Labour ?

Just heard on R4, immigration reduction target already being recast as an aspiration by spokesmen. Surprise.

Strat, which movement do you mean, Labour or UK politics in general?

I have listened to the 1pm BBC News and hear that the Tories have criticised Labour's claim that under the Tory manifesto proposals, "millions of pensioners will lose out".

The Tory criticism of Labour's comment was based on their bold-faced assertion that the claim was pure guess-work. Well, if you will insist on inserting policies in your manifesto with no underlying detail whatsoever (such as how the means testing associated with the loss of winter fuel subsidy will be carried out and at what measure of income the subsidy will be lost), then what else can you reasonably expect the opposition parties to do but to come up with what appears to be a very reasonable assumption, given the amount of information available.     

Dave***t posted:

Just heard on R4, immigration reduction target already being recast as an aspiration by spokesmen. Surprise.

Strat, which movement do you mean, Labour or UK politics in general?

Oh in general - have no doubt on that. 

Eloise posted:

Hmack posted:

Just one example of a policy that has obviously been designed to look 'compassionate', but in reality is nothing but.

Theresa May's claim of being an inclusive government in my view is at best simply not true, and at worst a cynical deception.  

In complete agreement with what you said ... the whole Manifesto is one which looks good and gives enough that the Daily Mail and Sun can promote it with truths; while ignoring the negative sides.

Yesterday's Mail headline was a case in point...

"YOU WON'T HAVE TO SELL HOME TO PAY FOR YOUR CARE"

was true, but lacking in important facts.  The more honest headline of...

"YOUR CHILDREN WON'T INHERIT YOUR HOME IF YOU NEED CARE"

wouldn't play anywhere near as good with the Mail's and therefore TM's target audience.

I thought Corbyn's label for this policy was spot on: the Tory's "tax on dementia". A dramatic reversal from the policy that Cameron's government pursued i.e. a circa £75k cap above which costs of care would be met by the State. But then Cameron was also regularly associated himself with a drive to find a cure for Alzheimer's.  I'm struggling to see how TM's assertion that her government is more caring about the poor, vulnerable and sick as compared to previous Conservative governments can be reconciled with this manifesto commitment.    

MDS posted:

Eloise posted:

Hmack posted:

Just one example of a policy that has obviously been designed to look 'compassionate', but in reality is nothing but.

Theresa May's claim of being an inclusive government in my view is at best simply not true, and at worst a cynical deception.  

In complete agreement with what you said ... the whole Manifesto is one which looks good and gives enough that the Daily Mail and Sun can promote it with truths; while ignoring the negative sides.

Yesterday's Mail headline was a case in point...

"YOU WON'T HAVE TO SELL HOME TO PAY FOR YOUR CARE"

was true, but lacking in important facts.  The more honest headline of...

"YOUR CHILDREN WON'T INHERIT YOUR HOME IF YOU NEED CARE"

wouldn't play anywhere near as good with the Mail's and therefore TM's target audience.

I thought Corbyn's label for this policy was spot on: the Tory's "tax on dementia". A dramatic reversal from the policy that Cameron's government pursued i.e. a circa £75k cap above which costs of care would be met by the State. But then Cameron was also regularly associated himself with a drive to find a cure for Alzheimer's.  I'm struggling to see how TM's assertion that her government is more caring about the poor, vulnerable and sick as compared to previous Conservative governments can be reconciled with this manifesto commitment.    

Yep, that manifesto item has done it for me.

Regardless of what our current Conservative MP says about Brexit and a few other things, I am unwilling to vote for a party with that sort of mentality.

I can't say i'm totally aligned with the Lib Dem manifesto, but given that here, we used to have a Liberal or Lib Dem MP for many years, that's where my vote will be going this time around.

It's at time like this when we need PR. The Tory majority in our constituency is so massive that if they put up a newt it would be elected. Come to think of it a newt is probably more intelligent than the guy who will get elected. And if a newt is chopped in half its front part can still walk. 

I'm in one of the few Lib Dem constituencies, and the Tories are clearly targeting it.  They've even had the bl**dy cheek to put fliers through the doors citing the recent local authority implementation of umpteen different bins for recycling, which has been a shambles (it's a Lib Dem council), as a reason why we should elect a Tory MP. While I'm grumpy with the local authority about the bin fiasco I found the Tory flier an insult to my intelligence.  

