameron in the commons because she agrees with pretty much everything he says.
    That's just corbynite spin in which anything they disagree with is Tory. I actually think she would have done quite well- for a start they wouldn't have U turned on the fiscal charter. Avoided the red book debacle. Wouldn't have Emily Thornberry as defence sec. Would actually be able to hold the government effectively to account instead of dwelling on nuclear disarmament and of course, the Falklands Islands.

    I'm actually pleased that Cotbyn has got on now and shifted economic focus to the left-,but his presence is too high a price. He needs to go.

    Liz Kendall http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/248...ter_west/votes

    David Cameron
    http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/107...n/witney/votes
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I agree with you regarding home ownership (it's been declining since 01) and being an aspirational political capitalist rather than a purist (i.e. a moderate over ancap) i'm actually prepared to both limit the supply of credit for mortgages (something responsible for fueling house price growth well above wage inflation) and also to combine MacMillion and Thatcher's housing policies until we can have a private sector that meets demand. The problem was that in 2015 we had the Tories proposing 200,000 starter homes and phase 1 of Help To Buy while Labour had a aim of 200,000 per year (a million over the parliament) but no real description of how to make the private sector do that. Thus i concluded the Tories were closer to my aim.
    Surely giving real families an advantage over buy to let is best, with mortgage credit it's not normal families but the buy to letters who are the elephant in the room, and without eradicating them/building so much they are swamped you can't solve the problem. The Tories have essentially done this via Help to Buy, although I don't like that it inflates the price of starter homes. They haven't been as bad as Labour on housing I will give them that.


    Spurious since your essentially basing this on the 00's vs 1980's unless you actually believe another government would have solved the real wage crisis last term. Your tax credit point is valid though. I'm not overly sure that small business under either of the current two parties succeeds more under one than the other.
    Yes I suppose although these were both boom times and I do believe government policy controls who gets the money, if not necessarily how much of it there is.

    You forget that much of what government spends its money on is not capital projects and there's really no reason to tax the populous more in order to pay for European levels of welfare for example. Fiscal discipline does not mean cutting to the bone per say (that's somewhat ideological) but simply reigning in the speed at which government spending grows so that it is more affordable as a percentage of GDP over time. Given current tax and spending levels there's more than enough room to cut departments and transfer that spending to capital projects and defense while reducing the state as a proportion of GDP.
    I understand, I am not against all cuts, some were needed, Labour 2010 had austerity planned too. But there is no reason for us to shrink the state to historic levels/so much further than other countries. It has become ideological I'm afraid.


    So not perfect in my eyes but better than the current alternatives. For reference i should probably say that 93-03 was probably the closest period to perfection that i'm aware of in recent times.
    I agree but wasn't the economic growth because of getting kicked out of ERM and being able to devalue the pound. It would seem to be pretty artificial in that case. Plus cheap houses the market being below trend for that entire period. That's all people need to be happy - that's why housing is at the centre of my politics.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dumachi)
    Its like asking, which is worse? diarrhea or vomit?
    With the option of AIDS too (representing UKIP)
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by scrotgrot)
    Surely giving real families an advantage over buy to let is best, with mortgage credit it's not normal families but the buy to letters who are the elephant in the room, and without eradicating them/building so much they are swamped you can't solve the problem. The Tories have essentially done this via Help to Buy, although I don't like that it inflates the price of starter homes. They haven't been as bad as Labour on housing I will give them that.

    Yes I suppose although these were both boom times and I do believe government policy controls who gets the money, if not necessarily how much of it there is.

    I understand, I am not against all cuts, some were needed, Labour 2010 had austerity planned too. But there is no reason for us to shrink the state to historic levels/so much further than other countries. It has become ideological I'm afraid.

