This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Rudi Hedman Caterham 19 Apr 17 12.38pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Y Ddraig Goch
I was the same, thought the coalition worked well. Yes I don't know where people got 'shambles' from. They may not have done a great deal but it wasn't shambolic. Their voters deserted them in 2015 for no political benefit. I most remember Lib Dems policy of no tax under £10k and now rising to about £12k. The Tories claimed that. Can't remember the other good few policies they wanted agreed and signed before doing the deal.
COYP |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 19 Apr 17 12.47pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Rudi Hedman
Yes I don't know where people got 'shambles' from. They may not have done a great deal but it wasn't shambolic. Their voters deserted them in 2015 for no political benefit. I most remember Lib Dems policy of no tax under £10k and now rising to about £12k. The Tories claimed that. Can't remember the other good few policies they wanted agreed and signed before doing the deal. Funny how the media narrative on Clegg worked, huh? Everything was his fault, whilst the flagship Lib Dem policy on raising the tax-free allowance was claimed by the Tories.
Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
nickgusset Shizzlehurst 19 Apr 17 12.49pm | |
---|---|
Once again, may doesn't actually answer a question in pmq's and gets away with it.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
DanH SW2 19 Apr 17 12.59pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
What makes you think there was an "inability" to increase investment on infrastructure? Or for that matter investment in education and healthcare? Tax take per capita will be impacted by earnings per capita and the tax rate. If tax take per capita falls, as you suggest that would imply lower earnings per capita or reduction in tax rates. Earnings per capita has broadly increased since 1979, however average taxes on personal income have fallen from 10% of GDP to 9% in that time. That's over 1% lower than in the US, having been slightly higher in 1979. It's also lower than Canada, NZ, the Nordics and a number of other OECD countries. Tax on corporate profits has also shrunk as a share of GDP from 3.6% of GDP to 2.5% since the Tories came back to power. Social security contributions are also way below the OECD average and have reduced under the Tories. This is ideological. The Tories have decided to slash spending on infrastructure, policing, healthcare, education, while simultaneously reducing the tax burden. Reducing tax on companies doesn't promote inward investment in the way that politicians would have you believe. There are huge amounts of corporate profits which sit on balance sheets doing nothing. It actually takes money out of the economy far from creating some sort of multiplier effect. But more even than just talking about tax take - the government has been using QE for years now to prop up asset prices. This is completely irresponsible, and also ignores what they should be doing with monetary policy - increase money supply to invest in the economy and improve productivity. Creating asset bubbles with public finances just helps line the pockets of those who own the assets - the already wealthy. Using the argument that printing money for government spending just creates inflation is only true when an economy is at full employment - something ours is nowhere near. You can increase money supply and increase GDP in real terms up to that point. But this is against Tory ideology. Always enjoy the deafening silence after someone who clearly actually knows their economic stuff posts.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
matt_himself Matataland 19 Apr 17 1.08pm | |
---|---|
Something to watch out for during the election:
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
matt_himself Matataland 19 Apr 17 1.11pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
What makes you think there was an "inability" to increase investment on infrastructure? Or for that matter investment in education and healthcare? Tax take per capita will be impacted by earnings per capita and the tax rate. If tax take per capita falls, as you suggest that would imply lower earnings per capita or reduction in tax rates. Earnings per capita has broadly increased since 1979, however average taxes on personal income have fallen from 10% of GDP to 9% in that time. That's over 1% lower than in the US, having been slightly higher in 1979. It's also lower than Canada, NZ, the Nordics and a number of other OECD countries. Tax on corporate profits has also shrunk as a share of GDP from 3.6% of GDP to 2.5% since the Tories came back to power. Social security contributions are also way below the OECD average and have reduced under the Tories. This is ideological. The Tories have decided to slash spending on infrastructure, policing, healthcare, education, while simultaneously reducing the tax burden. Reducing tax on companies doesn't promote inward investment in the way that politicians would have you believe. There are huge amounts of corporate profits which sit on balance sheets doing nothing. It actually takes money out of the economy far from creating some sort of multiplier effect. But more even than just talking about tax take - the government has been using QE for years now to prop up asset prices. This is completely irresponsible, and also ignores what they should be doing with monetary policy - increase money supply to invest in the economy and improve productivity. Creating asset bubbles with public finances just helps line the pockets of those who own the assets - the already wealthy. Using the argument that printing money for government spending just creates inflation is only true when an economy is at full employment - something ours is nowhere near. You can increase money supply and increase GDP in real terms up to that point. But this is against Tory ideology. But surely Labour are just as culpable for what you claim as they were in power for a substantial part of the post 1979 era?
