Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

Hungryhalibut posted:

Another reason for a Labour government then, along with an NHS where people don’t die on trolleys, where schools are properly funded, and where the trains operate as they should. The Tories offer nothing. No policies, no leadership, just a vacuum. 

Nigel you must have been around in the 70s as was I.    The NHS was critically underfunded by Labour and I will remind you that it was under the Tories in the 80s that for the first time expenditure on the NHS exceeded that on  Defence.    And then of course there is the economic car crash that Labour government inevitably ends in.    Not that I support the current administration at all.   

The Strat (Fender) posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

Another reason for a Labour government then, along with an NHS where people don’t die on trolleys, where schools are properly funded, and where the trains operate as they should. The Tories offer nothing. No policies, no leadership, just a vacuum. 

Nigel you must have been around in the 70s as was I.    The NHS was critically underfunded by Labour and I will remind you that it was under the Tories in the 80s that for the first time expenditure on the NHS exceeded that on  Defence.    And then of course there is the economic car crash that Labour government inevitably ends in.    Not that I support the current administration at all.   

Not sure about HH, but I was certainly around in the 70s. I have no idea if your reference to the Tories spending more on the NHS than on defence is accurate. It appears to me to be a pretty meaningless statistic as there could potentially be many underlying reasons that might contribute to this being the case. 

You also claim that the NHS was "critically" underfunded by Labour in the 70s. I wonder where you sourced this statistic, and whether or not it is true.

What I do know, from personal experience as well as anecdotal evidence from many I know personally who worked at the sharp end of the NHS as doctors in the 70s, and from a number of people I know personally who currently work as doctors in the NHS, is that there is absolutely no question that the NHS is in a very significantly worse state now than it was in the 70s. It is currently drastically underfunded and needs significant additional funding if it is to survive. 

The question for all of us is - Do we want a well funded NHS providing free service at the point of entry and are we prepared to pay for it?

I certainly do, and am, but quite a few people don't and are not prepared to pay for the NHS. This is obviously a generalisation, but I suspect the demographic of those in each camp is largely directly related to personal wealth. No doubt many high earners (and I suspect many of the right wing of the current Conservative party) fall into this group, and would be happy to pay for private health insurance if it meant a winding down of the NHS and a reduction in their tax bills. I wonder how many of the 'rich' in our society, or indeed the current Conservative Party, actually make use of the NHS. I don't know the answer to this question, but I have my suspicions.     

I would sooner accept an income tax increase and thereby fund a much better NHS, than leave the EU in order to find the money to add £350pw to the NHS budget.

But either way, I consider a well run and properly funded NHS helps bring cohesion to society.

Just chucking money into the NHS isn't the only aspect that needs to be improved, it needs to be properly structured such that we extract the maximum benefit from the funding.

Oooops..............The £350pw should, of course have been £350m pw !

Don Atkinson posted:

Oooops..............The £350pw should, of course have been £350m pw !

Well, Don, that was the Brexiteers' original claim but I think you might have got it right the first on what we might be able to afford if the Brexiteers get the sort of exit they want. 

But hold on guys it’s a fact the Tories spent more year on year in real terms.  New Labour then increased spending three fold but it seemingly isn’t enough. 

In the short term I would agree with Vince Cable simply that everyone pays 1p more to sustain.  Long term I agree with you guys there needs to be a more fundamental review into all aspects. 

I’m not convinced that paying 1p more is the right thing to do. It’s easy of course, but there are better ways, like not keep upping the personal allowance, which simply takes people out of the tax system and reduces the tax base. Put the upper tax rate to 50p, increase inheritance tax and corporation tax, and close those loopholes that everyone bangs on about but nobody has the bottle to upset their friends. Stop Brexit now and watch the economy improve immediately, increasing the tax take. Bang 20p a litre on diesel, get more income and reduce the number of deaths from air pollution. There are lots of options. The country needs a real conversation as to what sort of place we want to live in. We cannot have Scandinavian levels of services with US tax rates. Something has to give. 

Perhaps our memories are different from what the spending figures show, though with the NHS absolute spending, even adjusted for inflation, won't really reveal the truth about "under-funding" because demand has been rising, cuts in social care has resulted in more pressure on it, many more expensive drugs and other treatments are available.  But in politics, perception is everything.  If the belief gets hold that the current government has overseen failing targets, losses of clinical staff, waiting lists lengthening, bed shortages and hospitals turning away A&E admissions, well, it doesn't matter much when ministers say 'how much extra' they are investing (sic) in the NHS. They've lost the argument.

