The Student Room Group

Vote Conservative on June 8th

Scroll to see replies

I won't be doing that.
You can have a non-communist society without the Tories or Jeremy Corbyn. Vote Green!
The only sensible option.

Says more about the incompetence of the other parties than the outstanding merits of the Tories. Sadly nobody else has anything to offer.

I am pretty certain they will win. Unless Labour can think of another strategy other than whinging.
I mean this election's kinda like choosing between AIDS and ebola so I don't think "keeping the country safe from the hands of ebola" is a particularly good point when by doing so I'd be voting for AIDS.
Reply 24
Nah.
Original post by Mathemagicien
lol

It is funny hearing that word. Brits are probably the biggest cucks in Europe.


We probably ruled you at one point so get got m8
Original post by Naveed-7
"We are also overpopulated and the number of elderly is increasing by a large margin. Look at the statistics. We also currently pay £10 billion a year NET towards the EU and have also given contol of many of our laws to the European Commission. Do your research about these areas too, then you will understand"

^ That was not rubbish. Their facts. Money is a problem but it isn't the only thing that can solve the issue. There are other factors too that are causing problems such as the high population and increasing amount of elderly.


And how does that fact relate to the NHS? Does that £10 billion mean our spending within the UK is limited? No, because as a country we borrow money and invest in different areas (and if we didn't borrow so much money the Conservatives wouldn't have been able to put us in more debt than Labour government has done in history). And that £10billion doesn't tell us 'stop spending on the NHS' so stop arguing something which doesn't exist.

Quite frankly, as someone who works part time as a HCA in the NHS, did an EPQ on the issues facing the NHS, and is going on to study Medicine in September, I probably know more about the NHS than you do. So stop with this whole, let me just say a bunch of crap with no premise and see if she'll believe me since she's 'youngster'.
(edited 7 years ago)
Yep, I'll be giving my vote to the Ruth Davidson and Scottish Conservatives.
Original post by Mathemagicien
lol

It is funny hearing that word. Brits are probably the biggest cucks in Europe.



I don't have a problem with Muslims being here so kindly stop posting racist memes.
Reply 29
Original post by bex.anne
No thanks. I don't want an NHS which is underfunded and in severe crisis, the education sector facing severe cuts, and as a matter of fact all public services being rejected because the Tories care about no one but themselves.

The NHS has always been in "crisis". It's the default position in the tabloid press for a middle-of-the-road service that cocks things up occasionally and gets overloaded at times. It has always been this way and will always be this way. You could sink the odd extra billion or two in there, but it wouldn't change anything.

I'm not sure what "all public services being rejected" means. Are you accusing the Government of abolishing itself? Because I'm pretty sure that didn't happen.

Economically stable? The conservatives have put us into more debt than any government has ever done in history.


A rather odd criticism given that the deficit was inherited and they have been reducing it steadily: the only way to reduce it faster and avoid the national debt growing would have been to cut more. If you're going to criticise cuts, and then criticise the Government for not cutting enough, you're leaving yourself wide open to a charge of hypocrisy.
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 30
Original post by Quantex
So are the Conservatives going to address the shocking real wage growth pattern over their time in government? Our shoddy productivity that is going to bite us in the ass? What about our poor investment levels in science and technology?

Or are people happy to accept that the economy is stable and sweet on the basis that chucking a couple of hundred thousand peeps into the workforce each year creates a bit of GDP growth?


While I probably have a bit of a reputation for basically being a Cameronite loyalist on here, these are actually legitimate criticisms. In 2015, the Conservatives spoke about increasing productivity and made some choices that could have had an impact (increasing the annual investment allowance hugely, for example) - but it needs to be far greater, and more joined up.