Like HH's area, there's absolutely no point in anyone round here voting labour so the real choice is between Lib Dem and Tory, and I will confess to being previously undecided, but after that piece in the Tory manifesto about care costs, well, what I think is not suitable to post on here .......    

HH - were you of that view when Tony Blair was heading for large majorities?

Don Atkinson posted:

MDS posted:

Eloise posted:

Hmack posted:

Just one example of a policy that has obviously been designed to look 'compassionate', but in reality is nothing but.

Theresa May's claim of being an inclusive government in my view is at best simply not true, and at worst a cynical deception.  

In complete agreement with what you said ... the whole Manifesto is one which looks good and gives enough that the Daily Mail and Sun can promote it with truths; while ignoring the negative sides.

Yesterday's Mail headline was a case in point...

"YOU WON'T HAVE TO SELL HOME TO PAY FOR YOUR CARE"

was true, but lacking in important facts.  The more honest headline of...

"YOUR CHILDREN WON'T INHERIT YOUR HOME IF YOU NEED CARE"

wouldn't play anywhere near as good with the Mail's and therefore TM's target audience.

I thought Corbyn's label for this policy was spot on: the Tory's "tax on dementia". A dramatic reversal from the policy that Cameron's government pursued i.e. a circa £75k cap above which costs of care would be met by the State. But then Cameron was also regularly associated himself with a drive to find a cure for Alzheimer's.  I'm struggling to see how TM's assertion that her government is more caring about the poor, vulnerable and sick as compared to previous Conservative governments can be reconciled with this manifesto commitment.    

Yep, that manifesto item has done it for me.

Regardless of what our current Conservative MP says about Brexit and a few other things, I am unwilling to vote for a party with that sort of mentality.

I can't say i'm totally aligned with the Lib Dem manifesto, but given that here, we used to have a Liberal or Lib Dem MP for many years, that's where my vote will be going this time around.

 

Bear in mind the Lib Dems have based their manifesto on the basis their is no possibility of actually being elected,  similar with Labour,  so any promises made will never be carried out....it actually doesn't even matter if their sums don't add up...

as far as the Conservatives are concerned,  austerity is the way forward..... and in reality is it really possible to have it any other way?

Depends on the definition of austerity? As I say none of the parties are demonstrating any fiscal responsibility.   

wenger2015 posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

MDS posted:

Eloise posted:

Hmack posted:

Just one example of a policy that has obviously been designed to look 'compassionate', but in reality is nothing but.

Theresa May's claim of being an inclusive government in my view is at best simply not true, and at worst a cynical deception.  

In complete agreement with what you said ... the whole Manifesto is one which looks good and gives enough that the Daily Mail and Sun can promote it with truths; while ignoring the negative sides.

Yesterday's Mail headline was a case in point...

"YOU WON'T HAVE TO SELL HOME TO PAY FOR YOUR CARE"

was true, but lacking in important facts.  The more honest headline of...

"YOUR CHILDREN WON'T INHERIT YOUR HOME IF YOU NEED CARE"

wouldn't play anywhere near as good with the Mail's and therefore TM's target audience.

I thought Corbyn's label for this policy was spot on: the Tory's "tax on dementia". A dramatic reversal from the policy that Cameron's government pursued i.e. a circa £75k cap above which costs of care would be met by the State. But then Cameron was also regularly associated himself with a drive to find a cure for Alzheimer's.  I'm struggling to see how TM's assertion that her government is more caring about the poor, vulnerable and sick as compared to previous Conservative governments can be reconciled with this manifesto commitment.    

Yep, that manifesto item has done it for me.

Regardless of what our current Conservative MP says about Brexit and a few other things, I am unwilling to vote for a party with that sort of mentality.

I can't say i'm totally aligned with the Lib Dem manifesto, but given that here, we used to have a Liberal or Lib Dem MP for many years, that's where my vote will be going this time around.

 

Bear in mind the Lib Dems have based their manifesto on the basis their is no possibility of actually being elected,  similar with Labour,  so any promises made will never be carried out....it actually doesn't even matter if their sums don't add up...

as far as the Conservatives are concerned,  austerity is the way forward..... and in reality is it really possible to have it any other way?

Your prognosis of the future is probably correct.