"That was fun and to round off the day, I am off to steal a charity collection box and then desecrate a place of worship.” - Smokey, The Selhurst Arms, 26/02/02 |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Cucking Funt Clapham on the Back 19 Apr 17 1.32pm | |
---|---|
Sums it up for me. Attachment: IMG_20170419_133111.jpg (43.72Kb)
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Hrolf The Ganger 19 Apr 17 1.52pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Once again, may doesn't actually answer a question in pmq's and gets away with it. Wow. A politician not answering a question. When Jeremy Corbyn answers a question most of his party wish he hadn't. Not that they could do better in most cases. Corbyn's Labour = worst quality of MPs ever.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
CambridgeEagle Sydenham 19 Apr 17 1.54pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by matt_himself
But surely Labour are just as culpable for what you claim as they were in power for a substantial part of the post 1979 era? I certainly think Labour didn't do enough. They halted the huge increase in inequality seen between 1979 and 1997, but they didn't reverse it. They reduced the lower rates of income tax but did nothing about the higher rates until after the GFC, which has subsequently been reduced by the Tories. They also increase NICs on everyone, but the biggest burden on low to middle incomes. But government spending did increase as a proportion of GDP under Labour steadily up until the GFC, and debt as a proportion of GDP were exactly the same as in 1997 when the GFC started. The serious failing was deregulation of banks and financial markets and then a lack of coherent response in 2009/10. They also could and should have done a lot more to improve productivity. The insistence that 50% of people go to University at the expense of other ideas of how to improve educational achievement and prepare people for work is one example I can think of. Problems with the UK's balance of payments stem from 1979 and Thatcher's destruction of manufacturing. it has also got significantly worse since 2010. Labour did little though in terms of industrial policy or addressing productivity to help. There are obviously external factors which influence this such as the increased availability of cheap imports, but Germany manages to run a surplus and has a far higher share of it's economy still in manufacturing. People can point to financial markets in London being so dominant, but outside of London there are 55m people and huge scope for increasing productivity and investing in manufacturing. Thatcher dismantled much of what did exist in the North and didn't bother replacing it with productive industry. Just said said there's no such thing as society and washed her hands of them.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Lyons550 Shirley 19 Apr 17 2.05pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by nickgusset
Once again, may doesn't actually answer a question in pmq's and gets away with it. She did answer them...just not in the way you wanted
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Lyons550 Shirley 19 Apr 17 2.09pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
I certainly think Labour didn't do enough. They halted the huge increase in inequality seen between 1979 and 1997, but they didn't reverse it. They reduced the lower rates of income tax but did nothing about the higher rates until after the GFC, which has subsequently been reduced by the Tories. They also increase NICs on everyone, but the biggest burden on low to middle incomes. But government spending did increase as a proportion of GDP under Labour steadily up until the GFC, and debt as a proportion of GDP were exactly the same as in 1997 when the GFC started. The serious failing was deregulation of banks and financial markets and then a lack of coherent response in 2009/10. They also could and should have done a lot more to improve productivity. The insistence that 50% of people go to University at the expense of other ideas of how to improve educational achievement and prepare people for work is one example I can think of. Problems with the UK's balance of payments stem from 1979 and Thatcher's destruction of manufacturing. it has also got significantly worse since 2010. Labour did little though in terms of industrial policy or addressing productivity to help. There are obviously external factors which influence this such as the increased availability of cheap imports, but Germany manages to run a surplus and has a far higher share of it's economy still in manufacturing. People can point to financial markets in London being so dominant, but outside of London there are 55m people and huge scope for increasing productivity and investing in manufacturing. Thatcher dismantled much of what did exist in the North and didn't bother replacing it with productive industry. Just said said there's no such thing as society and washed her hands of them. Ironically an area that is starting and will continue to grow as a result of Brexit
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
CambridgeEagle Sydenham 19 Apr 17 2.24pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Lyons550
Ironically an area that is starting and will continue to grow as a result of Brexit We shall see! This is purely off the back of sterling depreciation, which could reverse given any number of external shocks. It's not off the back of any actual policy or concerted effort.
|
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.