They have a majority of 6 lol how is that a huge margin. The tiniest swing away from cons in 5 years time will be the end of their government What on earth is this economics. Argue laffer curve if you like but this^ is crazy ------------- I'm pretty gutted with the result and I'm pretty scared about this conservative government. Can't believe how badly the lib dems did. South west used to be lib dem stronghold and they get zero seats it's sad. Still at least Tim Farron will be their new leader now, hopefully I am actually pretty eurosceptic for what it's worth. Genuinely not sure which way I'd vote in a referendum
Quite simple, they won this election with only the tail end of their government bringing good economic growth, that growth will continue and more and more people will notice the increase in their wages and after 5 years of shouty nationalists the Tories will be able to play the SNP card again. Again, simple. You tax that 5% yes you get that money, but that's all you have - money. Decrease it and you attract foreigners not only to invest but to stay (we gained many French millionaires after France brought in their wealth taxes). But by decreasing it you encourage them to invest in business which creates more jobs than you could've done with your little 5%. Even with it dropped 5% they are paying more tax than before as that theory has worked and they have become wealthier. Also a tax cut has a psychological impact too of having more money.
I still don't get why conservative has won! They're gonna take down a wind farm for fracking!! HOW THE HECK IS THAT GOOD?????!!!!!!!! D:
Either way, whatever would have happened in this election, I think none of the parties would have done what would've been extremely important for the economic stability of the country (I'm looking at you banking reform). Britain's Big Four has become too big to be tackled, the bubble will burst soon whether it be under Labour, Lib Dem, Tory, UUP, SNP, DUP, Sinn Fein, Green, UKIP... it will burst soon because none of the parties are tackling the elephant in the room. I would be nice to put some brakes on the crazy borrowing and housing super-prices in the UK. Maybe tax foreign owners of UK property that don't live in the UK as houses are becoming increasingly expensive for the average Briton. I'm not going to side with anyone in regards to the politics because it almost seems like a flame war is about to erupt, but these are my two cents if anyone is taking them...
It should always be possible to talk about politics in a mature and sensible way without getting into a bitter argument or flame war. I have a lot of respect for people (politicians especially) who can debate issues from opposing positions without resorting to base insults. Interestingly enough, we have politicians in the UK who are fierce political opponents, but otherwise share a close personal friendship. You don't always see that portrayed in the media.
Well that might be your prediction but you can't possibly present what has just happened as a guarantee of a third term, that's pretty mental Right, so simple. Every single higher rate tax payer who gets taxed £5 less for every £100 will be investing their fivers .. in such a way that 40% of the taxable income that their investment generates accounts for greater than the £5 that the gov lost out on in the first place .. not to mention that the government itself would be able to invest that £5 tax in their own way ie they'd be paying interest on £5 less of the national debt Even if this were anywhere near a credible theory, there would still be some sort of tipping point whereby it wouldn't generate extra revenue for the government to cut taxes ie at 0% income tax there will be £0 tax. At what point does this happen? Would it generate more income for the government to reduce the top rate of tax to say 35%, or 20%, or 10%? Or is the tipping point conveniently (for your argument) at 40%? Is there any sort of evidence to support this or have you actually just dreamt it up and presented as established economic theory?
I do believe that was the case for Michael Foot and the Royal Family, Foot was a staunch anti-monarchist and republican but at the same time a favourite of the royals... Can't say the same for the lady in blue. Politicians who debate politely and in a sensible way, I've not seen one in a very long time, it's all about scare tactics now, democracy has become a haven for scare tactics and dehumanising slander of the opposition. And yeah it is true, the media does play a big role in our perceptions, kinda like how Thatcher took bit shits for closing down coal mines and Wilson didn't get as much shit for doing it even though there were more mines closed under his 10 years. Still, I'm a South Korean citizen residing in Vietnam and I'm not going to the UK for higher education, I don't think I have the right to side with a party in the British elections. However, it was fun watching my teachers collapse and facepalm themselves when the results came out. (Most voted Labour, and many wanted David Miliband at the helm).
Governments aren't great at spending money, because of the size there are many inefficiencies. It's the same when VAT was dropped 2.5%, it encouraged more spending which stimulates jobs to pay tax, government has no business in business and it's by methods like this that promote business. The evidence is that the rich are paying more in tax now than at any point under Labour with the higher rate of tax.
