UK General Election - 12th December 2019 | Con 365, Lab 203, LD 11, SNP 48, Other 23 - Tory Majority of 80

How do you intend to vote in the 2019 General Election if eligible?

  • Brexit Party

    Votes: 30 4.3%
  • Conservatives

    Votes: 73 10.6%
  • DUP

    Votes: 5 0.7%
  • Green

    Votes: 23 3.3%
  • Labour

    Votes: 355 51.4%
  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 58 8.4%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 3 0.4%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 9 1.3%
  • SNP

    Votes: 19 2.8%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 6 0.9%
  • Independent

    Votes: 1 0.1%
  • Other (BNP, Change UK, UUP and anyone else that I have forgotten)

    Votes: 10 1.4%
  • Not voting

    Votes: 57 8.3%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 41 5.9%

  • Total voters
    690
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
It isn't capitalism in and of itself. Every single measure of human welfare (life expectancy, birthrates, income per capita, absolute poverty) has improved over time due in no small measure to capitalism. Even in China they allow it to operate. The problem is that unregulated, it causes massive inequality. For me the problem is regulation and embracing a more compassionate approach. It is not, in my view, a case of capitalism has caused poor people and inequality therefore chuck it out for some society leveling regime that fundamentally flies in the face of human nature and will always struggle to contain it.

The same as everyone should have the right to become a doctor, lawyer, prime minister or president. If you cap aspiration then where does it stop? If we say that £1bn should be banned. Why not £100m? Why not £10m? Most people could probably survive quite well on £1m. This is goes against human aspiration. Tax it if you want at but don't say that you're not allowed to get there.

At the 8:45 minute mark.

 
It's absolutely nothing to do with jealousy and everything to do with a broken system. The reason the left fixate on wealth is they reflect on the hardship of others rather than dismiss it with nonsense such as....well some can't be helped.

I really hate how the right misconstrue all arguments of wealth. It isn't the politics of envy, people don't want other peoples money. They just want a fair standard of living for all or at least as fair as possible. If people felt such earnings were fair and through hard work then there wouldn't be such a desire to redistribute but no one fairly accumulates such wealth without exploiting the rest of society. Limiting that exploitation has been the travel of direction for quite some time.

The limitation of exploitation is cool, a necessary aim, but there are people who have trained, sacrificed and worked hard due to personal aspiration who will also be negatively affected by Labours policies. These aren’t obscenely wealthy people and they have more than likely got where they are by being self determined and had aspirations which may, or may not be money oriented.

And they should not only have the right to be oriented by financial betterment but should be respected for it.

ensuring billionaires pay their fair amount of tax is very different to hitting middle class families who have decided they want to be financially comfortable and have worked hard for it. Labour are not speaking for these people now.
 

Meanwhile, Farage on Obama three years ago:

“Vladimir Putin behaved in a more statesmanlike manner than President Obama did in this referendum campaign. Obama came to Britain, and I think behaved disgracefully, telling us we would be at the back of the queue,” said Farage during an interview Monday on Fox News. "Vladimir Putin maintained his silence throughout the whole campaign.”
 
Nowhere does is say they are weighting the EU and local elections over the 17 GE, it says they use MRP polling and constituency level demographics to predict how people will vote in each constituency, then make a recommendation based on the positions of the candidates in each one as to who you should vote for.




without seeing what you're talking about I can't comment, but if it's as transparent as Owen Jones' attempt then it's most probably bollocks. From what I've seen Owen spends about 95% of his time attacking Lib Dems and ex Labour MPs on twitter rather than going after the Tories or Farage, he's pretty obsessed tbh.



taking 2 of those:

EIMsJ8VXkAAd4iv


EIMsJ8WWwAAeZKf


Given the way things have changed since 2017 with the Lib Dem revival in the polls and the way Brexit has developed I'd say it's more than possible the Lib Dems are the most likely to beat the Tories in these seats, and alot of others too.

read this thread, the comments and her replies for a better understanding of it.


Seems dodgy to me. I'd advise anyone boring tactically to do their own research and not rely on that (or any other single website).
 
Meanwhile, Farage on Obama three years ago:

Whats the betting that Trump is using Farage to get a quid pro quo with Johnson. Favourable public statements about Boris getting a fantastic deal with the US if he becomes PM and forces a hard Brexit in return for Christopher Steele / an official UK IC statement that Steele's report was completely fabricated and untrustworthy.
 
Yet you didn't question the fact there are billionaires ?

Look you are literally making things worse by voting tory

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2019/01/don-t-believe-tories-homelessness-isn-t-falling

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...may-light-touch-approach-policy-a7942261.html




Even tory minsters can hide away from this.

https://www.theguardian.com/society...-admits-tory-policies-blame-homelessness-rise



I know you have to think or say ''well it unfortunate part of life'' etc. As it makes it easier to justify the awful outcomes of your vote(I haven't even mentioned the awful damage aboard) but honestly as someone who stood in line at the dole and watched homeless people being denied the most basics of human interactions, it would be honestly better for everyone if you just admitted that your don't really care that much about the poor.

has this government been to harsh with cuts to some aspects of the welfare state? That’s the real question and I think that have been too deep. Are the UK particularly poor when it comes to the homeless? Absolutely not. Go to big cities in Canada and the USA, it’s horrific.

also wtf have billionaires got to do with the homeless? Absolutely nothing.
 
