So does that make this a ‘first’ then?
I would conclude not.
£40bn not £49bn. £9bn short.
At least the Conservatives are trying to actually cut the deficit though. If this were a race, the Conservatives are running in the correct direction slowly, and Labour are ready to start sprinting in the wrong direction.
Not at all. Whilst there is a small element of chance with subtle tweaks, completely changing everything entails massively more risk. A risk we can’t take with the debt at 90%. Conservative social care plans will reduce the deficit, no doubt about it.
He could well blackmail them though.
But his party are pro-EU.
Do we need to? No other nations are giving up their nuclear deterrent, quite the opposite, so I can’t see any rationale for us doing so. Would we remain one of the 5 permanent members of the UN if we did so? It’s also vital that we keep alive our only company that can still build nuclear reactors in building a Trident sub replacement.
The reading of the IFS take on Labours plans around tax is also selective. It may be that someone has said if ‘x’ number changed their behaviour than ‘y’ would happen. If my uncle had boobs he would be my aunt. The point is, the IFS predict that the change in behavioir will be of a magnitude to net 40 billion not 48 billion which is what the party were hoping for. That is still a raised take, though I agree the manefesto figure was optimistic.
Actually no. The IFS said it would fail to achieve the required funds in the short term, and would fail by an even larger margin in the long term. Thus implying that the taxes won’t even raise the required revenue before people leave as a result. It falls £9bn short if everyone stays and pays, and a whole lot more if they don’t, which is not only a real, or likely possibility, but an inevitable one based on past performance.
The IFS said that Labour was planning to maintain “most” of the Conservatives’ planned”big cuts” to working-age benefits. But the costings for Mr Corbyn’s generous giveaways “would not work” because it would be impossible to raise as much money as the party claims it could.
It also said “there is no way” that Labour’s plans for tens of billions of pounds of tax rises would affect “only a small group at the top” as the party has claimed.
Instead their pledge to increase taxes for companies would reduce the incomes of “ordinary households” through lower wages, higher prices, or lower investment returns.
Labour has said it would raise £49 billion per year from taxing the “rich” and companies.
But the IFS said the calculation includes “factual mistakes” and “optimistic assumptions” – creating a £9 billion shortfall.
“Their proposals could be expected to raise at most £40 billion in the short run, and less in the long run,” the IFS research concluded.
The IFS also warned that Labour’s proposals to set the minimum wage to at least £10 per hour by 2020 are “a gamble”. “We simply don’t know beyond what level a higher minimum wage would start having serious impacts on employment”, if companies cannot afford to pay the higher wage, Mr Emmerson said.
So basically, Labour plans do not add up, even in the short term and the consequences of such a shift in policies are an uncalculable gamble in the long term.
Now consider the risk they imply in discussing Labour’s proposals. High taxes on businesses, £10 minimum wage. What if this triggers another crash? Do we really need this now, whilst debt remains at 90%. It’s irresponsible to start experimenting with huge policy shifts whilst the fiscal balance teeters on the brink. You want to try this at sub-40% debt, okay, but trying it at 90% is just Russian Roulette.
I’ve got to say, my obvious disdain for the Labour team not withstanding, that they have run a much better campaign than I, or most commentators thought possible. The Tory one has been absolutely dire, and you have to wonder if they want to lose it! I’ve just noted the demonstration against hunting in London – in the middle of a bl00dy campaign FFS. What on earth were they thinking?? As for the social care thing – yes it needs reform, but they could have quite happily snuck in a consultation mid parliament, without anybody batting an eyelid.
If they really are as incompetent as we are seeing here, I don’t know what I want. I know, to the roots of my soul that Labour cannot do what they are promising, but maybe, just maybe, they need to be given a chance. I am certain it would be a disaster – I mean really, really certain, but crikey.
Whoever does win this only gets five years IMHO. Brexit cannot possibly deliver all things to all men, and whoever is in power in five years will be out, and convincingly so.
I don’t trust Corbyn to deliver on Brexit or Trident. He’s already U-turned on both those issues once or twice, and I therefore don’t trust him to deliver on anything in his manifesto, even on the things which are actually possible. The EU Commission would also walk all over him during Brexit negotiations. On the other hand, the Conservatives have by and large delivered on their manifestos and they have proved they can balance a budget, which is perhaps even more important than the manifesto itself in many ways. Social care is the only spikey issue for me. They need to confirm the cap will be roughly around £100k or less, it would be silly to continue to leave that one festering.
But credit were credit is due, the Conservatives are fiscally doing what needs to be done, and here’s the irrefutable proof. Deficit moving towards zero, debt levelling off just under 90%. Another 10 years and we might actually see debt back below 60%, where it belongs, at this rate. Then we’ve fixed this crap for the next generation, even if we’ve suffered a little in the process. Surely that’s more responsible than leaving our mess for them to fix.



Deportation back to where…..Bradford?
Isn’t what you are suggesting, except the deportation element, exactly what happens now? And it’s only ‘simple and straightforward’ if the potential suicide-bomber gives you sufficient evidence to accumulate; most don’t.
They can definitely be detained one way or another. Oswald Mosley was detained for the duration of WII for similar such support for the enemy’s ideology, so I don’t see why people flying ISIS flags, verbalising support for terrorism, laughing at terror attacks or travelling to Syria can’t be.
So when they say it’s “the first air-cooled AESA radar,” that probably just means it’s operating at lower power and isn’t really something to brag about.
No.
It’s that sort of conflating of ‘facts’ and half-truths that led seventy million people to follow a delusional psychopathic retard into a world war, apparently, started by the ‘International Jewery’!
And, just to make absolutely sure there is no confusion, I am not condoning, excusing, or pardoning anything that went on in Northern cities involving ‘paedophile rings’!
Let’s get back to a sensible discussion about facts, shall we?
Taking females from the enemy as sex slaves is condoned in Qu’ran.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/femalecaptives.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoners_of_war_in_Islam
In late 2014 ISIL released a pamphlet on the treatment of female captives and slaves which permits sex with them.[29][30][31][32][33]
Abul Taher, “Our faith condones raping underage slaves: ISIS publishes shocking guidebook telling fighters how to buy, sell and abuse captured women,”
I will also mention the underage brides taken by ISIS and the schoolgirls kidnapped by Boko Haram.
Ryan – you got that from Wiki. I have immediate family who worked for BNFL, and then BNL until it was disolved.
I have worked for them personally. There was nothing left of the actual company before Brown left office, just a body paying out pensions, which were later transferred to the UKAEA.
I believe the decision to dissolve it was outlined in the Energy White Paper 2003.
Oh wow.
Corbyn condemned by his own party for attending wreath-laying ceremony for Palestinian terror chief
I did not if this is the correct translation in English, but ther friday’s prayer is the moment that usually spark revolts in M.E. as you can’t just ban people going to Mosques without facing an uprise.
I have given you the benefit of doubt , you are demostrating by yourself it was wasted .
There seems to be terror every day of the week, I genuinely didn’t realise they had a favourite day in their culture.
What about current GaAs?
Well, he implied that it caused terror attacks, and Rotherham was really a form of terror attack.
What do other AESAs use for cooling though?