    I agree but wasn't the economic growth because of getting kicked out of ERM and being able to devalue the pound. It would seem to be pretty artificial in that case. Plus cheap houses the market being below trend for that entire period. That's all people need to be happy - that's why housing is at the centre of my politics.
    I have no objection to buy to let given that rental demand exists. Land is not so restricted that we need either/or. I'm not a fan of Help To Buy either given that it piles up yet more unfunded liabilities although i love the starter home idea, it's exactly what aspirational capitalism should be.

    True.

    That's certainly true and Osbourne has not only wasted 2 years at the start but ringfenced numerous departments, the combination of which mean the deficit is about 2 years longer than it should be.

    Not on its own but it was a big factor. That's not really an indicator of it being artificial unless you view current Euro-zone growth as being.artificial too. Yes, Hydraulic Keyensianism starting from below market prices was certainly a feel good factor early on.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    I have no objection to buy to let given that rental demand exists. Land is not so restricted that we need either/or. I'm not a fan of Help To Buy either given that it piles up yet more unfunded liabilities although i love the starter home idea, it's exactly what aspirational capitalism should be.
    Rental demand only EXISTS because the houses are being taken up by BTL. If BTL didn't exist many more houses would be on the market. Prices would fall and the renters could buy as the market cleared. Aside from the first few years of one's career nobody chooses to rent rather than buy. It is not a choice when someone rents privately. All housing is too coercive for the market/price mechanism to work - rents and mortgages alike - and so should be heavily provided/regulated by the big state.

    BTL have a huge advantage if these things are not available to ring fence housing for real owner occupiers: BTL get lower deposits, far lower payback period, interest only mortgages, even tax relief on mortgage interest for Christ's sake - can you imagine such a thing being extended to cover rent rises?? AND they are getting a house bought for them without having to lift a finger and political consensus means there is no risk of significant legislation against them.

    It should be clear that in a perfect market rents should always be less than mortgage payments, as the person with mortgage gets something at the end. The fact that landlords can set rents that deliver a month to month profit higher than any other high street investment, as well as the paid for asset at the end of it, illustrates how out of whack the supply/demand and price mechanism is.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Davij038)
    That's just corbynite spin in which anything they disagree with is Tory. I actually think she would have done quite well- for a start they wouldn't have U turned on the fiscal charter. Avoided the red book debacle. Wouldn't have Emily Thornberry as defence sec. Would actually be able to hold the government effectively to account instead of dwelling on nuclear disarmament and of course, the Falklands Islands.

    I'm actually pleased that Cotbyn has got on now and shifted economic focus to the left-,but his presence is too high a price. He needs to go.

    Liz Kendall http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/248...ter_west/votes

    David Cameron
    http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/107...n/witney/votes
    Unfortunately this is very common at the moment. People have even been calling Hilary Benn a Tory. How detached from reality do you have to be to genuinely think that?