I think this is the logic... last time libs were polling 15-20% nationally they were the main challanger in these seats and they are now polling 15-20% but something about best for britain are jew funded yellow tories etc and ooooooh jeremy corbyn
I think the logic is simply that they are supporting the female David Cameron.
 
The limitation of exploitation is cool, a necessary aim, but there are people who have trained, sacrificed and worked hard due to personal aspiration who will also be negatively affected by Labours policies. These aren’t obscenely wealthy people and they have more than likely got where they are by being self determined and had aspirations which may, or may not be money oriented.

And they should not only have the right to be oriented by financial betterment but should be respected for it.

ensuring billionaires pay their fair amount of tax is very different to hitting middle class families who have decided they want to be financially comfortable and have worked hard for it. Labour are not speaking for these people now.
They are, on this matter, speaking for me and I fall very much into your description.
Do not assume your opinions are reflected generally by "these people".
 
has this government been to harsh with cuts to some aspects of the welfare state? That’s the real question and I think that have been too deep. Are the UK particularly poor when it comes to the homeless? Absolutely not. Go to big cities in Canada and the USA, it’s horrific.

also wtf have billionaires got to do with the homeless? Absolutely nothing.
You cannot see a connection between taxation policy and spend on social care and welfare support networks? You think billionaires are somehow outwith society? Do you not think greater tax revenue and spending on social infrastructure are in anyway connected?
 
has this government been to harsh with cuts to some aspects of the welfare state? That’s the real question and I think that have been too deep. Are the UK particularly poor when it comes to the homeless? Absolutely not. Go to big cities in Canada and the USA, it’s horrific.
Firstly the fact you even have to ask that the question is genuinely disturbing but more importantly saying its bad somewhere else isn't an answer(It another way for you to justify the awful outcomes of your vote). Again voting tory is actually making the issue worse.

Really have a bit of self respect and class pride, for christ sake. Just say you aren't interesting in helping the poor, that they deserve the conditions they live in. To her credit Thatcher was at least honest about this.


also wtf have billionaires got to do with the homeless? Absolutely nothing.
They are of course linked. But the reason I brought up billionaire in our discussion most because you quote my other post.
 
has this government been to harsh with cuts to some aspects of the welfare state? That’s the real question and I think that have been too deep. Are the UK particularly poor when it comes to the homeless? Absolutely not. Go to big cities in Canada and the USA, it’s horrific.

also wtf have billionaires got to do with the homeless? Absolutely nothing.

The homeless problem in Vancouver is basically the same as the homeless problem in Manchester when I left 18 months ago. Infact I would say that Manchester edges it.
 
Indeed... Hence I said extra shift... I.e income at highest marginal rate meaning at 83% tax any additional work would net you less than somebody on basic rate on the living wage... Cracking I can see doctors lining up for the extra shifts now
Do you make decisions to do extra work on hourly rate calculations? I certainly don't. I couldn't even tell you my hourly rate in fact as that's not how my salary or business work. Short term revenue gains are not my principle motivator and I am fortunate I can say that. I am not a Doctor but I guarantee that my decision to do extra shifts would be based on many factors and net pay for those hours would not be high on the list unless I were in financial dire straits.
 
The homeless problem in Vancouver is basically the same as the homeless problem in Manchester when I left 18 months ago. Infact I would say that Manchester edges it.
It appears based on stats that homelessness is not at its worst in recent history.
However, I find that hard to believe. The sheer volume of visible homeless people in the UK's cities has increased enormously in the last five years. What was once a London phenomenon is seen everywhere. Cardiff, Manchester and Glasgow are extraordinarily bad in ways I have never seen in my no longer short life.
 
They are, on this matter, speaking for me and I fall very much into your description.
Do not assume your opinions are reflected generally by "these people".

Ok Fingeredmouse, maybe an assumption too far but maybe I should have said Labours policies will alienate a lot of people in the category, i too am one of these people. I’ve done ok through graft and good fortune and Labour are not a home for me anymore.

And that’s not because I am a right wing Tory, far from it, I am a traditional Labour voter but I am also aspirational and it seems that aspiration of any kind is unwelcome under Corbyn and MacDonnell.
 
You cannot see a connection between taxation policy and spend on social care and welfare support networks? You think billionaires are somehow outwith society? Do you not think greater tax revenue and spending on social infrastructure are in anyway connected?

no billionaires are within society and they pay significant tax. It’s up to the government what they do with it.

The homeless problem in Vancouver is basically the same as the homeless problem in Manchester when I left 18 months ago. Infact I would say that Manchester edges it.

vancouver wasn’t too bad when I was there in 2018 to be fair, although they have significant drugs issues they have revolutionary schemes to combat that. Montreal this summer was horrific.
 