I think one thing about the UK is that it's still trying to get over that whole, ' The Sun never sets on the British Empire' thing, after losing the empire, so there's always seemed to be a bit of wistfulness and a certain zeal for pomp and strutting about. Once you lose an empire, you worry about losing the island, I'd imagine. It is curious to see as this now is happening to the US, and to observe the results will make quite a spectacle. (This message is in no way intended to make anyone in the UK crabby, but is simply something I've observed over time)
Well quite. It's been a while since the Tories had a stonkingly huge majority. Labour managed to command a 100+ seat majority in 1997 after taking over 400 seats. Not even Thatcher was that good. Given the right leader they can sleepwalk to victory. If there is a small recession in 2017 like is predicted then it will make it hard for the Tories to command a majority in 2020.
Right, but governments do need to spend money to provide public services. The UK gov spends something around £600-700bn a year from memory and are currently borrowing a ridiculous amount year on year. Whatever you feel about the efficiency of uk gov any extra revenue generated for the government means they are borrowing that amount less. The idea that a private investor can make money work so well for him that the taxable income generated by that investment will make more money for the gov than the sum value of the investment the gov would make with the same money, is crazy. Pretty sure the cons raised VAT last parliament ??
Ugh so annoyed about this, more of the tories is not what the UK needs! I find it really hard to believe that UKIP has a seat now too, at least Farage is stepping down though.
I think the result is bad in the sense that the UK will not leave the EU but will "re-negotiate things with the EU". Which means Brussels will obviously do whatever the Uk wants while completely neglecting smaller/insignificant countries like Croatia/Bulgaria and the result will be once again beneficial to the UK. If it was the UKIP in charge, there won't be any of this - they will simply leave without planning to stay at the cost of other countries...which is what Cameron wants actually.
I want to stay in the EU but I really want a re-negotiation so immigration is reduced. Iv read somewhere that one house needs to be built every 7 minutes for immigrants alone which is ridiculous.
I don't agree with David Cameron's decision to enter into a re-negotiation and hold and in/out referendum, but nor do I agree with your assessment that "Brussels" will do whatever the UK wants. It's not really a matter for Brussels anyway. During the re-negotiation, I hope other EU leaders (including those of smaller countries) will be rather uncompromising towards David Cameron. The UK would achieve far more in Europe if we worked to build alliances and sort out issues by consensus and agreement. The high handed approach is simply alienating.
Every country in the eu fights to make it work as best they can for them. Why does france care so much about keeping the common agricultural policy or germany the fiscal compact. I like how DC actually sticks up for the UK's interest in europe instead of rolling over like labour did time and again.. see lisbon treaty. What uk wants out of the eu is more out of step with what the eu is than for most of the continental countries, and so we whinge more. But the eu needs the uk pretty badly, it would be terrible for the institution if the uk left and I don't see why a prime minister would not use that power to get the best deal for the uk. I'm pretty sick that we have a conservative government now but at least I trust DC on Europe
Well, if this doesn't happen the conclusion will be that a country like Bulgaria has a stronger army than the UK, bigger population than the UK and also: stronger economy. Why would the EU defend smaller countries instead of the UK? Do you honestly think the EU are some sort of "defenders of the weak and those suffering from injustice...". Like I've said countless times: the goal of the EU to "join" smaller countries like Romania, Bulgaria, Croatia is for 2 reasons: 1. get cheap manual labour 2. sell its second hand/ third-hand products in eastern europe. ^ Both reasons are largely beneficial to richer countries, including one of the richest: UK and not to say...Poland, excluding the poles working in England. Of course far-right parties like the ukip will blame immigrants for everything...since this is their job (and idiotic line of reasoning...). It's pointless to debate with these people that immigrants from bulgaria decreased in 7.5% in just one year after 2014 or that overall the % of immigrants from some countries is less than 0.5%. Actually the real problem will be wasting ones time to debate the obvious, rather than trying to prove something to narrow-minded people (I mean the ukip of course - not you). ---------- Post added 10th May 2015 at 03:28 PM ---------- He also needs to specify what he means under "re-negotiation". France and Germany most likely will vote against immigration curbs while also pushing for larger budget and enforcing more bizarre laws against China and other places outside the EU. The EU seems to be a case of UK vs Germany/France then again. But overall France and Germany will favor the UK if the threat is for Britain to leave.
