The 2017 General Election campaign

[killer b]

twenty quid. Don't you even want a Labour victory?

 

[redsquirrel]

But I want to go back to the 70s.

Lowest level of inequality, highest % of GDP as wages

 

[Pickman's model]

Lowest level of inequality, highest % of GDP as wages

And music better than today

 

[butchersapron]

Not really. I check in with Labour First to find out if it's "on message" and if it isn't I just rubbish the source rather than debunk it with evidence.

The best bit about this tactic, is that I demand that the source, which I had previously not been familiar with but I accuse of being unreliable, must be shown to be reliable by proving that he or she is not lying.

Marvelous - you're the first person on here to have heard of Eoin Clarke.

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Lowest level of inequality, highest % of GDP as wages

Yep. And lower (although rising) unemployment.

Now if we could get back to the levels we had between '45 and '70 that'd be something. Pipe dreams, I know.

 

[bemused]

I love the fact that being 'extremely cautious' about using nuclear weapons is a controversial policy.

 

[brogdale]

1970's; the last decade of concessions borne of fear.

 

[Raheem]

Now if we could get back to the levels we had between '45 and '70 that'd be something. Pipe dreams, I know.

Patience, patience. We can't have a war on that scale until we get our sovereignty back.

 

[killer b]

Marvelous - you're the first person on here to have heard of Eoin Clarke.

yeah, there definitely isn't discussion on this forum about his bullshit going back 5 years.

 

[Raheem]

I love the fact that being 'extremely cautious' about using nuclear weapons is a controversial policy.

Always wear gloves. It's health and safety gone mad.

 

[bemused]

Always wear gloves. It's health and safety gone mad.

Now Paul Nuttall knows it is controversial stand by for a picture of him with a red button and the caption 'vote for me and I'll slam this bitch'

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

 

[mikey mikey]

Well we'll see if Eoin is right then, shall we?

If he is, I fully expect to get a whole bunch of "meh, so what, jezza is stilll shit" from butchersapron and killerb. They're saving their enthusiasm until after Jeremy's gone.

 

[killer b]

Well we'll see if Eoin is right then, shall we?

If Eoin is right, I will be sending a crisp twenty pound note to Labour Party HQ and will happily post a mea culpa here. I'm confident that won't be necessary though.

 

[mikey mikey]

Remaining skeptical, killer b. I wouldn't trust you to mention it ever again. Down a memory hole it wil go, is my guess.

 

[killer b]

fuck you.

 

[mikey mikey]

Let's see shall, we?

 

[killer b]

I'll look forward to your mea culpa when those 20% taxes on private schools and private healthcare don't show up in the manifesto then.

 

[Dogsauce]

The 20% on private schools/healthcare is just achieved by adding VAT to these items, I've heard it mentioned as a policy idea before. No idea why these luxuries are exempt in the first place (well actually, I have a pretty good idea why, but no idea what 'justification' was given).

 

[mikey mikey]

Will do. Ask yourself this: why do you hope that it won't be true?

 

[butchersapron]

They certainly don't appear in the draft manifesto.

 

[brogdale]

Interesting graphic...hope they keep up-dating it...kind of relates to the discussion surrounding Who PhD 's exhortation to vote LP.

 

[brogdale]

Will do. Ask yourself this: why do you hope that it won't be true?

You've outed him as a tory. smart work Mikey.

 

[killer b]

They certainly don't appear in the draft manifesto.

Dropping the VAT exception on private school fees is actually - there's an unspecified increase on private health insurance tax mentioned, but not 20%.

 

[mikey mikey]

Waiting for killer b to semantically squirm-out-of-it: i.e. "VAT does not count"

 

[killer b]

Looking through his other points, very few are supported by the draft manifesto: there's a commitment to ensuring excess private profits aren't made out of the NHS, no commitment to end profitmaking altogether; there's no reference to Capital Gains or inheritance tax, no mention of reversing corporation tax cuts; no sweetheart deals ban, just a commitment to strengthening tax collection enforcement.

So...

 

[killer b]

Waiting for killer b to semantically squirm-out-of-it: i.e. "VAT does not count"

No, that's fair enough. They can have a tenner.

 

[mikey mikey]

Well, I can't argue with that. Respect.

 

[killer b]

It's still a well dodgy list, mind.

 

[ViolentPanda]

From what I can glean (The Mirror's read is a bit more nuanced than, say, the Telegraph's) is that they're not necessarily proposing straight renationalisations but eg taking back the railway franchises as existing contracts expire, creating public competitors in the energy and bus sectors etc

Or, at least not disadvantaging public competitors, as currently happens.