Voting quandry

I have the problem of supporting Welsh Labour but no wish to support Corbyn , Wales is in danger of having a Tory majority for the first time

By 2020 there will be no inheritance tax to be paid for any couple with a home less than a million. That's a big tax perk for the rich.

DJ I'm not sure I understand that article. I thought CGT had increased for wealthier people since the last Labour govt? As for income tax, there have been increases on the wealthy by way of cutting back on reliefs like pension contributions. I'm not saying the rich have been clobbered with huge taxes but I doubt they feel they are paying less. In any event the gap between rich and poor, in terms of net earnings at least, has been narrowing. Again, net earnings isn't the be all and end all of the (in)equality debate, but it's an important point and particularly relevant to the discussion in hand.
In any event, my point was simply that we have not seen the wholesale giveaways to the rich that some posters seem to imagine have occurred since Labour lost power.

Fitzy, they are not practical

Annie I've read he intends to borrow 100bn but I've also read he might relieve the wealthiest 10% of the population of 20% of everything they own. We'll just have to wait for the manifesto, but none of these ideas would be practical.

No, but his giveaways to the wealthy are still going through.

Athough he's not actually in the government now...

"George Osborne’s latest tax cuts for the wealthy will leave him with a Herculean task of reducing borrowing by £32bn to meet his budget surplus rule in 2019-20, according to the Resolution Foundation.

A string of giveaways in the next couple of years will increase government borrowing above his previous forecasts and force him to find £32bn of tax rises and spending cuts in the last year of the parliament.

The thinktank said the decision to offer tax cuts to wealthier groups in the form of higher tax thresholds and lower capital gains tax was “misguided” when official forecasts showed there was a £56bn gap in the government’s finances.
Budget 2016: Osborne's policies help the rich and hurt the poor, says thinktank - Politics live
Rolling coverage of all the day’s political developments as they happen, including George Osborne’s morning interviews and the Institute for Fiscal Studies’ briefing on the budget
Read more

“By increasing spending through expensive and poorly targeted tax cuts, the chancellor has created a Herculean task of reducing borrowing by £32bn in a pre-election year. It is hard to see a government seeking to build a pre-election feelgood factor delivering a consolidation comparable to that seen during the chancellor’s first two years in office.

“We think it is misguided to be giving away money on increases in higher thresholds for the personal allowance and 40p rate, which we estimate will cost around £2bn,” said the Resolution Foundation chief economist, Matthew Whittaker."

Less than a year ago.

GG I don't think the wealthy have been given much in the way of tax cuts? But my point is simply that while the Tories could usefully spend more, it seems to me that Labour will spend us into ruin, and the NHS etc. will suffer more

It is also 'dangerous' and 'expensive' to our national income to keep cutting taxes for those who could actually afford to pay them surely Fitzy54.

Mcdonald said this morning the money he proposes to borrow £5billion , is for infrastructure only, the rest will come from taxing the wealthy !

Isn't it rather "dangerous" to cut money for health, education, elderly care, and the myriad social structures (day centres for elderly/disabled people, Sure Start centres for the very young, youth clubs for teenagers, etc. etc.) that seeks to integrate people into society and address their specific needs? My feeling is you will end up with a sick, ill-educated and apathetic (or hate-filled) population that feels no enthusiasm for, or commitment to, their work, their community or their country.

I don't know GG, but we'll see when the manifestos come out and I' sure they won't be anything like as expensive. I agree, maybe too far in the opposite direction but I'm not for dangerous profligacy.

Where are the costings for the Cons Fitzy? In fact - where are the policies?

Interesting article in the Times today about voting in town of Auchel in the French Presedential elections. It's a coalmining town in their rust belt north, previously staunchly communist, with roads named for the likes of Lenin. It's now staunchly National Front, apparently attracted by Le Pen's description of her politics as against the arrogant elite and anti-establishment. Sounds quite familiar.

All that and three days more holiday! Why didn't somebody think of this before?
Any mention of the cost? No need to worry about that I guess. All paid for by the Elite/Establishment - Genius! I'm sure they will be only to grateful to help out and will pay up double quick.
DJ - very interesting article, and a bit how I imagined things. Tough going for the first 10 years or so whatever happens, and it could go either way after that. But what caught my eye was the admission that there were some excellent arguments from others with a different view, though he didn't say whether those views applied to the initial period. I really can't see any way things work out well for us in the short to medium term.

Corbyn is the only one who is taking on the Elite/Establishment & until that is done, there can be no significant improvement in UK
#GE2017

Lots of information on this website. I do lots of homework on it.

ukandeu.ac.uk/predicting-the-brexit-gains-and-losses/

I think, POGS, although of course I don't know, that those who comment on the problems of the British economy are commenting on the 'strong and steady' hands we keep hearing the Cons have. As they are not running or offering to run other countries I imagine those countries are irrelevant in this instance.

Yes POGS, I think we have done ok in comparison to many others, especially those in the Eurozone.

A good point POGS

DD - Just one set of bad figures though, and still showing growth, albeit low and quite a big drop. I think we need to see three consecutive sets of quarterly figures with negative growth before we are in recession?
But I guess by stagnation you simply meant we are moving moving towards zero growth, which I accept is correct.
But one bad set of figures doesn't necessarily show a trend.
Brexit will clobber us in due course anyway!

Do those who continually post negatively on the UK finances have a clue how other countries are doing, is anybody interested in how the UK finances are for the most part very similar to other EU countries, better than some worse than others.

Look at the GDP, the Inflation Rates , the State of the EU Economy in general, the State of the Italian Banks etc. etc.
You might just find find that we have not been fairing too badly.

Will it change, could it change, of course but do your homework and look at the bigger picture and you just might understand how we have really been doing.

Why? The latest Treasury statistics were bad. We haven't quite dipped into recession, but we're not far off.

...or at least a bit early.