The flip-side of the coin is that a lot of jobs were indeed created. I'll happily say that lower-paid work is better than no work, and low employment is better than high productivity, but it shouldn't be an either/or question. The Government has a genuine challenge here.
I will certainly not be voting conservative now, or in the foreseeable future. Firstly, i don't trust Theresa May, she has lied about the idea of not having another 'snap' election as this is a time where Britain needs stability etc. and yet that's exactly what she's just done! And as someone whom is against public and grammar schools i also don't support her opinions there. The NHS is actually something I really value about this country, as from looking at other healthcare systems we are very lucky. However, as people have already said in this thread, the NHS will continue to crumble due to lack of funding, all whilst millionaires are getting away with tax evasion and avoidance because they're mates with some of the conservative MP's. Brexit could potentially put the UK into more debt as we will be needing to repay the EU for many things that they've funded etc, and that will be quite a sum! not to mention the fact that the money we would pay annually to the EU will not be going straight into public services, its more likely to be going into bankers pockets (not that the Brexit campaigners like to talk about it after they lulled voters into a false sense of security). As for immigration, its whats helped boost our economy in recent years and they're often working harder and doing jobs brits don't want to do! As students, i hoped there would be more left wing comments on here being as we are experiencing first hand what a tory government has done to education (schools turning into academies, uni tuition fees constantly rising, and our opportunities for studying abroad or even working abroad now dwindling). Labour are not a communist party and they never will be, we live in a capitalist society and that isn't going to change no matter who you vote for.
Original post by Naveed-7
Less knowledgable youngsters like you need to realise that the NHS is underfunded and over loaded because of our membership of the European Union. We are also overpopulated and the number of elderly is increasing by a large margin. Look at the statistics. We also currently pay £10 billion a year NET towards the EU and have also given contol of many of our laws to the European Commission. Do your research about these areas too, then you will understand.
Jeremy Hunt isn't allowed to spend more or change the circumstances of the NHS because we currently have a contract of £10 billion payment towards the EU every year. If he breaks this contract, our country could face extra fines and project cut offs, plus the European Union would also spread misconceptions and widespread false criticism of Conservatives all over the media to ruin their image. This is why Jeremy Hunt is not doing much at the moment. The only way to fix this is to Leave the European Union and become Global.


If we are overpopulated with elderly people, then surely remaining within the EU would benefit us! Many of our elderly generation seek warmer more relaxed environments (like Spain) and we had a young hard working population coming in from abroad contributing greatly to our economy! free movement of people benefits Brits a lot more than people think.
don't tell me what to do
Reply 34
Original post by L i b
The NHS has always been in "crisis". It's the default position in the tabloid press for a middle-of-the-road service that cocks things up occasionally and gets overloaded at times. It has always been this way and will always be this way. You could sink the odd extra billion or two in there, but it wouldn't change anything.

I'm not sure what "all public services being rejected" means. Are you accusing the Government of abolishing itself? Because I'm pretty sure that didn't happen.



A rather odd criticism given that the deficit was inherited and they have been reducing it steadily: the only way to reduce it faster and avoid the national debt growing would have been to cut more. If you're going to criticise cuts, and then criticise the Government for not cutting enough, you're leaving yourself wide open to a charge of hypocrisy.


Couldn't agree more!
No thank you

I don't get what everyone's problem is with Corbyn. I'm not a Corbyn fan particularly, just a Labour one, but having looked at his voting record in parliament I feel he is misjudged. He has good intentions even if his actions aren't always necessarily in the absolute best interests of the Labour Party.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 36
Original post by TheMightyAugur
No thank you

I don't get what everyone's problem is with Corbyn. I'm not a Corbyn fan particularly, just a Labour one, but having looked at his voting record in parliament I feel he is misjudged. He has good intentions even if his actions aren't always necessarily in the absolute best interests of the Labour Party.


Good intentions is really the bare minimum standard you should expect in a politician. If you're talking a leader of the opposition, you also need to provide leadership, a clear vision, policies that are actually evidence-based and can still connect with the country, a general level of competence and the ability to form a stable and credible alternative to the government.

I think people quite reasonably question where the "good intentions" were in his relations with Hamas and the IRA.

Or whether he even sees his policies as improving the country rather than just being part of his ideological dogma. I suspect he doesn't care a great deal about the material benefit of this country, but rather considers what is good for it is a moral adherence to what he believes in.

I'd further ask what possible good intentions he has towards the Labour Party, given that he has spent virtually his entire time in politics trying to undermine it and, since becoming leader, has shown himself prepared to run it into the ground.
Original post by L i b
Good intentions is really the bare minimum standard you should expect in a politician. If you're talking a leader of the opposition, you also need to provide leadership, a clear vision, policies that are actually evidence-based and can still connect with the country, a general level of competence and the ability to form a stable and credible alternative to the government.

I think people quite reasonably question where the "good intentions" were in his relations with Hamas and the IRA.

Or whether he even sees his policies as improving the country rather than just being part of his ideological dogma. I suspect he doesn't care a great deal about the material benefit of this country, but rather considers what is good for it is a moral adherence to what he believes in.

I'd further ask what possible good intentions he has towards the Labour Party, given that he has spent virtually his entire time in politics trying to undermine it and, since becoming leader, has shown himself prepared to run it into the ground.


