Non spiky Politics 2

I have found it interesting that in a very small sample size the football fans that i know have all been opposed to the re introduction of alcohol at matches.

Whitewavemark2

Cossy

So, a very non spiky polite question.

This particular thread appears to only be for those not supporting Labour?

In which case I’ll leave you all to your own thoughts and in peace

😄😄😄 it should be renamed

Non-spiky politics, because you are not allowed to disagree with me

😄😄😄.

I thought we were keeping spikiness out of this thread? That is why I am posting on it. You appear to be introducing it which is not fair.

The posters on here are just airing their thoughts which we are all allowed to do.

I suggest you find other political threads which are more combative and leave this one alone!

Oh! Oh! Are there Thread Police now on this non spikey Chat?

To anyone who doesnt know., the rules of the Gransnet cafe, written by GN, can be seen by everyone, I would hope.
If you cant see them, ask GN about the cafe rules.

This particular thread appears to only be for those not supporting Labour?

That would be like saying that Labour supporters are unable to go along with the Gransnet cafe rules.
So that is a no. Hopefully?

Either way, Gransnet cafe rules.

Maremia

Oh! Oh! Are there Thread Police now on this non spikey Chat?

Please leave us in peace!

Non spiky means exactly that, it’s easy enough for anyone to understand.

I would definitely like to discuss the Russian pneumatic plague!
We all know what happened in the Pandemic that leaked from the Wuhan Lab😬
We can’t be at all certain that this will be contained.

I also agree with Kemi Badenoch about scrapping Inheritance Tax for family houses.
It’s set at a ridiculous £500,000 at the moment, a modest three bedroom house or bungalow in the South East!
Is that real wealth, I don’t think so.

Oreo

I would definitely like to discuss the Russian pneumatic plague!
We all know what happened in the Pandemic that leaked from the Wuhan Lab😬
We can’t be at all certain that this will be contained.

If it is all true, then what are Countries[I presume not just China and Russia] doing in the labs?
Is it all good for humanity?

Oreo

I also agree with Kemi Badenoch about scrapping Inheritance Tax for family houses.
It’s set at a ridiculous £500,000 at the moment, a modest three bedroom house or bungalow in the South East!
Is that real wealth, I don’t think so.

I believe it was originally brought in to affect only the very welathy but like all taxes the net widens. Completely agree it should be changed and it is one of the good idea that Kemi is coming up with to make the Conservative party more electable.

petra

Whitewavemark2

Cossy

So, a very non spiky polite question.

This particular thread appears to only be for those not supporting Labour?

In which case I’ll leave you all to your own thoughts and in peace

😄😄😄 it should be renamed

Non-spiky politics, because you are not allowed to disagree with me

😄😄😄.

And if you dare to the report button is at the ready.
The real politics thread is for those of us ( left or right) who have a broad knowledge of the subject.
We respect a properly thought out argument.
But admittedly we don’t suffer fools gladly. You have to know your onions when debating on The Real Politics thread, otherwise it goes in Chat.

And the disruptors just can’t keep away…😂🤣😂🤣
Absolutely pathetic

I dint think the brief for this forum is laid out for politics at all!

Just read its description.

Please,please don’t let this be spiky. If you feel angry about this thread, go to the politics thread and leave this one alone. Noone forces participation.

In a non spiky way you can't improve care services without increasing taxes someone has to pay, increasing IHT is one way.
It doesn't affect you directly, it means your family would inherit less say £450k instead of £500k. £50k care levy out of all estates would make a big difference.

0nly 4% of estates pay IHT so abolishing it costs little Badenoch knows that but it's a good vote catcher

No arguments or judgements on this thread.
Write what you like, within those GN rules.

Personally, I dont feel I belong as such to any Party.
Though will vote for one of them, most likely, when the time comes.

Is IHT a good vote catcher?
Not so sure.

I dont tend to read polls. They always seem so biased towards a certain group or another.

I think posters will get used to non spiky politics.

