General Election 2015

[pap]

Pap , the employer would normally suspend someone in such cases where there is an ongoing investigation

Like wise that maybe the case even if charge . The deciding fact is where the employee is found guilty and at the point the employee is well and truly like to be dismissed

 

So by your viewpoint you would have expected Dave Jones to be Sacked when he was charged

 

Deal with the Facts Pap instead of taking a blinkered approach to fuel your pro left wing and labour agenda

 

Dave Jones was bounced out of the club very quickly, still officially paid and all that.

 

Fair point about the suspension mechanic though.

Edited 8 April, 2015 by pap

[buctootim]

All of which may be true, but it's not the domain of your average family GP, is it?

 

You do know GPs perform procedures, issue drugs and refer patients to hospitals right and get paid by work done? and that the whole point of integrated IT systems is to enable that to happen? and you did read special K's post admitting IT work takes GPs time? Your point is what?

[Wes Tender]

So because we don't have the flat rate tax system you prefer its okay to let the super rich not pay tax? Stellar.

 

I already made the case that when taxation becomes punitive, the super rich find ways not to pay it, either by finding offshore tax havens to stash it in, or by emigrating to countries with a more reasonable tax regime. If taxes were deemed to be fair, then we would not have the problem of the wealthy trying to avoid paying them.

 

With a flat rate of tax, somebody earning twenty times the average wage, already pays more than twenty times the tax as a sum, because of the low earnings tax thresholds. At the 50% rate, they would be paying more than half of their earnings when taking into account other taxes paid additionally like VAT, Council Tax, etc and in addition there is Labour's proposed Mansion Tax, which would screw them still further. OK, still some way to go to the 83% rate which peaked with Labour under Wilson before Maggie Thatcher slashed it to a much more reasonable 40%, but despite the howls of anguish then about how the Tories were the party who only helped the rich, revenues to the Exchequer actually rose. This is the Laffer Curve in action and Labour really have not learned the lessons of history and still feel inclined to offer sound-bites which appeal to the more hard of thinking voters by labelling the wealth creators as the rich who should be squeezed until the pips squeak.

 

By all means attempt to close the loopholes which allow the wealthy to take clever advice on how to avoid paying their tax and in my opinion there is no excuse for allowing the big corporations like Starbucks, Google and Amazon to operate here without paying their share of Corporation tax on their earnings over here, but it has to be accepted that if the tax rates become punitive, the result is going to become counter-productive at some point, because those wealth creators will take their money and their business elsewhere.

[Lord Duckhunter]

We are talking semantics here, Shylock. Red Ed obviously doesn't mean that everybody should pay taxes in the same way, as his sobriquet infers he is a leftie whose inclinations are not that everybody be treated equally, but that those who often earn much more through their own skills should be taxed punitively.

 

I'm quite OK with the concept that Non-Doms pay the equivalent rate of tax here as everybody else on what they earn here, or on money they bring in from their wealth abroad. This is already quite tightly regulated by changes made in 2008. Where they cross the line for me is with their presumption that they should pay tax here on their Worldwide earnings.

 

You're right. I wish lefties would stop banging on about " fairness". The fairest system is for everybody to pay the same % . I'm not suggesting a flat tax, although I would like them to be lower for higher earners , the Brown rate of 40% seems reasonable. But they need to be set to bring in maximum revenue and lefties need to stop banging on about fairness.

 

As for non doms . Frasier Nelson has pointed out in the Spectator that the only difference between doms & non doms is tax you pay on overseas wealth. As the ordinary Joe hasn't got any , the line that they should pay tax like everybody else is disingenuous in the extreme. They're trying to imply their on the side of ordinary people . They want to give the impression that they're clamping down on tax avoidance and that non doms are somehow not paying tax like you and I . Whereas " everybody else" is actually doms with overseas wealth in this case.

[Wes Tender]

I'm not suggesting a flat tax, although I would like them to be lower for higher earners , the Brown rate of 40% seems reasonable. But they need to be set to bring in maximum revenue and lefties need to stop banging on about fairness.

 

The Brown rate? Shame on you DH! Maggie Thatcher brought in the 40% rate, then in 2010 Labour raised it to 50%, before the coalition reduced it to 45%

 

This quote from Laffer is interesting:-

 

"It's already done long-term damage having it at 45p rather than 40p," he says.

 

Laffer claims that if the Government scrapped the top rate and "levelled the playing field" at the top it would entice more people to work here, generating more income for the Exchequer.

