UK Politics General Discussion

[rob666]

I think you have summed up where we are quite nicely, the don’t knows are largely Tories that will have to be dragged out kicking and screaming to vote but will vote Tory if they vote at all.

There have always been a considerable number of "don't knows" who vote Tory, virtually every last time.
More than on the left.
These things rarely change.
Likewise good weather brings out the left, as they have fewer cars, and live in bigger built up areas.
If the sun shines, and the polls don't change...

 

[Matt N]

Green Party want a maximum 55mph speed limit in the UK which would include motorways. Jeez we are going backwards not forwards. Why are we bothering with all these technical advances and safety systems in vehicles only to go backwards.

“TR115 On major roads outside of built up areas, the maximum speed limit allowed would be 55m.p.h., to maximise the efficiency of fuel use as well as improving safety.”

Our 2024 General Election Manifesto - Green Party

Real hope.Real change. Millions of people in our country are feeling insecure and deeply worried about the future. We live in one of the richest countries on the planet, yet nurses are using food banks, our children’s schools are crumbling, a roof over our heads is all too often unaffordable...

policy.greenparty.org.uk

As much as I would say my political beliefs, while not overly strong or entrenched, lean left-wing, and I absolutely appreciate the sentiment behind incentivising increased public transport use, I’m not sure I agree with all of these carte blanche universal speed limit reductions.

I’m not against speed limit reductions full stop. I agree with 20mph in some areas such as town centres and residential cul-de-sacs. However, I am not a fan of the universal 20mph policy brought in by Welsh Labour because I disagree with the way in which they have seemingly just turned any 30mph road into a 20mph road with little thought; near where I live, many key arterial roads have become 20mph under the new Welsh legislation, despite them being designed differently to, say, a town centre or residential cul-de-sac and not carrying the same risk to pedestrians.

To me, universally reducing motorways and dual carriageways to 55mph makes even less sense. Motorways are statistically our safest roads in terms of accident numbers, and in many cases, they are built rurally enough that air pollution for people living around them isn’t too much of an issue. I can at least understand the safety perspective behind 20mph in built-up areas to some extent, but it seems like there’s little motivation behind universal 55mph on motorways other than to make car use more of a pain.

I also don’t necessarily agree with rural areas being universally limited to 40mph. While some are admittedly quite windy, there are some quite good, straight rural roads where doing more than 40mph is definitely safe.

With that being said, I don’t disagree with the idea of reducing country lane speed limits, which the Greens also propose. I’ve long thought that it would not be safe to travel at anywhere near 60mph along many of those country roads.

 

[rob666]

I think their point is Matt, all engines, both petrol and electric, use far less energy at 55 than at 70.
So slower tends to be greener, and around 55, or "double anchor" as the yankee spankers know it, is a very efficient limit...and encourages other methods of transport into the bargain.

 

[GaryH]

Crazy thing is in wales, I am forced to do a crawling 20mph down a wide road with markings, clear view ahead, lighting. Yet I can do 60mph down a single track lane with minimal visability, no street lights etc.

And it’s been proven in a modern engine 55mph is no longer the most efficient speed. It used to be on engines but not now. Sick of this “oh let’s but the speed limit” all the time. Let’s have some common sense - if any still exists.

 

[Matt.GC]

The Greens aren't targeting the average motorway driver vote though. So if a party that has just a single MP can get people talking about their policies, then it's partially a successful policy isn't it?

 

[BigT]

There have always been a considerable number of "don't knows" who vote Tory, virtually every last time.
More than on the left.
These things rarely change.
Likewise good weather brings out the left, as they have fewer cars, and live in bigger built up areas.
If the sun shines, and the polls don't change...

I would put myself in the don’t knows, I’d normally vote Tory but do think something needs to change, however I’m hardly going to vote for a party that is proposing to give me a £6k tax bill in the first month they are in charge am I?
I don’t know who is standing in my area yet (East Staffordshire) but will vote tactically this time to keep the Labour candidate out.

 

[Matt N]

I would put myself in the don’t knows, I’d normally vote Tory but do think something needs to change, however I’m hardly going to vote for a party that is proposing to give me a £6k tax bill in the first month they are in charge am I?
I don’t know who is standing in my area yet (East Staffordshire) but will vote tactically this time to keep the Labour candidate out.

