A Labour Government.

Who cares if fat cats running the stock exchange take their money elsewhere?
The whole point is that they do not spend it here. That's how they are such fat cats.

By the way, Brexit will ensure that they take it elsewhere anyway.

Jen, people are beginning to believe; it will depend how much that can be moved in two weeks.

What Labour could really do with now, if those who have attacked Labour from within in the recent past really want a Labour government and not Tory light, is for these people to come out and get behind the leadership and stop throwing their toys out of the pram because everything is not being gifted to them on a plate this time round.

No fat cats lay tax in this country?

That's a good idea, GracesGran, Labour supporters getting behind the Labour leadership if you don't want another Tory government.

The point of voting Labour is to curb TM's ardour - Labour will not get in, so don't fret about that; but if you think TM's hard Brexit/bloody difficult woman; austerity; privatisation; cuts in social and health services and in policing - if you would like to see these at the very least watered down a bit, then, in most constituencies, vote Labour!

durhamjen So the only thing you picked out of Oldwoman's well thought out post was the mention of the fat cats of the stock exchange taking their money elsewhere. As she said after all the wealthier amongst us up and leave who will there be left to pay higher and higher taxes?

For me it's a case of between a rock and a hard place. I do not want a Tory government but do not want Corbyn and McDonald running the country , I fear both

No, sunseeker, I read it all, although it would have been easier with paragraphs - and I know I will be criticised for saying that.

One of the Tory mantras is about trickle down money. It doesn't happen. Fat cats take their money offshore and do not pay tax.
If the tax gap was closed, i.e., if they were not allowed to do this, there would be no financial problems in this country.
That is rather important, don't you think.
If all fat cats paid their taxes properly, we would not have the cuts in the NHS, education, the police, social care.
That is what is important, and comes down from the fat cats comment. Don't you agree?

durhamjen - I apologise if my style of posting made things difficult for you - I will try to do better in future

Tax loopholes have been around ever since taxes. I agree these should be closed but are you saying that somehow these fat cats are avoiding income tax and national insurance payments? As far as I am aware that is not possible - but I bow to your better expertise if you are a tax accountant.

How many of these fat cats are managing to avoid paying tax that if they were all to pay their taxes the NHS, education, police and social care could all be saved at a stroke?

It's hard for me to understand how anyone could be against the main proposals in the Labour Manifesto: Free university education, like I had in the 60/70s; renationalising the NHS so that we can keep the taxes we are paying for it within the system, paying for care, rather than going into Richard Branson's pockets, renationalising the railways so that the profits go back into the rail system instead of to foreign governments; building genuinely affordable houses so that our grandchildren will have somewhere decent to live, all programmes costed, and mainly paid for not by excessive borrowing, but by taxing the top 5% a little more. What's not to like?

"As damaging as the U-turn itself, the episode drew attention to the lack of anything much by way of a positive offer from the Tories. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has audited the promises of the Tories and Labour and castigates both for their lack of honesty. I hear a different complaint from Conservative campaigners. This is that Mrs May has given them nothing to sell on the doorstep. They report that voters can cite popular offers from Labour while all anyone can recall about the Tory prospectus is the things that they plan to take away from people."

Andrew Rawnsley in the Observer.

Iam64 Sun 28-May-17 08:56:08

"I'm away and have Internet, which may go any minute. I read the unpleasant, aggressive OP and hoped to see some positive comments to follow those from whitewave and Anya."

I certainly didn't read the OP in any way 'unpleasant nor aggressive'.

If you haven't already done so, I 'd urge you to look at anya 's link. It shows in very simple blue and white the difference between Tory and Labour borrowing.

Oldwoman, read www.taxresearch.org.uk
He's a tax expert.

Maybe the tories have got it wrong again.

"The shift away from living standards as an election-defining issue might be because on the fundamental question of whether families will be better or worse off in the coming years, the outlook is disastrous. We’re facing down a parliament containing the toxic combination of stagnant incomes overall, falling incomes for the poorer half of the population and the biggest increase in inequality since Thatcher.

Voters are heading to the polling booths with their pay packets shrinking for only the third time since the Second World War. Politicians love to talk about the sunny uplands of the coming years. Instead, faced with the grim prospect of millions of families getting poorer, we’ve decided to file living standards away in the “too depressing to deal with” folder.

What’s happening to family budgets matters far more to people now than talk of article 50. Of course, some elements of the forthcoming squeeze are linked to the decision to leave the EU, such as the rising cost of imports driving up the prices we pay in shops. But far from all of them are related to this."
Concentration on Brexit might not be such a good idea after all.

Labour is better at managing the economy than the Tories - always have been.

POGS, what did you think saying "that joke Corbyn" meant if it wasn't unpleasant?

So calling May names such as Maybot isn't unpleasant but calling Corbyn a joke is

durhamjen - I tried the link you provided and received the following message

This site can’t provide a secure connection

www.taxresearch.org.uk sent an invalid response.

Sorry meant to add, could you provide a link to a site which is safe to connect to

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog

I've just done that. Mine's okay. Lots of people on here use taxresearch to get information.

I do understand your concern about Corbyn, Anniebach (and others) and it's one shared by so many. He's not the leader I would have chosen. But I'm voting for the party and its policies rather than its personalities. There are still many good people in the Labour party. And of course for every Diane there is a Boris.

The Labour manifesto is one I can support. We can't get away from the fact that we need to pay more for our healthcare, as do other comparable countries. And we must fight for our public services and the NHS - a healthcare system in public hands just makes sound economic sense, as well as being more ethical. As does public ownership of our transport system, which is currently chaotic and fragmented, as well as over-priced. Its re-nationalisation is hardly radical, it just makes sense, and brings us back in line with other countries with better provision. The German government, for example, still owns all shares in the efficient and affordable Deutsche Bahn.

I'm not sure about the abolition of tuition fees, and would rather have seen a drastic reduction and a cap on them.

But the bottom line is, I can't bear the thought of another five years of Tory government, hitting the most vulnerable and benefitting the greedy. I could never vote to be part of that.

Whitewave there really is not evidence for that view. It has been talked up by the right wing press and I am disappointed you have swallowed it.

The Tories manage the economy better for the rich - that is correct, but they are currently not managing it better for;

The homeless
The working poor
The disabled
Education
Training
Those with care needs
Some with health needs
The elderly poor
Some approaching retirement

Would you like more? An economy is supposed to serve a country and its citizens not enslave them into working for "the economy".

Well put maggie.