Who You Gonna Vote For?!

[International class]

As Billy Connelly once said

"Don't vote for politicians as it only encourages them"

[COYC73]

It is very clear that JC is a massive economic and actual security risk to this country. If you are a Labour supporter, other than the far left wing, is it not better for a tory landslide this time, so that a new centre left party can be formed asap when JC refuses to stand down?

There is a rocky road ahead on the economy, health and social care and possible turmoil in the hapless Europe due to the invasion of economic migrants from mainly Africa. Plenty of scope for a well led centre party to put up effective, credible opposition and hopeully see off the dangerous SNP.

This!!!

[Corky]

I'm voting for the Calathumpians.

[UpTheClaretsFCBK]

I'm voting Labour.

[If it be your will]

.

[taio]

Surely if you aspire to earn more than £80,000/year (the only group whose taxes will increase under Labour), but aren't yet doing so, it would be in your naked self-interest to vote Labour now, then reverse your vote when you are actually earning these sums?

Not when the government continues to increase the lower tax threshold benefiting many millions and taking some completely out of income tax.

[If it be your will]

.

[Paul Waine]

These are all good arguments. I am not an economist, and I cannot counter your arguments on those grounds. That does not rule out the possiblity that someone with a better understanding of the technicalities could dismiss them. I think there are people with more expertise than myself (and, not intending any offense, yourself too) who could argue, for example, that the failures of Hollande's government do not stem only from his taxation policy (and indeed that the tax band he targeted was more a political gesture than a practical one), also that Thatcher's economic successes were the first step along a rickety path where the budget for popular public services was reduced by outsourcing to private firms who provide a more cost-effective service. That these firms may not provide the quality of service the populace expect is, of course, the political issue at hand. These are the arguments which would be put against your position, but (like a true lefty!) I do not have the data to back them up. They are complex issues, and I think the sensible thing to do is to leave them to those who have the time and expertise to properly study them.

So, I will take a different tact. We can talk about the economy, but we always predicate those conversations on what is 'good'. So even if we are utterly pragmatic, we will say that 'it is good when GDP rises, and bad when it doesn't. Yet, even as pragmatists, we have to admit that such-and-such a political arrangement is beneficial to us, but not to others, even if it is one which, for example, favours those who work hard, and does not favour those who seek to live off state benefits. Such an arrangement is what the Tories are offering to the people: they say, if you work hard, you will get your just desserts. Now this is not an economic proposition - as I've alluded to, none of us (I assume at least) are experts in that area, and it is, at any rate, a questionable claim - so it is a moral one. If it is a moral proposition, then we have to test it against reality as we would any other. 'Murderers are punished' is a moral proposition which often holds true. We accept that proposition because it holds true. Party politics aside, does anything Theresa May say hold true in that way? It seems to me that at present she talks a lot about future circumstances, and she cannot confirm what they will be or how she will respond. Meanwhile, the country carries, and this is implicitly approved by her government (for surely she disagreed with the state of the nation, she, as the most politically powerful person in the country, would change it).

I feel a bit embarrassed making this argument because it seems overly-intellectual but the way I see it is that, when you look into it closely, the Tories are offering nothing other than what we have now. The question then is does anyone think this is a sustainable, practical way of running a country? Even if you're averse to Labour's solutions, it seems bizarre to suggest the Tories have them.

Hi Hieronymous, great post. I like the way you have responded and I like the way you present your arguments. I get the sense that you have put some thought into your response and that you have responded with decency. So, I was thinking how I would reply, whether I could endeavour to achieve the same standards of thoughtfulness and decency in my response. Alongside this, I was thinking about how I would refer you to another thread where I'd also contested the efficacy of high marginal rates of tax - but where the debate didn't reach the standards that you have achieved. As I read through the other posts on this thread I learnt that my "adversary" on the other thread had already found this thread and had already introduced himself to you - and, regrettably in my view, made comments about me that are inaccurate. However, let's but that aside. I'll let you be your own judge of my motivations and my integrity.

For now, I will pause my repsonse here - and come back later with my thoughts.

[If it be your will]

.