Just who is David Cameron putting first? Labour hyperbole?

#1
Having been directed to the Labour Party site by another thread I came across this....



David Cameron says he wants to help ordinary families but his first priority is to give 3,000 millionaires each a tax cut worth £200,000 on average.

It’s a policy that does nothing for 96 per cent of families in this country.

If they meant what they said then they'd drop their tax cuts for the wealthiest estates and instead they would support the £145 tax cut that Labour are giving to basic rate taxpayers.
How exactly does this measure with the millions that Labour have spunked on Bankers and other "leaders" who have mismanaged their companies to the point of insolvancy?

Then to find this....

Our party has been in power now for eleven years - something Labour has never come close to achieving before.

And though it’s been tough at times and there are still big challenges to overcome, we can be hugely proud of the progress we have delivered together for the country.

It is easy to forget what Britain was like in 1997 - the NHS on its knees, schools crumbling, crime doubled and millions of families still scarred by unemployment over three million and interest rates still recovering from hitting 15 per cent on Black Wednesday.

And while we know that everything is not perfect now, Britain is, without doubt, a better, more prosperous and fairer place.
 
#2
I think this is all part of Labour's cunning plan to make the notion of inheritance tax reductions less popular.

There is a rumour going about that Darling intends to reverse the cut in inheritance tax made last year in response to the popularity the proposal earned Cameron (otherwise there'll be no way of funding Sir Fred Goodwin's government approved pension, presumably), so a spot of wealth envy propaganda is being employed in a bid to make any such U-turn less embarrassing.
 
#4
jew_unit said:
Ah yes. Black wednesday. A date referred to by some economists as 'white' wednesday because of all the good it actually did for our economy.
I've done the correcting for you. No need to thank me.
 
#5
smartascarrots said:
jew_unit said:
Ah yes. Black wednesday. A date referred to by some economists as 'white' wednesday because of all the good it actually did for our economy.
I've done the correcting for you. No need to thank me.
Dont really agree with you...

After whatever Wednesday you want to call it, we had 17 years of Non inflationary constant expansion.

You can argue it should have slowed down around 2004/2005, but then Labour could have lost the election and we cant have that!
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#6
Well if it was a straight choice between The Boy Dave weighing out 3,000 millionnaires to the tune of £200k each, in the hope they'll stay in the UK, run their companies here, pay taxes and so on, and The Cyclops Brown, impoverishing 65,000,000 people to the tune of £1,000,000,000 through sheer incompetence and corruption . . . . . .


The Boy Dave gets my vote every time.
 
#7
Majorpain said:
smartascarrots said:
jew_unit said:
Ah yes. Black wednesday. A date referred to by some economists as 'white' wednesday because of all the good it actually did for our economy.
I've done the correcting for you. No need to thank me.
Dont really agree with you...

After whatever Wednesday you want to call it, we had 17 years of Non inflationary constant expansion.

You can argue it should have slowed down around 2004/2005, but then Labour could have lost the election and we cant have that!
You don't really agree that some economists call it Black Wednesday and others White? That's your perogative, I suppose, but a brief read of the literature shows you'd be wrong. It's thought to be a good thing mainly by those who think pegging the national economy to the exchange rate was a bad move. Others who see different priorities have different views.

Stating 'economists think' as if it was part of the orthodoxy of the economist's canon is misleading and incorrect. I was one once and met a wide range of opinion on its effects.
 
#8
"It is easy to forget what Britain was like in 1997 - the NHS on its knees, schools crumbling, crime doubled and millions of families still scarred by unemployment over three million and interest rates still recovering from hitting 15 per cent on Black Wednesday"

Could be re-worded to change the year from 1997 to 1979 which is likely to be more like what the next government has to contend with:

"It is easy to forget what Britain was like in 1979 - The rubbish uncollected on our streets, the dead were unburied, Admission to hospital was sanctioned by a Shop Steward, the Economy was stuffed and the country was in hock to the IMF. Unemployment figures were unavailable owing to strikes. LABOUR ISN'T WORKING!"
 
#9
smartascarrots said:
Majorpain said:
smartascarrots said:
jew_unit said:
Ah yes. Black wednesday. A date referred to by some economists as 'white' wednesday because of all the good it actually did for our economy.
I've done the correcting for you. No need to thank me.
Dont really agree with you...

After whatever Wednesday you want to call it, we had 17 years of Non inflationary constant expansion.

You can argue it should have slowed down around 2004/2005, but then Labour could have lost the election and we cant have that!
You don't really agree that some economists call it Black Wednesday and others White? That's your perogative, I suppose, but a brief read of the literature shows you'd be wrong. It's thought to be a good thing mainly by those who think pegging the national economy to the exchange rate was a bad move. Others who see different priorities have different views.

Stating 'economists think' as if it was part of the orthodoxy of the economist's canon is misleading and incorrect. I was one once and met a wide range of opinion on its effects.
My apologies, i presumed that the change to 'some' economists meant that you thought it was bad for the economy!
 
#10
Christ Labour have a nerve.If nothing else this rubbish shows the contept they hold for the elecorate.

It could be argued that it is a contempt well deserved though seeing as the UK (regardless of electoral turnout) gave these goons three terms in office.

If either party was serious about making real change for the tax-payer then they would be looking at a flat rate of 10% or raising the income tax threshhold to 20k.

Of course this would mean an end to the 'big state' mentality of westminster and the relinquishing of power by politico's.

And of course we will not be seeing this as the main political parties are not intrested in 'helping hard working families','fairness' or 'change'.
 
#11
So the Tories will give 3000 millionaires £200,000 each eh.

Does this include the ones who were made life peers after they'd donated money to ZaNu Liarbour?
 
#12
Ex_ex said:
So the Tories will give 3000 millionaires £200,000 each eh.

Does this include the ones who were made life peers after they'd donated money to ZaNu Liarbour?
I am sure they will be donating that extra cash to a worthy cause.

'Help4 hardworking families as its the right thing to do' or somthing. :roll:

Just a quick point of order.I have highlighted the word 'give' as I think it is being misused in this context.

Government does not 'give' anything to those that pay tax through the sweat of their brow.They simply allow people who work for their cash to keep more of the fruits of their own labours.

Mega fucking gracious of them . :x
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads