What is the point of Labour ?

[Jedi2]

1 hour ago, coprolite said:

Those money raising ideas are trivial in scale, extremely dubious on effect (although i don't know about trident, but thats a cost saving).

The non-dom "loophole" closure was in the last Tory budget, although they probably only did that to annoy Labour. 

Wealth tax at that level has been tried and abandoned by other European countries before. It's expensive to administer and easy to avoid. International co operation and co ordination is vital and i can't imagine the US being on board any time soon. 

Big corporate tax avoidance. 11 bn? Just pie in the sky. 

They've chosen these things because they don't cost voters anything so they can pretend someone else will pay. 

I am hopeful that the "no tax on working people" thing means that they might start taxing unearned income and gains properly and in line with earnings. Starting with capital gains tax. Putting the equivalent of NI on dividends and interest would be great too.  

But they've made a rod for their own backs by lacking the courage to be honest and to get locked into silly posturing on tax. 

There has certainly been chat about increasing personal gains tax. Going for dividends and interest would, I agree be positive as well.

The advantage of going in with 'no increases in income tax, NI and VAT' is the room to tax other areas, while sticking to the manifesto.

You are also right about wealth taxes, though good in theory, those with the most of course have ways of avoiding it.

 

[lichtgilphead]

25 minutes ago, Jedi2 said:

Kate Forbes on QT recently said she personally didn't think VAT on private schools was a good idea. You will note I never mentioned the SNP manifesto.

So, it's you who is in fact lying (again)

Let's see, who to believe? A confirmed fantasist & liar who rarely links to proof of his deluded claims or the BBC's own report on the event?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw99vqyz2p4o

The debate also focused on Labour’s plans for VAT on private schools, a move which Mr Ross – who went to a state school – said would end up putting pressure on the state sector.

Mr Sarwar called the plan a “balanced decision” to allow more money to be invested in state schools, while Ms Forbes called it going for a “soft target”.

However she would not say if the SNP supported the plan, ahead of publication of her party's manifesto next week.

I've already provided the link to the very manifesto she referred to.

EDITED TO ADD: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00204mf/question-time-2024-13062024

Kate Forbes response is at 45:00 to 47:00, especially 46:30 onwards

As always, Jedi doubles down on his original lie, and will now run away when confronted with the facts.

Edited Wednesday at 18:42 by lichtgilphead

[Crùbag]

Labour trying to outdo Farage at a Sun hustings. Tosspot.

 

 

[BFTD]

3 hours ago, DrewDon said:

I get that politicians will say more or less anything to get a vote, but a big problem for Scottish Labour since 2014 is that so many of them seem like they only care about beating the SNP, and actually stand for nothing other than being anti-independence. It's not even clear that some of them actually understand that they are supposed to dislike what the Tories are doing to the country, because at least they are pro-union. 

Hard to imagine a world where Scottish Labour would be so bitterly obsessed with defeating a centrist party that they'd wave through their old ideological opposites.

You'll be telling me next that some of their supporters are posting incessantly about the aforementioned party - now more left wing than Labour - at a time when the head office in London is about to celebrate (temporary) victory over actual fascism!

[Jedi2]

2 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Let's see, who to believe? A confirmed fantasist & liar who rarely links to proof of his deluded claims or the BBC's own report on the event?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw99vqyz2p4o

The debate also focused on Labour’s plans for VAT on private schools, a move which Mr Ross – who went to a state school – said would end up putting pressure on the state sector.

Mr Sarwar called the plan a “balanced decision” to allow more money to be invested in state schools, while Ms Forbes called it going for a “soft target”.

However she would not say if the SNP supported the plan, ahead of publication of her party's manifesto next week.

I've already provided the link to the very manifesto she referred to.

EDITED TO ADD: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00204mf/question-time-2024-13062024

Kate Forbes response is at 45:00 to 47:00, especially 46:30 onwards

As always, Jedi doubles down on his original lie, and will now run away when confronted with the facts.

So rattling around in your own empty head is But but but Kate said 'wait for the Manifeeestoo' 

My point that, on QT she did not support VAT on Private Schools still stands. Doesn't say either way if she agrees with the said Manifesto or not.

I'm more likely to take Kate Forbes at face value, from her own mouth, than what 'some guy on the Internet who would claim that saying John Swinney is leader of the SNP' is a 'lie', purports.

.

[Jedi2]

24 minutes ago, BFTD said:

Hard to imagine a world where Scottish Labour would be so bitterly obsessed with defeating a centrist party that they'd wave through their old ideological opposites.

You'll be telling me next that some of their supporters are posting incessantly about the aforementioned party - now more left wing than Labour - at a time when the head office in London is about to celebrate (temporary) victory over actual fascism!

Can only assume that you are talking about the Lib Dems here. I would agree. On some issues they are to the left of Labour.

It certainly couldn't be 'decade of austerity/firewall of Scottish assets/Private Finance for the NHS', SNP.

Edited Wednesday at 21:21 by Jedi2

[itzdrk]

3 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

Kate Forbes on QT recently said she personally didn't think VAT on private schools was a good idea. You will note I never mentioned the SNP manifesto.

So, it's you who is in fact lying (again)

It's almost definitely a good idea in that case if corpos like Forbes are against it. 

[lichtgilphead]

7 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

 Windfall Tax on oil and gas profits and VAT on private schools (both opposed by the likes of Kate Forbes),

 

3 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

Kate Forbes on QT recently said she personally didn't think VAT on private schools was a good idea.

 

2 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

EDITED TO ADD: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m00204mf/question-time-2024-13062024

Kate Forbes response is at 45:00 to 47:00, especially 46:30 onwards

 

6 minutes ago, Jedi2 said:

My point that, on QT she did not support VAT on Private Schools still stands. 

1) Jedi said that Kate Forbes opposed VAT in private schools. No proof was given.

2) When challenged, he claimed that she said on Question Time that she "didn't think VAT on private schools was a good idea." No evidence of this quote was provided.

3) When a link to what she actually said was posted, he then claimed that he (Jedi) had only said that she (Forbes) did not support VAT during her appearance on QT.

So, an outright lie, followed by a made-up quote, followed by a total misrepresentation of her actual words.

That's a Jedi hat-trick. Well done Jedi.

 

 

 

[Thane of Cawdor]

5 hours ago, Freedom Farter said:

This guy also just blurts out Bangladesh. Must be the party line.

Is Ashworth doing his impression of David Brent here? Labour is indeed a broad church, except for those inconvenient Socialists. We have a TUSC candidate in our constituency. He is standing on what looks like a classic Labour platform, I think I'll try to get his vote to four figures.

[EvilScotsman]

5 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

The issue with the debt....

The 'national debt' is a massive con.

A chunk of it is money ( "we promise to pay the bearer on demand" etc), and most of the rest is owed to the Bank of England (which also sets the interest rates). The BoE is wholly owned by His Majesty's Government, and as it's logically impossible to owe yourself money this part of the 'debt' cannot exist.

[Jedi2]

42 minutes ago, EvilScotsman said:

The 'national debt' is a massive con.

A chunk of it is money ( "we promise to pay the bearer on demand" etc), and most of the rest is owed to the Bank of England (which also sets the interest rates). The BoE is wholly owned by His Majesty's Government, and as it's logically impossible to owe yourself money this part of the 'debt' cannot exist.

A 'Con'?.

You are right the largest share of the debt is interest due on Government bonds, or gilts, which the B of E issues money for. However, if the B of E prints money indefinitely interest rates rise along with prices for basic goods and services, which generally hits the poorest harder.

However nearly a third of the debt is to foreign investors. Default on that and obviously credit rating goes through the floor, value of the pound drops, and Imports become more expensive. In addition a fair chunk of debt is tied up in pension funds.

Debt due to the Tories and in (part) fairness, Covid, is now at the highest since the early 1960s.

Obviously we don't have to 'balance the books' on debt, but borrowing has to have a limit which of course makes spending more difficult. It doesn't mean 'austerity' but does mean less spending on some unprotected budgets.

It's over to Labour to spend what is there, better than the Tories, and given that unlike the Tories they aren't chasing tax cuts, that's a start.

[Jedi2]

59 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

 

 

 

1) Jedi said that Kate Forbes opposed VAT in private schools. No proof was given.

