Election 2019, Week 1

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Didn’t say that - I said the companies (and it was mainly institutions that held the vast majority of shares) would be able to write off those losses against tax.

But you knew that, and decided to mischaracterise my comments.

(FYI, I worked in the Telecomms industry at that time, for Cable Companies and BT Cellnet (as was)).

They still make losses from it. The tax adjustments mitigate against losses, they don't eliminate them.
Simple example: £100m profit with 20% tax = £20m to pay leaving £80m gain. Instead suffer £50m losses leads to £50m profit = £10m tax paid leaving £40m gain, rather than the £30m gain if the losses weren't allowed against tax.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by denphone

That is the vexed question though as to what will transpire at the forthcoming General Election as l have just read some quotes from Rob Ford, the politics professor and co-author of a seminal book on the Ukip vote.

Here are several of his quotes from today from his Twitter account.

It is a conundrum isn't it Den?

Farage is clever enough to work it all out i'm sure Like Bozza he's only in it for himself, and his personal wealth.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by ianch99

If you cannot come up with any of these examples yourself then there is no point debating the point with you ..

I sense your immediate stance is to equate "Deserving" with "Unemployed". There is a whole spectrum of situations between the destitute and the wealthy. What is up for discussion is the shape of this distribution.

You made the statement, i’m Just enquiring how you would administer it.

[denphone]

Here is the latest polling out today, from Panelbase.

Westminster
Con 40% (+4%)
Lab 29% (+2%)
Lib Dem 14% (-3%)
Brexit Party 9% (-2%)
Green 3% (NC%)

EU Referendum
Remain 53% (+2%)
Leave 47% (-2%)

Fieldwork Oct 30-31

Originally Posted by denphone

Here is the latest polling out today, from Panelbase.

EU Referendum
Remain 53% (+2%)
Leave 47% (-2%)

Fieldwork Oct 30-31

Nothing to see here - Exactly what all those polls were saying prior to the 2016 EU Referendum.

[jfman]

Except the ones that didn't of course.

https://ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/

[mrmistoffelees]

Anyone had any MP's at their doors yet?

[denphone]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Anyone had any MP's at their doors yet?

Not yet but the last one that knocked on our front door in the last election was answered at the door by my bigger brother nearly jumped out of his skin in shock at the size of my big brother.

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Is that dated right? Or, should it be 2019. Or is it there for further/future comparison.


Genuine Q !

Yes.

It's tell us what the % is of those who voted in 2016, would now vote in the General Election, 2019.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Anyone had any MP's at their doors yet?

If you're not in a marginal constituency they won't bother ! Crazy electoral system we have.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Mr K

If you're not in a marginal constituency they won't bother !

But . . but . . if they don't come and speak to us, we won't know what we're voting for

. . and then people will say we're thick

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Carth

But . . but . . if they don't come and speak to us, we won't know what we're voting for

. . and then people will say we're thick

What will people say if you vote for them after they have spoken to you

Originally Posted by Mr K

If you're not in a marginal constituency they won't bother ! Crazy electoral system we have.

I live in a Tory/SNP swing seat, so I might expect a visit except for the fact that I live way out in the sticks. The only time I've ever had canvassers at the door was during the independence referendum. Both sides showed up for that.

[Anonymouse]

I can't remember if I've said this before, but since the UK is (in theory) a democracy I'm going to say it anyway.

From the Notebooks of Lazarus Long:

If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for...but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong.
If this is too blind for your taste, consult some well-meaning fool (there is always one around) and ask his advice. Then vote the other way. This enables you to be a good citizen (if such is your wish) without spending the enormous amount of time on it that truly intelligent exercise of franchise requires.

- Robert A. Heinlein, Time Enough For Love

I have followed this rule for decades. Unfortunately, when I first started doing so, I was led (or pushed) to a logical conclusion Heinlein might not have thought of: what happens when you want to vote against all the parties because you don't trust or agree with any of them? The only logical answer to this is to vote for none, i.e. not to vote at all. So except for the 1997 election, I haven't voted for decades.

(Even then, I was acting in accordance with Heinlein's principle - I wasn't voting for Labour, because Tony Blair always got my back up with that creepy smile; I was voting against the Tories because I'd bloody well had enough of 'em and so, I imagine, had millions of other voters. Of course "New Labour" turned out to be just a different flavour of Conservatism, but that's another debate.)

This, however, does not mean, as several politicians have said, that I and the millions who agree with me are apathetic. This is not the case. We do care. We simply object to all the available choices. Which is why I want to see a new choice added to the ballot paper, one familiar to Richard Pryor fans from the remake of Brewster's Millions:

NONE OF THE ABOVE.

Give us that option and I will quite happily vote. Such an option would mean that abstainers would no longer effectively be disenfranchised because their voice wasn't heard. With that option, they would have to be heard - and with millions voting that way as I strongly suspect they would, it would make all the parties sit up and take notice.

This option seems to me to be the ultimate expression of democracy: a way of telling all the parties you don't agree with any of them, without wasting your vote by spoiling the ballot paper or being self-disenfranchised by not voting at all.

For the record, I voted for Brexit, which I'm sure will come as no surprise to y'all. I am frankly disgusted with the way successive Prime Ministers (none of whom we actually voted for!) have dragged their feet over this. We, the electorate who pay their damn salaries, told them what we wanted them to do. It is their responsibility and their duty to do as they were damn well told. The size of the Referendum majority was and is irrelevant. It was a majority vote. They should therefore abide by it. End of.

"But will you be voting this time?" I hear you cry. Hmm. Good question. I haven't decided yet. Though Boris Johnson seems to be pushing for what I and millions of others told the government what we wanted done, I'm not convinced by him or what he's offering.

Frankly, I don't trust him. Or Corbyn. Or any of them. I don't really believe democracy works any more in this country. NONE OF THE ABOVE is the only proper answer IMO.

"Suppose They Gave An Election And Nobody Came?" - now that I'd pay to see!

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Anonymouse

Though Boris Johnson seems to be pushing for what I and millions of others told the government what we wanted done, I'm not convinced by him or what he's offering

What exactly is he offering, to tear up the last ten years of tory rule and blame others for his and his parties short comings, we've screwed it up for a decade so give us another go at it isn't reason to vote for him imo. Plus if his own brother doesn't trust him, why should we.