Talking of perceptions, for some time now I've felt that there is a misconception of Conservative governments being strong on defence and Labour being weak and cutting budgets.  Memories can play tricks on us but mine seems to recall that every time there is a hue and cry from the defence chiefs about a defence spending crisis it's on a Conservative government's watch, just like the current one. Indeed, I seem to remember that under Thatcher there were defence cuts planned which, had they been implemented, the defence chiefs said the task force to retake the Falklands wouldn't have been possible.    

To me, it doesn’t matter who did or didn’t do what in the past, it’s what we do now that matters. As L P Hartley wrote, the past is a different country. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

I’m not convinced that paying 1p more is the right thing to do. It’s easy of course, but there are better ways, like not keep upping the personal allowance, which simply takes people out of the tax system and reduces the tax base. Put the upper tax rate to 50p, increase inheritance tax and corporation tax, and close those loopholes that everyone bangs on about but nobody has the bottle to upset their friends. Stop Brexit now and watch the economy improve immediately, increasing the tax take. Bang 20p a litre on diesel, get more income and reduce the number of deaths from air pollution. There are lots of options. The country needs a real conversation as to what sort of place we want to live in. We cannot have Scandinavian levels of services with US tax rates. Something has to give. 

Hmmm. While I support your underlying sentiment, HH, your suggested measures may not have the desired effect. For example, putting 20p on diesel would simply feed through to rising inflation because it would affect the costs of commercial transportation which gets passed onto the consumer; whether you like it or not, corporation tax rates are internationally competitive and cranking them up means the big corporates restructure to move their profits off-shore; and the 50p rate runs into 'Laffer's law', which means at the top end when you push up the tax rate, you don't get the tax you hope for (because people who can afford it change their behaviour like moving out of employment and becoming incorporated).  You're right about the personal allowance, though.  Freeze that and it's a big revenue earner. More Corbyn than May, though. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

To me, it doesn’t matter who did or didn’t do what in the past, it’s what we do now that matters. As L P Hartley wrote, the past is a different country. 

For new and young voters, yes, but as amply illustrated by posts on this thread, memories of what the political parties have done in the past shapes strongly the voting intentions of the more mature electorate.  

The tories destroyed most of the country’s industrial base in the past and now they seem happy to let the health service collapse, so I’ll accept links between past and current behaviour. Anyone who says that’s a stupid over simplistic comment needs to consider how linking labour policies of the 70s to the current manifesto is any different. 

The Laffer curve is an interesting thing, though it can be minimised by joining up the tax system so that tax cannot be avoided. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

The tories destroyed most of the country’s industrial base in the past and now they seem happy to let the health service collapse, so I’ll accept links between past and current behaviour. Anyone who says that’s a stupid over simplistic comment needs to consider how linking labour policies of the 70s to the current manifesto is any different. 

The Laffer curve is an interesting thing, though it can be minimised by joining up the tax system so that tax cannot be avoided. 

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

Resurrection posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

The tories destroyed most of the country’s industrial base in the past and now they seem happy to let the health service collapse, so I’ll accept links between past and current behaviour. Anyone who says that’s a stupid over simplistic comment needs to consider how linking labour policies of the 70s to the current manifesto is any different. 

The Laffer curve is an interesting thing, though it can be minimised by joining up the tax system so that tax cannot be avoided. 

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

Hope you've done you inheritance tax planning then, Resurrection. 

Nope, the trade unions destroyed our industrial base.

MDS posted:

Resurrection posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

The tories destroyed most of the country’s industrial base in the past and now they seem happy to let the health service collapse, so I’ll accept links between past and current behaviour. Anyone who says that’s a stupid over simplistic comment needs to consider how linking labour policies of the 70s to the current manifesto is any different. 

The Laffer curve is an interesting thing, though it can be minimised by joining up the tax system so that tax cannot be avoided. 

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

Hope you've done you inheritance tax planning then, Resurrection. 

WIP ????

Hungryhalibut posted:

As L P Hartley wrote,

Did he brother write books about fishing?  :-)

Resurrection posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

The tories destroyed most of the country’s industrial base in the past and now they seem happy to let the health service collapse, so I’ll accept links between past and current behaviour. Anyone who says that’s a stupid over simplistic comment needs to consider how linking labour policies of the 70s to the current manifesto is any different. 