It appears based on stats that homelessness is not at its worst in recent history.
However, I find that hard to believe. The sheer volume of visible homeless people in the UK's cities has increased enormously in the last five years. What was once a London phenomenon is seen everywhere. Cardiff, Manchester and Glasgow are extraordinarily bad in ways I have never seen in my no longer short life.

The Tories have pumped money into homelessness this last two years, especially in Manchester, Birmingham and Merseyside. Most people I talk to expect this November’s rough sleeper count to fail on last year. Will be interesting (if it happens) to see if this pops up in the campaign narrative.
 
The same as everyone should have the right to become a doctor, lawyer, prime minister or president. If you cap aspiration then where does it stop? If we say that £1bn should be banned. Why not £100m? Why not £10m? Most people could probably survive quite well on £1m. This is goes against human aspiration. Tax it if you want at but don't say that you're not allowed to get there.

An unequal society actually effects the ability of people to become a doctor, lawyer, prime minister or president. Nobody sets out aspiring to have $100b like Jeff Bezos, would his life be so bad if he'd only been successful enough to make 500m?

If you cap aspiration then where does it stop? If we say that £1bn should be banned. Why not £100m? Why not £10m? Most people could probably survive quite well on £1m. This is goes against human aspiration. Tax it if you want at but don't say that you're not allowed to get there.

Nice strawman, how about we go the other way, should one person be allowed to control all the wealth because that's what they aspired to?

This is goes against human aspiration.

This is what being part of a society is, making sure the greater good of all is put ahead of the individual. What about people who work full time jobs that can barely pay the bills, can't afford to buy a home, have to use food banks to feed their kids, should their aspirations not count?


Tax it if you want at but don't say that you're not allowed to get there.

So if we tax them 900m as soon they get to 1b you're ok with that?
 
Ok Fingeredmouse, maybe an assumption too far but maybe I should have said Labours policies will alienate a lot of people in the category, i too am one of these people. I’ve done ok through graft and good fortune and Labour are not a home for me anymore.

And that’s not because I am a right wing Tory, far from it, I am a traditional Labour voter but I am also aspirational and it seems that aspiration of any kind is unwelcome under Corbyn and MacDonnell.
I think that aspiration of any kind is unwelcome is an extreme interpretation personally. For me, society's support networks and cohesion matter more than personal financial wealth and I believe that an improved society is wealth in of itself. I understand your view though and, perhaps, someone like the Lib Dems might be more of a home for you.

I won't be voting Labour either but for very different reasons.
 
Firstly the fact you even have to ask that the question is genuinely disturbing but more importantly saying its bad somewhere else isn't an answer(It another way for you to justify the awful outcomes of your vote). Again voting tory is actually making the issue worse.

Really have a bit of self respect and class pride, for christ sake. Just say you aren't interesting in helping the poor, that they deserve the conditions they live in. To her credit Thatcher was at least honest about this.



They are of course linked. But the reason I brought up billionaire in our discussion most because you quote my other post.

It depends why they are poor. Lazy knob heads who can’t be arsed working why should I give a shit? People who are pro active and work hard? Different question all together. I’ve seen this shit first hand under Labour. One half of my family were wasters, did feck all other than breed like rats, sponge off family and the government. Would you believe it but they had to start working when the free lunch was withdrawn.
 
It depends why they are poor. Lazy knob heads who can’t be arsed working why should I give a shit? People who are pro active and work hard? Different question all together. I’ve seen this shit first hand under Labour. One half of my family were wasters, did feck all other than breed like rats, sponge off family and the government. Would you believe it but they had to start working when the free lunch was withdrawn.
Jesus fecking Christ.
 
Wait do you actually not know how tax works?

Calculating and maths isn’t his strong point (is anything?), he tried to explain why Help to Buy was bad without having any idea how interest charges on it worked in another thread.

I’m fairly sure he’s Michael Essien.
 
It depends why they are poor. Lazy knob heads who can’t be arsed working why should I give a shit? People who are pro active and work hard? Different question all together. I’ve seen this shit first hand under Labour. One half of my family were wasters, did feck all other than breed like rats, sponge off family and the government. Would you believe it but they had to start working when the free lunch was withdrawn.

The vast majority of people living in poverty in this country are in a working household though, so while your anecdote might be useful for someone writing a Daily Mail article, it's not exactly a solid foundation on which to build a welfare policy.
 
I think that aspiration of any kind is unwelcome is an extreme interpretation personally. For me, society's support networks and cohesion matter more than personal financial wealth and I believe that an improved society is wealth in of itself. I understand your view though and, perhaps, someone like the Lib Dems might be more of a home for you.

I won't be voting Labour either but for very different reasons.

I agree with your views on society and support networks and wouldn’t mind a small tax rise to help fund it but social cohesion isn’t likely to be attainable any time soon with both the Tories and Labour retreating to their extreme trenches on the right and left. In my view social cohesion requires a centrist government which is why Tony Blair did so well for a while and why I actually thought David Cameron did an alright job too for the most part.

I have no problem paying my share of taxes and would willingly do so but my relatively modest aspirations are under direct attack from labours plans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.