If you don't mind me asking, when exactly have Labour proposed that they will raise taxes by £6,000? Both Starmer and Reeves seem keen to emphasise that they're not hiking taxes and want to keep taxes low for working people; they've criticised "the highest tax burden in 70 years" under the Tories a fair bit.

 

[BigT]

If you don't mind me asking, when exactly have Labour proposed that they will raise taxes by £6,000? Both Starmer and Reeves seem keen to emphasise that they're not hiking taxes and want to keep taxes low for working people; they've criticised "the highest tax burden in 70 years" under the Tories a fair bit.

VAT on school fees.

 

[rob666]

Whoever gets in gets awarded the poisoned chalice of massive costs to come...with limited income, especially after flipping stupid election promises on both sides...as usual.
Simple as that.
The routine joke for political changeover is a note in the Treasury till saying...sorry, we spent up...from the previous government.
This time it is very real...massive costs due, ageing population to pay for it, triple lock funding for the old gits, a million neets sitting in front of screens getting sadder, not feeding the economy, and brexit and covid still to be paid for...in full, in a stagnant economy.
I'm happy to see a 5% increase in income tax...for all, including the low paid, right down to zero earnings, if the money was spent to fix the stuff in desperate need, nhs, education, justice, housing and transport.

Going right back to Blair...Thatchers massive shift to the right screwed things up for generations...there was no shift back left with cool tony, he promised no new taxes too...when he should have taxed the rich, but that wouldn't be cool with all his new voters.
Help your family, screw the rest, and greed is good.
We have had two whole generations of than, I don't think a single government, or two even, will bring back the balance as it was when I was a child.

And sorry mate...

VAT on school fees.

About bloody time.
You pay to give your kids a head start against others, and you know it works.
You can't complain about the tax bill.
Let's hope they slap vat on all private medicine as well, from day one, and all revenue to the nhs.
That would keep them in power for a full generation.

 

[pluk]

Then you have the vast amount "don't knows" and "undecided" voters. Lers face it, most of these people are Tories, they're just ashamed to admit it. Some of them will reluctantly turn up on polling day like zombies and put their X in a Tory box anyway. And Labour are not at all popular, they're just the default option for many people whilst the Conservatives reputation sits in the toilet bowl. If you don't really want any of them, and you think the Tories are brown bread anyway, you may decide just to not bother as you may expect the result to be a forgone anyway.

That's a very reductive way to think of floating voters. I've voted for all the major parties over the years depending what I think is right for the country at the time. That doesn't make me a Tory, the whole point is I don't have a default.

Before now I've voted against my manifestal and to some extent ideological preference in favour of my belief in the competence of one party over another, and the opposite. It's all balancing act each election time. I don't see either side as good or evil, as inherently right or wrong. It's not that black and white.

This election is Labours to lose though, and apathy if they dont present as being worth a vote against conservative must be a real risk. The pathetic fannying about over Diane Abbot I think has been more harmful to Labour than they realise, they need to get it together now to see it home.

 

[GaryH]

People pay for their kids to go to private school only because the state schools are so poor these days. I wouldn’t say it’s for a head start, it’s just to get a decent education.

If they want to get some extra money in, legalise some drugs and tax them.

 

[BigT]

Whoever gets in gets awarded the poisoned chalice of massive costs to come...with limited income, especially after flipping stupid election promises on both sides...as usual.
Simple as that.
The routine joke for political changeover is a note in the Treasury till saying...sorry, we spent up...from the previous government.
This time it is very real...massive costs due, ageing population to pay for it, triple lock funding for the old gits, a million neets sitting in front of screens getting sadder, not feeding the economy, and brexit and covid still to be paid for...in full, in a stagnant economy.
I'm happy to see a 5% increase in income tax...foe all, including the low paid, right down to zero earnings, if the money was spent to fix the stuff in desperate need, nhs, education, justice, housing and transport.

