The Chronicles of Rishi

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

I managed a smile. I fear that most of the UK agrees with you. But we'll get bitten by Labour and shat on by the Conservatives.

I'll spoil it now: Farage as leader of the Tories and in power by 2030.

I agree with you on the former but not the latter. The Tories are now so extreme in their policy positioning that are are basically no different to UKIP/Reform so the return of Farage is a natural move and one I think will be attempted.

The good news is that if they do this, it will extend their time in the political wilderness.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

And Labour will be shitter than the Tories.

What are their policies?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by ianch99

I agree with you on the former but not the latter. The Tories are now so extreme in their policy positioning that are are basically no different to UKIP/Reform so the return of Farage is a natural move and one I think will be attempted.

The good news is that if they do this, it will extend their time in the political wilderness.

There I differ from you.

If you watch Farage on GB News, he only talks common sense. He points out where the Tories are going wrong, and Labour too.

I suspect that you draw your similarity claim from their positions on migration. Actually, Tory party (as per Sunak) and Farage are poles apart except on the boats, which are a small fraction of the numbers. Farage wants to stop the 900K or so per year of visa-grants with dependants because the country cannot absorb these numbers given the housing shortage.

The real problem is that the Tories will have left a mess more monumental than many people realise and so much so that Labour won't know how to get us out of it.

At the moment, the country runs courtesy of British business. That'll likely still bimble on if they aren't further taxed.


---------- Post added at 16:51 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ

What are their policies?

Doesn't matter really. But my take is that Labour has only one policy: Piss on what they think are the rich. The rest is their rhetoric.

As an executive, they will have to continue paying down the Covid debt. They will have to find a way of stimulating investment which requires cash that they won't have; that's how bad the Tories have performed.

[ianch99]

Paul Scully MP

https://twitter.com/scullyp/status/1764618324476846373

Otherwise we risk pushing ourselves into an ideological cul-de-sac. The standard deviation model is true in politics. Most people are in the middle. We can work with the bell curve or become the bell-ends. We need to make that decision. I fear the electorate already is!...

Oh yes ...

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

There I differ from you.

If you watch Farage on GB News, he only talks common sense. He points out where the Tories are going wrong, and Labour too.

I suspect that you draw your similarity claim from their positions on migration. Actually, Tory party (as per Sunak) and Farage are poles apart except on the boats, which are a small fraction of the numbers. Farage wants to stop the 900K or so per year of visa-grants with dependants because the country cannot absorb these numbers given the housing shortage.

The real problem is that the Tories will have left a mess more monumental than many people realise and so much so that Labour won't know how to get us out of it.

At the moment, the country runs courtesy of British business. That'll likely still bimble on if they aren't further taxed.


---------- Post added at 16:51 ---------- Previous post was at 16:45 ----------



Doesn't matter really. But my take is that Labour has only one policy: Piss on what they think are the rich. The rest is their rhetoric.

As an executive, they will have to continue paying down the Covid debt. They will have to find a way of stimulating investment which requires cash that they won't have; that's how bad the Tories have performed.

Labour pissing on what they think as the rich is still better than the tories pissing on anyone apart from the Uber rich.

Also, could you define labours perception of ‘rich’ please ?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Labour pissing on what they think as the rich is still better than the tories pissing on anyone apart from the Uber rich.

Also, could you define labours perception of ‘rich’ please ?

Absolutely no need to do this. Everyone, including you, broadly understands who Labour perceive as rich.

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Absolutely no need to do this. Everyone, including you, broadly understands who Labour perceive as rich.

I know that's your standard way of ducking a question you can't answer, but I honestly don't understand so would really like you to tell me.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Absolutely no need to do this. Everyone, including you, broadly understands who Labour perceive as rich.

I actually don’t so would you be so good as to clarify ?

[Sephiroth]

Anyone who votes Conservative represents people that Labour considers as rich. If I get to specifics, it'll just spur a nugatory rash of rebuttals and or arguments about minutiae.

There is perhaps something I can say - most parliamentary politicians are in it for themselves. The Tories think they can get power by promising that they'll make everyone richer (Thatcher got closest); Labour try to stoke up people they consider to be have nots. Labour knows they are out there and after a bad spell of Tory government they'll appeal to a lot of people who just want to give the Tories a kicking.

In fact, both parties are now total rubbish. I'm prolly one of the few true Conservatives who hope to eventually get back to better days.



---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:48 ----------

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

I actually don’t so would you be so good as to clarify ?

Please see my clarification in the preceding post.

[mrmistoffelees]

So here are some thoughts (albeit from a while ago) on what Labour and the British public clarify as to what make someone rich via their earnings

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articl...n-year-be-rich

There is actually a bracket that’s missing here and that is the 40% payers earning over 100k who lose a part of their tax free allowance


Sephi would you agree or disagree with the public’s sample set here ?

---------- Post added at 20:13 ---------- Previous post was at 19:57 ----------

Also,

‘ Anyone who votes Conservative represents people that Labour considers as rich.’

Not really true is it considering the red wall collapse at the last GE

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Anyone who votes Conservative represents people that Labour considers as rich. If I get to specifics, it'll just spur a nugatory rash of rebuttals and or arguments about minutiae.

There is perhaps something I can say - most parliamentary politicians are in it for themselves. The Tories think they can get power by promising that they'll make everyone richer (Thatcher got closest); Labour try to stoke up people they consider to be have nots. Labour knows they are out there and after a bad spell of Tory government they'll appeal to a lot of people who just want to give the Tories a kicking.

In fact, both parties are now total rubbish. I'm prolly one of the few true Conservatives who hope to eventually get back to better days.



---------- Post added at 19:51 ---------- Previous post was at 19:48 ----------



Please see my clarification in the preceding post.

New definition of "clarification" I hadn’t come across before…

Dictionary definition - an explanation or more details that makes something clear or easier to understand:

Seph’s definition - refuses to explain or give more details…

I believe you have missed out "lack of" before "clarification"…

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

So here are some thoughts (albeit from a while ago) on what Labour and the British public clarify as to what make someone rich via their earnings

https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articl...n-year-be-rich

There is actually a bracket that’s missing here and that is the 40% payers earning over 100k who lose a part of their tax free allowance


Sephi would you agree or disagree with the public’s sample set here ?

---------- Post added at 20:13 ---------- Previous post was at 19:57 ----------

Also,

‘ Anyone who votes Conservative represents people that Labour considers as rich.’

Not really true is it considering the red wall collapse at the last GE

Well, I must give you credit for attempting to answer the question you put to me. What you've done is provide a quantitative answer, while mine was 'qualitative'. (In other words you did better than me!)

The article is 7 years old, so perhaps £100K would be more realistic than £70K. But the true point of the article is that whoever is considered by Labour to be rich must be asked to pay more in tax. Btw, with the average salary being c. £36K/annum, I suspect that most Labour supporters would stick with £70K or even lower.

On your red wall point, yes you're right.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Absolutely no need to do this. Everyone, including you, broadly understands who Labour perceive as rich.

We know but it seems you clearly do not so an answer please. Where have Labour defined who is "rich"?

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by ianch99

We know but it seems you clearly do not so an answer please

Already answered.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Already answered.

Not really. Where have Labour defined who they "consider", as you put it, as "rich"?

A reminder, you said:

Anyone who votes Conservative represents people that Labour considers as rich.