2) When challenged, he claimed that she said on Question Time that she "didn't think VAT on private schools was a good idea." No evidence of this quote was provided.

3) When a link to what she actually said was posted, he then claimed that he (Jedi) had only said that she (Forbes) did not support VAT during her appearance on QT.

So, an outright lie, followed by a made-up quote, followed by a total misrepresentation of her actual words.

That's a Jedi hat-trick. Well done Jedi.

 

 

 

And for what is now the 3rd time...did Kate Forbes 'support' VAT rises on QT. Answer: No. Therefore a fact. Of course you haven't referenced her (non) support for taxing oil and gas profits either (maybe the repeated Tory line the SNP like to use of it 'costing' 100,000 jobs).

Still,no surprise given that the SNP are continuing to trot out their lie of £18 billion of Labour cuts. They will probably be backing Rishi up on his lie of £2000 Labour tax hikes on every household next 

[lichtgilphead]

Pathetic.

[sophia]

Here's the Question Time link again and at 45 minutes there is a response from the very impressive Kate Forbes on private schools. 

@Jedi2, would you agree that she simply said and I paraphrase, the SNP have already closed a tax loophole on private schools, Labour's tax plan isn't enough and the SNP view would later be declared in their manifesto?

Is there another place where she said that it "wasn't a good idea"? 

Why did you misspell manifesto as Manifeeestoo? 

 

[Sheas_cake]

9 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

Pathetic.

He's also run away from his blatant lie about the two-child cap as well. 

[Crùbag]

9 hours ago, Jedi2 said:

And for what is now the 3rd time...did Kate Forbes 'support' VAT rises on QT. Answer: No. Therefore a fact. Of course you haven't referenced her (non) support for taxing oil and gas profits either (maybe the repeated Tory line the SNP like to use of it 'costing' 100,000 jobs).

Still,no surprise given that the SNP are continuing to trot out their lie of £18 billion of Labour cuts. They will probably be backing Rishi up on his lie of £2000 Labour tax hikes on every household next 

I'm not a fan of Forbes and tbh, I'm absolutely fine with taxing private schools out of existence and using the proceeds to improve our state education system.

I can also see that the SNP have been no great shakes in recent years.

However, the SNP would have some way to go before they're half as bad as the Butt Cheeks in Westminster.

SNP have got my vote as I genuinely can't see anything in Starmer that says "he speaks for me". His latest dogwhistle politics in front of a bunch of Sun-readers is just the latest step in his sorry lurch towards the far-right. Little wonder that Labour have been positioned somewhere around the Tories and the DUP in policies in this GE.

[Crùbag]

Anything from Labour on this yet?

 

[Granny Danger]

FWIW I think @Jedi2 is a perfect fit for the Labour Party.

 

What astounds me is there are people I know from back in the day who are still activists and who can have nothing in common with Starmer’s Labour Party unless their beliefs have changed beyond all recognition.

[Salt n Vinegar]

1 hour ago, Crùbag said:

Anything from Labour on this yet?

 

It is an entirely ridiculous position to hold of course but the truthful answers, which because they are truthful answers you will never hear a unionist utter, would be 1) No; 2) No; and 3) By any means Westminster says, and only by any means Westminster says.

By definition, if the "rules" for achieving Scottish independence are only to be set by Westminster the answer to question 1 can never be other than "No".

All you'll hear from unionists are their opinions that "independence isn't the issue". They're not prepared to even entertain the question and instead bang on about them as individuals or their Party not supporting independence.

[Crùbag]

Labour FFS... they should be opposing the likes of Farage at every given opportunity, not appeasing the odious fckr.

Quote

 

Members of Clacton’s constituency Labour party (CLP) had been expecting a “well planned but low energy” social media campaign.

However, Owusu-Nepaul attracted attention on social media after he was photographed bumping into the Reform UK leader at an opening of a new food truck in Frinton earlier this month, with pictures going viral.

A campaign source said Labour headquarters had been angry with the traction Owusu-Nepaul was getting. “At one point [Jovan] was getting more retweets than Keir Starmer. The officials were furious with him and said he was distracting [from] Starmer’s campaign,” they said.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/jun/26/labour-not-putting-up-a-fight-against-farage-in-clacton