 

"If you lowered the tax to 40p, your prosperity would come back, your revenues, your budgets would come back and you would get back what you had. And if you lowered it even further, Britain would even do a better job."

 

Official estimates show that reducing the top rate of tax to 45p cost the Exchequer just £100m but there is a more important point.

 

According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, the 1pc of taxpayers earning in excess of £150,000 now pay between 25pc and 30pc of all income tax, up from 21pc a decade ago. Tinkering with the way this group are taxed carries a risk for any chancellor.

[buctootim]

If taxes were deemed to be fair, then we would not have the problem of the wealthy trying to avoid paying them.

 

You're right. I wish lefties would stop banging on about " fairness".

 

Lefty Ed, lefty Dave, lefty Nige, lefty Nick and now lefty Wes.

[View From The Top]

You'd think the way the small minded right wingers are banging on about Labour and the left that the tories were nailed on for a majority. Thankfully the majority of the country have more sense.

[aintforever]

I think it's more than fair that the rich pay more. Too many greedy c*nts in this world. I can't even comprehend the mindset of someone who has millions yet goes out of their way to avoid tax, I just think it's sad.

 

I pay more tax than most, I don't give it a moments thought.

[Wes Tender]

Lefty Ed, lefty Dave, lefty Nige, lefty Nick and now lefty Wes.

 

You're probably the only person who knows what you're rabitting on about.

[scotty]

You'd think the way the small minded right wingers are banging on about Labour and the left that the tories were nailed on for a majority. Thankfully the majority of the country have more sense.

 

You don't have to be a right winger to see that theyre pretty much nailed on to get back in, whether on their own or as part of another coalition.

[Torres]

You do know GPs perform procedures, issue drugs and refer patients to hospitals right and get paid by work done? and that the whole point of integrated IT systems is to enable that to happen? and you did read special K's post admitting IT work takes GPs time? Your point is what?

 

My point is that this:

 

Both Labour and the Conservatives have wasted billions on systems which dont work. However the hidden cost is the amount of time clinicians have to put into to supporting the designing of the systems because no matter how competent IT contractors dont understand clinical practice and what clinicians need the system to be able to do. At least two private sector computer systems for the NHS have failed to work in the past 20 years and been scrapped after years in development. When I ran medical specialties at a teaching hospital in London probably 30% of my time and that of the Clinical Director (a senior consultant being paid £150,000pa) was occupied for two years trying to get Mcdonnell Douglas employees to understand issues like why a meatal lesion was different to a meatal ulcer and why it was important that it was possible to code separately (it meant the hospital got paid nearly double the amount per procedure). The system never did work and was scrapped. Off course the NHS got the blame, not McDonnell Douglas.

 

didn't take up any of the time of my GP, or your GP, or the time of 99.99% of GPs across the country. It's got bugger all to do with your point that GPs are too busy worrying about IT, guttering and wasp nests to see any patients.

 

and you did read special K's post admitting IT work takes GPs time?

 

Of course it does - but how else do you propose patient records are held? Or prescriptions issued? Or appointments with hospital consultants made? If GPs were forced to go back to paper records, hand-written prescriptions and hand-writing referrals do you think that would take less time and be progress? Or would you be blaming the inventor of the Biro for wasting GP time?

 

Special K also pointed out that the majority of the "business" work done was done by partners, as owners of the business. If they didn't want to do it, they could always sell up and go back to being salaried GPs and concentrate more on patient care. Would any of them do that? Would they ******** - they're all quite happy to buy a new Jag every year, thank you very much.

[Torres]

I think it's more than fair that the rich pay more. Too many greedy c*nts in this world. I can't even comprehend the mindset of someone who has millions yet goes out of their way to avoid tax, I just think it's sad.

 

I pay more tax than most, I don't give it a moments thought.

 

I don't quite understand it either, but I suspect a lot of it has to do with getting one over the nasty tax man. In which case, the game is always afoot and there's always a challenge to be met no matter what the current tax legislation is.

 

Surely the aim has to be to maximise the overall taxation revenue received from the most wealthy, not hit them with a some populist, headline-grabbing mega-rate that actually decreases tax revenues? That's where both sides of the argument fall down; the left for wanting to "hit the rich hard" for idealogical reasons, and those opposing it for not making the argument in way that the average dimwit in the street can understand that it's proven that a higher top-level rate is entirely counter-productive.