^Is IHT a good vote catcher?
Not so sure^

Think I need to qualify that.
Not a good vote catcher amongst Tory voters. Maybe overall?

David49

In a non spiky way you can't improve care services without increasing taxes someone has to pay, increasing IHT is one way.
It doesn't affect you directly, it means your family would inherit less say £450k instead of £500k. £50k care levy out of all estates would make a big difference.

0nly 4% of estates pay IHT so abolishing it costs little Badenoch knows that but it's a good vote catcher

David49 are you sure it is just 4%?

I only ask as we live in the south east and we would be caught in the inheritance tax net. I would not put us in the 4% .

It is house prices in so-called affluent areas that push estates into paying this tax.

Wyllow3

I dint think the brief for this forum is laid out for politics at all!

Just read its description.

That’s what some of us are saying.
The OP tells us to read the guidelines for using the cafe.
Nowhere in the guild lines does it say it’s for light weight politics.

But there’s no reason why it can’t be either.
I hope Andy Burnham gets to grips with the river pollution scene, at one time it was going well but now is just terrible, why anyone would go wild swimming in them is beyond me.

Meandrogrog

David49

In a non spiky way you can't improve care services without increasing taxes someone has to pay, increasing IHT is one way.
It doesn't affect you directly, it means your family would inherit less say £450k instead of £500k. £50k care levy out of all estates would make a big difference.

0nly 4% of estates pay IHT so abolishing it costs little Badenoch knows that but it's a good vote catcher

David49 are you sure it is just 4%?

I only ask as we live in the south east and we would be caught in the inheritance tax net. I would not put us in the 4% .

It is house prices in so-called affluent areas that push estates into paying this tax.

The 4% is what’s being quoted but it is surprising isn’t it?
£500,000 is a modest 3 bed house in the South East.

Inheritance Tax was meant to stop the very wealthy from passing on too much to their heirs.

Oreo

Meandrogrog

David49

In a non spiky way you can't improve care services without increasing taxes someone has to pay, increasing IHT is one way.
It doesn't affect you directly, it means your family would inherit less say £450k instead of £500k. £50k care levy out of all estates would make a big difference.

0nly 4% of estates pay IHT so abolishing it costs little Badenoch knows that but it's a good vote catcher

David49 are you sure it is just 4%?

I only ask as we live in the south east and we would be caught in the inheritance tax net. I would not put us in the 4% .

It is house prices in so-called affluent areas that push estates into paying this tax.

The 4% is what’s being quoted but it is surprising isn’t it?
£500,000 is a modest 3 bed house in the South East.

Yes indeed. That is why I think Kemi’s plan is sensible 😊

Two things - can anyone give me a rational explanation as to why someone working and earning pays tax, but someone gifted a whole load of money having not got out of bed for it, doesn’t pay a brass farthing?

Also I don’t understand the rationale, that, given the premise that growth is badly needed and knowing that those with wealth do not spend, but squirrel it away. And yet to pay for the tax cut, the Tories propose to cut welfare - people who do spend any extra income on life’s necessities, like fuel, food, children’s clothing etc thus helping to grow the economy?

Whitewavemark2

Two things - can anyone give me a rational explanation as to why someone working and earning pays tax, but someone gifted a whole load of money having not got out of bed for it, doesn’t pay a brass farthing?

Also I don’t understand the rationale, that, given the premise that growth is badly needed and knowing that those with wealth do not spend, but squirrel it away. And yet to pay for the tax cut, the Tories propose to cut welfare - people who do spend any extra income on life’s necessities, like fuel, food, children’s clothing etc thus helping to grow the economy?

The gifted money will have already been taxed so is in effect being taxed twice. Also we all want to be able to give our heirs, in most cases our children, their inheritance. This is a basic human desire.

The wealthy also have to pay for life’s necessities. They also need to pay for the items you have listed. They also pay a lot of taxes. kemi’s idea for welfare to be paid by card to be spent on food and utilities, is a really good idea. After all it is taxpayer’s money.

Can I just give a gentle reminder to you that this is a gentle thread.