However, I am unwilling to add my vote to the Conservative haul of votes. They will claim it endorses all of their policies, and it doesn't.

By casting my vote with another party, it indicates dissent and/or concern. It probably won't change anything, it should but it won't, even if a large number of people do likewise.

Like I suggested earlier, either in this thread or another, if the Conservatives win 650 seats in a four-way fight, but only poll (25% +650 votes), they will legally be entitled to implement their entire manifesto and hard Brexit. But morally ?????

I simply no longer want to be associated with this type of party.

wenger2015 posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

MDS posted:

Eloise posted:

Hmack posted:

Just one example of a policy that has obviously been designed to look 'compassionate', but in reality is nothing but.

Theresa May's claim of being an inclusive government in my view is at best simply not true, and at worst a cynical deception.  

In complete agreement with what you said ... the whole Manifesto is one which looks good and gives enough that the Daily Mail and Sun can promote it with truths; while ignoring the negative sides.

Yesterday's Mail headline was a case in point...

"YOU WON'T HAVE TO SELL HOME TO PAY FOR YOUR CARE"

was true, but lacking in important facts.  The more honest headline of...

"YOUR CHILDREN WON'T INHERIT YOUR HOME IF YOU NEED CARE"

wouldn't play anywhere near as good with the Mail's and therefore TM's target audience.

I thought Corbyn's label for this policy was spot on: the Tory's "tax on dementia". A dramatic reversal from the policy that Cameron's government pursued i.e. a circa £75k cap above which costs of care would be met by the State. But then Cameron was also regularly associated himself with a drive to find a cure for Alzheimer's.  I'm struggling to see how TM's assertion that her government is more caring about the poor, vulnerable and sick as compared to previous Conservative governments can be reconciled with this manifesto commitment.    

Yep, that manifesto item has done it for me.

Regardless of what our current Conservative MP says about Brexit and a few other things, I am unwilling to vote for a party with that sort of mentality.

I can't say i'm totally aligned with the Lib Dem manifesto, but given that here, we used to have a Liberal or Lib Dem MP for many years, that's where my vote will be going this time around.

 

Bear in mind the Lib Dems have based their manifesto on the basis their is no possibility of actually being elected,  similar with Labour,  so any promises made will never be carried out....it actually doesn't even matter if their sums don't add up...

as far as the Conservatives are concerned,  austerity is the way forward..... and in reality is it really possible to have it any other way?

I'm not deluding myself into thinking a Lib Dem or Labour government stands a realistic chance of being elected but in the absence of PR all one can do in some constituencies is vote tactically with the aim of avoiding the massive majority that TM seeks in order to drive through a hard Brexit and, it now seems, some other obnoxious policies. 

And austerity? We've all been told by the Conservatives in government for nearly ten years now that austerity is the only way forward, yet the result has been: all of the deficit reduction targets of the previous chancellor have been missed; the latest Conservative manifesto has kicked the can further down the road to 2025; and, oh, I saw a report this week that the UK now has the widest inequality gap in Europe!   In pure financial self-interest terms logic would suggest that I should be voting Conservative because the policies of the other two main parties will cost me.  But, and this admission would probably get me expelled from the Conservative party (if I were a member), I've got a conscience and like to think I'm not selfish.

Don Atkinson, MDS,

i can understand your views completely, what I don't understand is what the alternative is?

In simple terms, if you miss your target to bring down the deficit at least the deficit is coming down?

The inherited financial  situation 10 years ago, was by any standards horrendous....to me it will take a generation of austerity to stand any chance of getting back on track.

But of course that's not what anybody wants to hear...

The NHS needs a shed load of cash, and Care needs to be subsidised ....it's a never ending money pit...

Maybe I should vote for the Monster Raving Loony Party......

My friend (she is one of my students and the top tax person in one of the Big 4 ) advises that tax changes along the lines of the Labour manifesto would bring in substantially more tax, despite the fact that companies and individuals would re-arrange their tax affairs.

I would be happy to pay my fair share in such an arrangement.

But Corbyn and his views on Trident and defence preclude me casting a vote in his direction. And it would be totally wasted in my constituency ! Not even as a protest vote !

Don Atkinson posted:

My friend (she is one of my students and the top tax person in one of the Big 4 ) advises that tax changes along the lines of the Labour manifesto would bring in substantially more tax, despite the fact that companies and individuals would re-arrange their tax affairs.