[buctootim]

My point is that this:

 

 

 

didn't take up any of the time of my GP, or your GP, or the time of 99.99% of GPs across the country. It's got bugger all to do with your point that GPs are too busy worrying about IT, guttering and wasp nests to see any patients.

 

 

 

Of course it does - but how else do you propose patient records are held? Or prescriptions issued? Or appointments with hospital consultants made? If GPs were forced to go back to paper records, hand-written prescriptions and hand-writing referrals do you think that would take less time and be progress? Or would you be blaming the inventor of the Biro for wasting GP time?

 

Special K also pointed out that the majority of the "business" work done was done by partners, as owners of the business. If they didn't want to do it, they could always sell up and go back to being salaried GPs and concentrate more on patient care. Would any of them do that? Would they ******** - they're all quite happy to buy a new Jag every year, thank you very much.

 

 

Basically it all boils down having an internal market in the NHS. Hospitals and GPs get paid for every patient they see and every procedure carried out. Each of those actions need to be recorded and billed for. Counting and recording of every action increases accountability and oversight but at a cost in time, resources and equipment. Some people think that the principal of 'money following the patient' makes the NHS more efficient and responsive. My experience is that it diverts money away from patient care and ironically creates waste in pursuit of efficiency.

Edited 8 April, 2015 by buctootim

[shurlock]

The Brown rate? Shame on you DH! Maggie Thatcher brought in the 40% rate, then in 2010 Labour raised it to 50%, before the coalition reduced it to 45%

 

This quote from Laffer is interesting:-

 

Old dear, Les, you silly plonker. Getting Laffer's views on the impact of higher marginal tax rates is like asking Brendan Rodgers to assess Kevin Friend's refereeing performance. In other words, dead impartial. Really.

[LGTL]

You don't have to be a right winger to see that theyre pretty much nailed on to get back in, whether on their own or as part of another coalition.

 

Really? I'd say a Labour led coalition is looking more likely at the moment.

[JackFrost]

Really? I'd say a Labour led coalition is looking more likely at the moment.

 

I'd be very surprised.

 

Whilst I'm in a safe Tory constituency where the Labour candidate would do well to get their deposit back, I really cannot see how that many of the 'undecided' see Miliband/Balls as remotely electable. Also Dave will be guaranteed to dig his heels in unless there is a clear cut Labour victory (which is highly unlikely).

 

It'll be a Tory led coalition again, but who they'll get into bed with this time is the million dollar question. UKIP taking on the Lib Dem role is my best guess.

[buctootim]

I'd be very surprised.

 

Whilst I'm in a safe Tory constituency where the Labour candidate would do well to get their deposit back, I really cannot see how that many of the 'undecided' see Miliband/Balls as remotely electable. Also Dave will be guaranteed to dig his heels in unless there is a clear cut Labour victory (which is highly unlikely).

 

It'll be a Tory led coalition again, but who they'll get into bed with this time is the million dollar question. UKIP taking on the Lib Dem role is my best guess.

 

Currently they are tied in the polls but with Labour predicted to get four more seats than the Tories due to the greater concentration of their vote. I doubt there would be another formal coalition. Much more likely imo is a minority Labour government working with the ad hoc support of the SNP and Lib Dems. It would give Parliament more power than it has had for decades.

[Lord Duckhunter]

I think it's more than fair that the rich pay more. Too many greedy c*nts in this world. I can't even comprehend the mindset of someone who has millions yet goes out of their way to avoid tax, I just think it's sad.

 

.

 

The rich do pay more.

 

What % of total income tax take do you think the richest 1% should pay?

[Lord Duckhunter]

Anyone think Labour have thought through this Non Dom policy needs to watch Andrew Neil take Shabana Mahmood apart.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A1KjRPBvnU

[aintforever]

The rich do pay more.

 

What % of total income tax take do you think the richest 1% should pay?

 

Couldn't care less, the more the better though because they have more money than they need and many hard working people are struggling to live a decent life.

[scotty]

Really? I'd say a Labour led coalition is looking more likely at the moment.

 

 

I'd be astonished if that happened. The wrong Miliband, with Ed Balls in tow? I can't see that at all.

[Jonnyboy]

Also, she's given her mobile number out on video via her twitter feed. Nice.

 

Oops. She's far too attractive to be doing that!

[CB Saint]

Anyone think Labour have thought through this Non Dom policy needs to watch Andrew Neil take Shabana Mahmood apart.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A1KjRPBvnU

 

the labour MPs who were penned in to do interviews today must have been crying into their weetabix when this broke today

[Wade Garrett]

The majority of the press ripping into Milliband isn't really having the desired effect at the moment. Partly due to the dismal campaign currently being run by Cameron. I don't think his planned cuts are going down too well with the electorate.