The Laffer curve is an interesting thing, though it can be minimised by joining up the tax system so that tax cannot be avoided. 

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

Well, I own my own home - and after mortgages for a total of 40 years i now own it outright. I own my own cars, hifi (worth more than cars),and everything else. I have some modest savings, just about enough to fund a retirement house purchase before selling the one I am in, the proceeds of which will improve that house, but a mobile home for holidays, and provide deposits for my children if/when they buy their own houses. And I have a pension due soon, which barring unforseen failues will provide for a comfortable enough income, though holidays and hifi purchases will have to be much more carefully considered and balanced.

But I am firmly with the others you call “you guys”.

Resurrection posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

The tories destroyed most of the country’s industrial base in the past and now they seem happy to let the health service collapse, so I’ll accept links between past and current behaviour. Anyone who says that’s a stupid over simplistic comment needs to consider how linking labour policies of the 70s to the current manifesto is any different. 

The Laffer curve is an interesting thing, though it can be minimised by joining up the tax system so that tax cannot be avoided. 

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

I have my own home, savings and children. But it’s not all about me, me, me. 

Innocent Bystander posted:

Resurrection posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

The tories destroyed most of the country’s industrial base in the past and now they seem happy to let the health service collapse, so I’ll accept links between past and current behaviour. Anyone who says that’s a stupid over simplistic comment needs to consider how linking labour policies of the 70s to the current manifesto is any different. 

The Laffer curve is an interesting thing, though it can be minimised by joining up the tax system so that tax cannot be avoided. 

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

Well, I own my own home - and after mortgages for a total of 40 years i now own it outright. I own my own cars, hifi (worth more than cars),and everything else. I have some modest savings, just about enough to fund a retirement house purchase before selling the one I am in, the proceeds of which will improve that house, but a mobile home for holidays, and provide deposits for my children if/when they buy their own houses. And I have a pension due soon, which barring unforseen failues will provide for a comfortable enough income, though holidays and hifi purchases will have to be much more carefully considered and balanced.

But I am firmly with the others you call “you guys”.

And that, IB, is your choice! I'd rather not have you or any of the "guys" making choices for myself. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

Resurrection posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

The tories destroyed most of the country’s industrial base in the past and now they seem happy to let the health service collapse, so I’ll accept links between past and current behaviour. Anyone who says that’s a stupid over simplistic comment needs to consider how linking labour policies of the 70s to the current manifesto is any different. 

The Laffer curve is an interesting thing, though it can be minimised by joining up the tax system so that tax cannot be avoided. 

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

I have my own home, savings and children. But it’s not all about me, me, me. 

Hilarious! If it wasn't for me, me, me and people like me actually paying taxes then we'd be even more stuffed than we are now. But, enough is enough and although I continue to pay taxes on my pensions and savings as well as Council Tax, I feel not the slightest compunction to pay a penny more. Nope, nada, niente, nichts, rien, nothing! 

Resurrection posted:

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

It might be a better idea to encourage your kids and grandkids to go and earn a living for themselves.

Have you ever heard of the term altruism.

Resurrection posted:

<snip>

I love the way that Remoaners think

<snip>

Clearly, from your constant repeated trite insults you have absolutely no idea what the remainers think, and have no intention to understand their position either.

But glad you like it.

(See, I can also reverse the meaning of things by taking them out of context!)

fatcat posted:

Resurrection posted:

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

It might be a better idea to encourage your kids and grandkids to go and earn a living for themselves.

Have you ever heard of the term altruism.

And that, of course, is the choice offered to the electorate when there is a general election - or would be if at the time of elections there are competent parties offering those choices, and provided that other policies they have domnot outweigh those particular ones.

fatcat posted:

Resurrection posted:

Boy, you guys are idealistic with other peoples’ money. I have to assume you live in rented or perhaps subsidised accommodation, don’t actually own a vehicle, have no savings and, if you have kids, no aspirations to leave them a penny. 

Me, I have my own home, my own cars, plenty of savings as well as  kids and grandkids who deserve my money more than anyone you may nominate. 

It might be a better idea to encourage your kids and grandkids to go and earn a living for themselves.

Have you ever heard of the term altruism.

Don't be presumptuous about my kids who all own their own homes, work, pay taxes and send their kids to public (private) schools, altruistically freeing spaces for the more 'needy'.