I would be happy to pay my fair share in such an arrangement.

But Corbyn and his views on Trident and defence preclude me casting a vote in his direction. And it would be totally wasted in my constituency ! Not even as a protest vote !

Interesting about Labour policy bringing in more tax, that's very much a positive I wasn't aware of.

Like yourself Corbyn and his defence strategy is way off the mark..

Alternatives are thin on the ground... 

I thought Labour were now committed to renewing Trident?

The Strat (Fender) posted:

I thought Labour were now committed to renewing Trident?

Yes, renewing the boats but not the misiles and not using it ! IIRC

Wenger, austerity is absolutely NOT the only way. It is an ideological choice. From an open letter, signatories of which included a Bank of England monetary policy advisor: '...opposition to austerity is actually mainstream economics, even backed by the conservative IMF.'

This is why the household budget metaphor, although politically clearly very effective, is a load of bollocks. How do you think the economy was brought back on track from possibly its worst ever position in the aftermath of WW2? Hint - it was the precise opposite of de-funding the NHS.

Dave***t posted:

Wenger, austerity is absolutely NOT the only way. It is an ideological choice. From an open letter, signatories of which included a Bank of England monetary policy advisor: '...opposition to austerity is actually mainstream economics, even backed by the conservative IMF.'

This is why the household budget metaphor, although politically clearly very effective, is a load of bollocks. How do you think the economy was brought back on track from possibly its worst ever position in the aftermath of WW2? Hint - it was the precise opposite of de-funding the NHS.

That's certainly the other side of the coin, I understand the thinking, just not totally convinced.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

HH - were you of that view when Tony Blair was heading for large majorities?

Yes, I've long believed in PR. Everybody's vote would then count and Parliament would genuinely reflect the wishes of the electorate. Tony Blair was a Tory in all but name anyway. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

The Strat (Fender) posted:

HH - were you of that view when Tony Blair was heading for large majorities?

Yes, I've long believed in PR. Everybody's vote would then count and Parliament would genuinely reflect the wishes of the electorate. Tony Blair was a Tory in all but name anyway. 

If we'd had PR last time out I think we'd have had 20 UKIP MPs?

Hungryhalibut posted:

The Strat (Fender) posted:

HH - were you of that view when Tony Blair was heading for large majorities?

Yes, I've long believed in PR. Everybody's vote would then count and Parliament would genuinely reflect the wishes of the electorate. Tony Blair was a Tory in all but name anyway. 

Tony Blair was not a Tory.. he was a centrist democrat.. the space that Tim Farron is desperately trying to retake.. but I think Blair's political antennae were far more tuned than Farron's.. I just can't  believe Farrons stance on the EU given his party's largest core vote came from a part of the country that was one of the more anti EU .. i.e. the  SW.. talk about political suicide... and that's on top of trying to regain some of the youth trust on the student loan debacle of his predecessor.

The Strat (Fender) posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

The Strat (Fender) posted:

HH - were you of that view when Tony Blair was heading for large majorities?

Yes, I've long believed in PR. Everybody's vote would then count and Parliament would genuinely reflect the wishes of the electorate. Tony Blair was a Tory in all but name anyway. 

If we'd had PR last time out I think we'd have had 20 UKIP MPs?

That would have been a price worth paying IMO. The fundamental problem at the heart of UK politics is that, 'my vote doesn't matter, and anyway, they're all the same'.

But this is our usual how many angels can dance on the head of a pin debate. Fairly early in the lifetime of the Cameron-Clegg coalition we were offered an alternative vote system and rejected it.

Don Atkinson posted:

Like I suggested earlier, either in this thread or another, if the Conservatives win 650 seats in a four-way fight, but only poll (25% +650 votes), they will legally be entitled to implement their entire manifesto and hard Brexit. But morally ?????

I simply no longer want to be associated with this type of party.

 

Surely, voting system.

Christopher_M posted:

That would have been a price worth paying IMO. The fundamental problem at the heart of UK politics is that, 'my vote doesn't matter, and anyway, they're all the same'.

Not at all, they are very different this time around... short of having real Communist and Fascist parties I think the electorate has quite a diverse choice this election.. of course some people will always be apathetic blaming some reason or other to justify their laziness.