One good thing about this campaign though, is that for the first time in a long while, there seems to be a clear divide between the two main parties. Makes it all a little less boring.

[Torres]

The rich do pay more.

 

What % of total income tax take do you think the richest 1% should pay?

 

Couldn't care less, the more the better though because they have more money than they need and many hard working people are struggling to live a decent life.

 

That's where both sides of the argument fall down; the left for wanting to "hit the rich hard" for idealogical reasons, and those opposing it for not making the argument in way that the average dimwit in the street can understand that it's proven that a higher top-level rate is entirely counter-productive.

 

The correct answer to the question, aintforever, is "whatever level maximises taxation revenue for the exchequer in the short, medium and long term."

[shurlock]

the labour MPs who were penned in to do interviews today must have been crying into their weetabix when this broke today

 

My mate at the IFS actually did an interview for the Beeb on the subject - there is large amount of uncertainty around how much revenue abolition would generate, though that doesn't mean Labour's projections are wholly implausible.

[CB Saint]

My mate at the IFS actually did an interview for the Beeb on the subject - there is large amount of uncertainty around how much revenue abolition would generate, though that doesn't mean Labour's projections are wholly implausible.

 

from a moral standpoint I actually agree with what they are trying to achieve, however it has been a political car crash for them and every MP has been on the back foot all day because of it.

[Torres]

My mate at the IFS actually did an interview for the Beeb on the subject - there is large amount of uncertainty around how much revenue abolition would generate, though that doesn't mean Labour's projections are wholly implausible.

 

The squeaky voice guy?

[SuperMikey]

https://www.greenparty.org.uk/news/2015/04/07/greens-pledge-to-cut-vat-on-housing-repairs/

 

Sorry to break up the conversation but I thought I would put this policy up here - a fantastic idea that will ensure our homes are more efficient AND that creates jobs and stimulates the economy.

[shurlock]

The squeaky voice guy?

 

Yep, the squeaky manc.

[Viking Warrior]

I am quite concerned and very worried about sturgeon jumping into bed with millipede to for a coalition government

She is one megalomaniac . Millipede should be worried , she really hates Labour MSP,s but not quite as much as she hates Cameron . Oh and Murphy has as much charisma as millipedes big toe .

She us going to screw the UK and in a couple of years time she will do the same fir Scotland . She is he'll bent in having another referendum

[SuperMikey]

I am quite concerned and very worried about sturgeon jumping into bed with millipede to for a coalition government

She is one megalomaniac . Millipede should be worried , she really hates Labour MSP,s but not quite as much as she hates Cameron . Oh and Murphy has as much charisma as millipedes big toe .

She us going to screw the UK and in a couple of years time she will do the same fir Scotland . She is he'll bent in having another referendum

 

I'm not sure Sturgeon would be that involved in Westminster would she? I thought she would act as the First Minister of the Scottish Parliament and Salmond would take up a more London-centric role (i.e. Deputy PM)? Or maybe I got that wrong. Either way, it'll be years and probably decades before another referendum so you don't really need to worry about that.

 

Speaking of Jim Murphy as well, I have no idea why he was chosen by Labour. I saw a poll that was released after he took the leadership role that said he was the most disliked politician in Scotland - he even beat Cameron which is a f*cking tough job! Bet Honey-Roast Hameron was delighted that he finally didn't come last in a Scottish popularity contest though!

[Wes Tender]

Old dear, Les, you silly plonker. Getting Laffer's views on the impact of higher marginal tax rates is like asking Brendan Rodgers to assess Kevin Friend's refereeing performance. In other words, dead impartial. Really.

What a ridiculous analogy, Shylock.

 

The essence of Laffer's thinking is essentially correct, that there must come a point whereby the rate of taxation becomes so punitive that it then becomes counter-productive and the Exchequer loses out when people either find ways of avoiding paying it, or emigrate.

 

I can understand aintforever holding such simplistic views because all rich bastards are c*nts in his opinion, so he is happy that they all should leave and take their filthy lucre with them, but I expected better from you.

[SarniaSaint]

No comment just eating a hot dog .............ketchup mustard and relish on fingers

[whelk]

No comment just eating a hot dog .............ketchup mustard and relish on fingers

 

I guess the webbing doesn't help

[trousers]

The UK's only likeable Tory?