Going right back to Blair...Thatchers massive shift to the right screwed things up for generations...there was no shift back left with cool tony, he promised no new taxes too...when he should have taxed the rich, but that wouldn't be cool with all his new voters.
Help your family, screw the rest, and greed is good.
We have had two whole generations of than, I don't think a single government, or two even, will bring back the balance as it was when I was a child.

And sorry mate...

About bloody time.
You pay to give your kids a head start against others, and you know it works.
You can't complain about the tax bill.
Let's hope they slap vat on all private medicine as well, from day one, and all revenue to the nhs.
That would keep them in power for a full generation.

Well turkey’s still aren’t going to vote for Christmas.

Private healthcare is a different story that’s mostly paid for by insurance which if you are in a company scheme you already pay tax on that as a BIK.

I’ve said it before adding VAT onto school fees is tax neutral, it won’t bring in a single penny extra as some will move children to state schools and also if private schools have to charge VAT they will also reclaim VAT from everything they buy which they can’t at the moment.
It just sells well to a demographic, we are taxing the rich more which is partly true but then they are giving it back to the schools in VAT reclamation so those schools will have an even bigger advantage.

 

[rob666]

Been costed out that it will raise between 1.3 and 1.7 billion for the state, net.
You been reading the funny papers again.

 

[pluk]

Well turkey’s still aren’t going to vote for Christmas.

Private healthcare is a different story that’s mostly paid for by insurance which if you are in a company scheme you already pay tax on that as a BIK.

I’ve said it before adding VAT onto school fees is tax neutral, it won’t bring in a single penny extra as some will move children to state schools and also if private schools have to charge VAT they will also reclaim VAT from everything they buy which they can’t at the moment.
It just sells well to a demographic, we are taxing the rich more which is partly true but then they are giving it back to the schools in VAT reclamation so those schools will have an even bigger advantage.

Surely if it works out that way the schools would be able to reduce your fees to a roughly equivalent amount to the tax you would have to pay, as they would be making the saving on their costs?

 

[BigT]

Been costed out that it will raise between 1.3 and 1.7 billion for the state, net.
You been reading the funny papers again.

Same funny paper that Labour are doing the sums on, they are just doing the sums of 500000 pupils x £20k x 20% and forgetting about what the costs are.

Surely if it works out that way the schools would be able to reduce your fees to a roughly equivalent amount to the tax you would have to pay, as they would be making the saving on their costs?

You would like to think so and a lot of parents are hoping that but seeing as most schools raised their fees last year by over 10% chances are they like most businesses will trouser it.

 

[D4n]

Your attitude to this seems very self centred.

Don’t want to pay the tax? Plenty of good state schools are available.

 

[rob666]

And hospitals.

One of my closest friends works in the health industry, she casually dropped a little bomb over a very nice lunch in Skipton one day,,,
"NHS, completely clucking bankrupt.
The Tories only want to make things worse."
That was a decade ago, and they did a sterling job.
Additional taxation on private health and education.
Let those who can afford it, pay for it.
Very likely to be on the horizon...like a good Towers project.

 

[Dave]

As an example of how bonkers the VAT system is.

If a private company buys an MRI scanner for £1.3 million it’s VAT exempt, if the NHS buys an MRI scanner it pays VAT.

It’s the same with schools. Private organisations should have the same Tax regime as their public counterparts.

 

[WillPS]

As an example of how bonkers the VAT system is.

If a private company buys an MRI scanner for £1.3 million it’s VAT exempt, if the NHS buys an MRI scanner it pays VAT.

It’s the same with schools. Private organisations should have the same Tax regime as their public counterparts.

I agree it's a crap tax, but in fairness isn't that money just then returned to the treasury? So if public bodies stopped paying it, they'd just have their budgets reduced accordingly and the public coffers would be in the exact same position?

 

[rob666]

As an example of how bonkers the VAT system is.

If a private company buys an MRI scanner for £1.3 million it’s VAT exempt, if the NHS buys an MRI scanner it pays VAT.

It’s the same with schools. Private organisations should have the same Tax regime as their public counterparts.

No, private organisations should pay more, because the customers, generally, can afford it, like private, personal transport, and private education.
Redirect additional income to the public sector in the same area, and few voters would complain.