    Nice avi by the way. I will most certainly be voting yes, despite the need to make reforms. Why the yellow and green?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It has to be Fox. Grew up in council house, Glasgow medicine, lots of experience in government e.g Major cabinet, fairly social liberal views with a good conservative slant
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    It has to be Fox. Grew up in council house, Glasgow medicine, lots of experience in government e.g Major cabinet, fairly social liberal views with a good conservative slant
    Ideally yes, but (and this is going to sound crazy) I don't think the can beat Corbyn. Conservative voters are smart, we know that if we can get the electorate on board then we have the power to shape the country the way that we like. I feel that George Osbourne can best get the electorate on board with us so it's with reluctance that I support him.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Ideally yes, but (and this is going to sound crazy) I don't think the can beat Corbyn. Conservative voters are smart, we know that if we can get the electorate on board then we have the power to shape the country the way that we like. I feel that George Osbourne can best get the electorate on board with us so it's with reluctance that I support him.
    Fox will beat Corbyn one hand behind back, not only are his views in line with a lot of the UK (4 million kippers for a start could switch to him), he also has the character, from relatively humble origins, military experience, not soft at all.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    Fox will beat Corbyn one hand behind back, not only are his views in line with a lot of the UK (4 million kippers for a start could switch to him), he also has the character, from relatively humble origins, military experience, not soft at all.
    Fox is our equivalent of Jeremy Corbyn, great for the members, not so great for the votes.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    Fox is our equivalent of Jeremy Corbyn, great for the members, not so great for the votes.
    Why? I fail to see how Fox would not appeal to the wider electorate, his policies are sensible and his background is strong. I don't think the public are receptive to Osborne or May, and the thought of Johnson running the country is enough to leave.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    Why? I fail to see how Fox would not appeal to the wider electorate, his policies are sensible and his background is strong. I don't think the public are receptive to Osborne or May, and the thought of Johnson running the country is enough to leave.
    He's one of our most right wing members, yes he may eat into the UKIP vote but so is Corbyn. He will bring us the right wing vote, but Corbyn will bring in the left wing vote, and that leaves most of the population up for grabs, and I just can't see Fox grabbing the grassroots support that Corbyn has and it could cost us the election. Or we have George Osbourne, who's going to take the country in the same rational, reasonable (granted, not perfect) direction that the public has already shown their support for and we can eat the centre vote up as Labour have abandoned it. Leaving the LibDems with the centre-left and Labour with the Left.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lime-man)
    He's one of our most right wing members, yes he may eat into the UKIP vote but so is Corbyn. He will bring us the right wing vote, but Corbyn will bring in the left wing vote, and that leaves most of the population up for grabs, and I just can't see Fox grabbing the grassroots support that Corbyn has and it could cost us the election. Or we have George Osbourne, who's going to take the country in the same rational, reasonable (granted, not perfect) direction that the public has already shown their support for and we can eat the centre vote up as Labour have abandoned it. Leaving the LibDems with the centre-left and Labour with the Left.
    Osborne is widely thought of as a creep with loose morals who cannot get his bills through the Lords. That's what i'm hearing from both side of the spectrum, Greens are loyal dogs and won't jump ship for Corbyn he's not extreme enough, I think Fox will appeal to the left as much to the right, he has championed some progressive views like mental health.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    Osborne is widely thought of as a creep with loose morals who cannot get his bills through the Lords. That's what i'm hearing from both side of the spectrum, Greens are loyal dogs and won't jump ship for Corbyn he's not extreme enough, I think Fox will appeal to the left as much to the right, he has championed some progressive views like mental health.
    So has Nick Clegg yet he's as disliked by the left as he is by everyone else.

    With the rise of Corbyn came the end of the "Green" surge, so they're not getting any bigger than they already are(n't). Osbourne is a representation of the Tory government, all he has to do is carry on with Cameron's one nation rhetoric and post-thatcherite policy platform and he'll win with his eyes closed. To choose Fox as leader would be as stupid as labour choosing Corbyn (though I wouldn't underestimate him, especially if we choose May/Fox as leader).
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    ****ing hell what a grim line up...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    What about Rory Stewart?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    Unfortunately this is very common at the moment. People have even been calling Hilary Benn a Tory. How detached from reality do you have to be to genuinely think that?

    Nice avi by the way. I will most certainly be voting yes, despite the need to make reforms. Why the yellow and green?
    The Corbynite attacks on Benn are reactionary and bonkers- so very in keeping with the regressive left. The resemblance to UKIP voters is uncanny.

    Green is the colour of the EU federalist movement, renewal and looks nicer than the old blue I think.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by whorace)
    Osborne is widely thought of as a creep with loose morals who cannot get his bills through the Lords. That's what i'm hearing from both side of the spectrum, Greens are loyal dogs and won't jump ship for Corbyn he's not extreme enough, I think Fox will appeal to the left as much to the right, he has championed some progressive views like mental health.
    All of that completely contradicts what I've experienced.

    Liam fox will appeal to the left as much as John Mcdonell will appeal to the right I assure you.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Theresa Villiers.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.