 

https://medium.com/@chrisdeerin/one-of-us-e9ad6fa39a9e

[CB Fry]

The UK's only likeable Tory?

 

https://medium.com/@chrisdeerin/one-of-us-e9ad6fa39a9e

I watched a little of the BBC Scotland debate yesterday (two in two days of a debate involving a collection of politicians absolutely no one at all can vote for on polling day) and she did come across pretty well. A lesbian Scot might just be the perfect next leader of the UK Conservatives.

[pap]

“Although growth resumed in 2013, real income per capita is only now reaching its level on the eve of the crisis, which means that Britain has had a much worse track record since 2007 than it had during the Great Depression,” he said.

“Yet as Britain prepares to go to the polls, the leaders of the coalition Government that has ruled the country since 2010 are posing as the guardians of prosperity, the people who really know how to run the economy. And they are, by and large, getting away with it.”

 

http://www.thenational.scot/business/coalition-record-on-economy-startlingly-bad-says-nobel-winning-economist.1770

“A nation’s leaders may do an excellent job of economic stewardship for four or five years yet get booted out because of weakness in the last two quarters before the election.

“In fact, the evidence suggests that the politically smart thing might well be to impose a pointless depression on your country for much of your time in office, solely to leave room for a roaring recovery just before voters go to the polls.

“That’s a pretty good description of what the current British government has done, although it’s not clear it was deliberate.”

[Torres]

It's the oldest trick in the book, pap. Cheeky tax cuts in the year before an election are always a good bet.

[pap]

It's the oldest trick in the book, pap. Cheeky tax cuts in the year before an election are always a good bet.

 

Indeed, but should a party that claimed it was there to "govern in the national interest" really be sending the country into an economic funk for its own electoral interests?

 

(After the taps have been turned back on, of course)

[trousers]

Any news on whether or not the Pope is catholic, pap? #saintswebforumrevelations

[Whitey Grandad]

Indeed, but should a party that claimed it was there to "govern in the national interest" really be sending the country into an economic funk for its own electoral interests?

 

(After the taps have been turned back on, of course)

 

There's only one party that created an economic funk and that was by over-borrowing and committing to spending that couldn't be afforded.

[JackFrost]

I watched a little of the BBC Scotland debate yesterday (two in two days of a debate involving a collection of politicians absolutely no one at all can vote for on polling day) and she did come across pretty well. A lesbian Scot might just be the perfect next leader of the UK Conservatives.

 

I saw that last night.

 

I thought Sturgeon and Davidson came over the best. Ill echo the comments above about why the heck Murphy was elected as Scottish Labour leader. He has about as much character as a lamp post.

 

The UKIP bloke was so bad it was hilarious

[badgerx16]

Any news on whether or not the Pope is catholic, pap? #saintswebforumrevelations

 

With a lowercase 'c' it would imply a humanist with liberal views, so quite possibly. #grammarpoliceonpatrol

[CB Fry]

I saw that last night.

 

I thought Sturgeon and Davidson came over the best. Ill echo the comments above about why the heck Murphy was elected as Scottish Labour leader. He has about as much character as a lamp post.

 

The UKIP bloke was so bad it was hilarious

Indeed. The UKIP bloke came across like someone who had just wandered in from the pub and just rambled. Pretty representative of the ranting shambles that is "the peoples army". Lord spare us.

[CB Saint]

Saw this in the comments on the BBC site - made me chuckle

 

Tory's want to take us back to the 1980s

Labour want to take us back to the 1970s

UKIP want to take us back to the 1950s

SNP want to take us back to the 1600s

Plaid want to take us back to the 1200s

Greens want to take us back to the U.S back to the U.S back to the U.S.S.R

[pap]

Candidate for photo of the day

 

 

 

Cheers. Upgraded.

 

[aintforever]

I'm getting a bit fed up with the Tory bias in the media. I mean, what the hell is all this Trident nonsense about?

 

Some Tory disagrees with a hypothetical decision made by a hypothetical coalition meaning Milliband is a back-stabber - how on earth is that headline news?

[pap]

I'm getting a bit fed up with the Tory bias in the media. I mean, what the hell is all this Trident nonsense about?

 

Some Tory disagrees with a hypothetical decision made by a hypothetical coalition meaning Milliband is a back-stabber - how on earth is that headline news?

 

If dune were still about, he'd be telling us how Trident keeps us at the "top table", and that going around threatening people with nukes is good diplomacy.

[trousers]