I said I'm not a Corbyn fan. You're preaching to the converted. All I said was I agree with how he has voted in parliament


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 38
Original post by L i b
While I probably have a bit of a reputation for basically being a Cameronite loyalist on here, these are actually legitimate criticisms. In 2015, the Conservatives spoke about increasing productivity and made some choices that could have had an impact (increasing the annual investment allowance hugely, for example) - but it needs to be far greater, and more joined up.

The flip-side of the coin is that a lot of jobs were indeed created. I'll happily say that lower-paid work is better than no work, and low employment is better than high productivity, but it shouldn't be an either/or question. The Government has a genuine challenge here.


What merit is there in a party that espouses support for the self employed/SME sector yet is pressing ahead, Finance Bill 2017, I think the largest ever, with the Making Tax Digital programme.

For those unaware, MTD will impact all self employed individuals and companies earning over £10,000 per year, it will also impact landlords with rentals above this figure.

The programme endeavours to create digital tax accounts for all taxpayers, for employees this will be prepopulated by data they hold re say employment income via RTI, but not until likely July following the end of the tax year, this part of the programme I have no objection with, it makes sense to harness technology, but real time updates would be preferable.

Where I have an issue is the need for all these small business entities to:

Keep their financial records in digital format, manual records on paper will not suffice.

Submit quarterly a return of said information within 30 days of each quarter end.

Submit a final adjustment reconciliation following these.

Submit a final declaration after all these.

In addition those also with rental income will have to repeat all but the last step for this different source.

The Government argument has to date been weak, they claim prompt recording of transactions will lead to more accurate accounts and close the tax gap.

I, as an accountant, along with myriad others serving the SME sector have my reservations, we see it as a significant administrative burden on the impacted individuals, near 6 million of them, your window cleaner, taxi drivers, shop owners. personal trainers etc, we do not believe a large swathe of our clients can deal with the process and the announced penalty structure for non performance is severe. We also believe it may drive more self employed into the shadow economy, actually reducing taxes collected.

The argument that business will benefit from the certainty of tax estimates throughout the year is a nonsense as the quarterly figures will not be adjusted for possible debtors. creditors, stock and WIP, and say significant plant purchases in the final quarter could radically alter liability anyway- the benefits are to a degree mirage, the compulsion to use digital recording a very nasty stick.

If the extolled benefits are there business will adopt digital record keeping, the government ought to provide the structure and let the free market decide on the business case for adoption re keeping records.

It is a really strange policy for a Conservative administration to drive through, and even stranger it looks like Labour to date are the only party voicing reservations, albeit only re those turning over below the vat threshold, on this issue they have swapped clothes.

I expect this issue to be ignored in the election, it may be the enactment will be swept through in wash up with the part progressed Finance Bill.

The details of the exact digital record keeping are to be enacted later by Statutory instrument, this likely means very limited scrutiny of the small print.

Accordingly voters who struggle along, often forced into self employment, need to ask themselves:

1. Can I cope with the requirements myself, will I need to pay for software.

2. If not, I use an accountant, how much extra will he/she need to charge me for assisting me to meet my obligations- I expect at least 50% fee increases but could quite easily for some clients see 100%, other accountants on forums have postulated higher.

3. In light of the above is the Conservative party currently the party that supports small business and do they deserve my vote.

You can couple these changes to be adopted with likely significant changes in vat rules vis a vis selling and buying goods and services into the EU, the Government ought, in the circumstances , consider this burden and halt the compulsory digital record keeping requirements and the quarterly submission aspects.

For information I have canvased the Liberals (yet to respond), SNP (not interested, but they rarely are re anything but independence) and the Conservatives. My response from Ruth Davidson's office indicates they still believe the non evidenced case made by HMRC and the software companies (who will be able to sell into the soon to be created captive market) and they are not for turning, they ought to be, the furore over this when it becomes more widely known will make the class IV debacle look like a picnic.

If you want to read some of the points in summary, here is an interesting link.

http://www.rossmartin.co.uk/sme-tax-news/1950-making-tax-digital-hmrc-s-myth-buster

So if you or your parents are impacted, maybe you ought to take heed now before what is now very likely becomes fact.
You appear to have missed a "Do not" at the beginning of the title of the thread.
(Though I do agree that Corbyn is not a particularly attractive option, you haven't thought about any other options other than Tory or labour of which there are plenty, and if they win enough seats then a majority from either of these parties can be prevented)

Posted from TSR Mobile

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending