Ed Miliband

Status
Not open for further replies.


Clatts said:
I think we'll see David back at the first decent by-election if Ed loses in May.
Click to expand...
Two of Labours biggest errors were David M not challenging Brown in his last months as PM, when everyone could see where the party were going, and secondly somehow managing to lose the leadership battle with his brother.

Maybe David is a little indecisive when it comes to the crunch, who knows.

I dont mind Ed too much in fairness.
 
Market Where? said:
I like his ideas on tightening up on tax avoidance schemes - building on what the Tories have already done mind - but I would like to see the people setting up the dodgy schemes and the people advising the Jimmy Carrs and Gary Barlows of the world to also be made liable for the amount of tax avoided should the schemes be declared illegal.
Click to expand...
Trouble is those companies provide researches and dogsbodies for the parties and the MPs free of charge so they are perfectly placed to influence policy before it is made.
 
FC United of Manchester said:
The party needed to cut it's ties to pseudo Toryism after the Blair and New Labour fiasco and return to being a genuine socialist party offering a true alternative. Ridiculously even the Lib Dems were to the left of labour before the last General election.

Whoever thought Ed was the right person to do that wants their bumps feeling but unfortunately the new labour years had rid the party of any leftish thinkers who were even remotely electable.

They need to tear everything up and start to differentiate themselves again, maybe even try and persuade somebody like Owen Jones into the fold. The rush for the centre ground from our 3 main political parties has left us completely devoid of choice, they are indistinguishable from one another and this genuine lack of choice is (IMO) the major reason that people are turning away from politics and becoming completely apathetic.
Click to expand...

Owen Jones :eek: Seriously? He is the absolute King of arseholes and lives in cloud-cuckoo land.
 
Church said:
There is nothing quite as liberating as some jumped up little cow who has made loads of money for basically waving her arse in peoples faces, to lecture the rest of us on how to go about our business. Stupid cow should go back to the jungle and not come back.
Click to expand...

I don't live in london and don't live in what I would class as an expensive house. The majority of individuals who will suffer under this tax proposal though are those who have lived in London all their lives, usually in the same house that belonged to their parents, and which has risen in value at astronomical levels. These are the one's who will be greatly disadvantaged by this tax - and no I'm not including the delectible Mylene. For these reasons, she does have a point. Those who can afford these houses, will not be hurt by paying x or y every year as a Labour tax.

Now, those of us who are fortunate not to live in London, couldn't give a flying fruit, but there are over 10 million living in the Metropolis and many will be taxed under this proposal.
 
Brexit said:
Owen Jones :eek: Seriously? He is the absolute King of arseholes and lives in cloud-cuckoo land.
Click to expand...
In your opinion, and nowt wrong with that opinion I might add but that's the whole point - we need to get a wider range of the spectrum involved again instead of these identikit public schoolboys with near identical views. The Labour Party needs to start representing those with left of centre views again. Inevitably even when dealing with one side of the spectrum only you will get people who some think are arseholes and others think are the next messiah. That's healthy, I always had enormous respect for Tony Benn while others thought he was a complete arse. Conversely I rather surprisingly know some people who actually rated the loon Derek Hatton!!!

Give us some choice again in politics not 3 branches of the same party.
 
Last edited:
York said:
I don't live in london and don't live in what I would class as an expensive house. The majority of individuals who will suffer under this tax proposal though are those who have lived in London all their lives, usually in the same house that belonged to their parents, and which has risen in value at astronomical levels. These are the one's who will be greatly disadvantaged by this tax - and no I'm not including the delectible Mylene. For these reasons, she does have a point. Those who can afford these houses, will not be hurt by paying x or y every year as a Labour tax.

Now, those of us who are fortunate not to live in London, couldn't give a flying fruit, but there are over 10 million living in the Metropolis and many will be taxed under this proposal.
Click to expand...

Sorry mate, but anyone living in a house that is worth £2m and doesnt have a bit spare to pay a one-off tax doesnt really have my sympathy. If the super-rich try and fiddle their way out of this, then that's an inland revenue matter of collecting the money properly.

The modern British culture has somehow lured most decent normal folk who pay their taxes and live fairly steady lives into accepting that the rich keep on getting richer and we just meander along not getting pay rises and having to squeeze more and more out of what money we do earn.
 
FC United of Manchester said:
In your opinion, and nowt wrong with that opinion I might add but that's the whole point - we need to get a wider range of the spectrum involved again instead of these identikit public schoolboys with near identical views. The Labour Party needs to start representing those with left of centre views again. Inevitably even when dealing with one side of the spectrum only you will get people who some think are arseholes and others think are the next messiah. That's healthy, I always had enormous respect for Tony Benn while others thought he was a complete arse. Conversely I rather surprisingly know some people who actually rated the loon Derek Hatton!!!

Give us some choice again in politics again not 3 branches of the same party.
Click to expand...

I'm all for choice but he is on another planet.
 
FC United of Manchester said:
In your opinion, and nowt wrong with that opinion I might add but that's the whole point - we need to get a wider range of the spectrum involved again instead of these identikit public schoolboys with near identical views. The Labour Party needs to start representing those with left of centre views again. Inevitably even when dealing with one side of the spectrum only you will get people who some think are arseholes and others think are the next messiah. That's healthy, I always had enormous respect for Tony Benn while others thought he was a complete arse. Conversely I rather surprisingly know some people who actually rated the loon Derek Hatton!!!

Give us some choice again in politics not 3 branches of the same party.
Click to expand...
Tony Benn, once he stepped away from front line politics at least, spoke brilliantly and with enormous amounts of sense. There doesnt seem to be a place for that kind of thinking and speaking in modern politics though, with spin and counter spin being the main requirement.
 
Church said:
Sorry mate, but anyone living in a house that is worth £2m and doesnt have a bit spare to pay a one-off tax doesnt really have my sympathy. If the super-rich try and fiddle their way out of this, then that's an inland revenue matter of collecting the money properly.

The modern British culture has somehow lured most decent normal folk who pay their taxes and live fairly steady lives into accepting that the rich keep on getting richer and we just meander along not getting pay rises and having to squeeze more and more out of what money we do earn.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a case of a proposal made to make people feel better, but which ends up only getting the people in the middle who aren't the problem. Trusting the inland revenue to ensure the wealthy actual targets of the measure don't use any of their multiple tax escape routes to avoid paying seems hopelessly optimistic given past history.
 
Cockney Mackem said:
Sounds like a case of a proposal made to make people feel better, but which ends up only getting the people in the middle who aren't the problem. Trusting the inland revenue to ensure the wealthy actual targets of the measure don't use any of their multiple tax escape routes to avoid paying seems hopelessly optimistic given past history.
Click to expand...
True.
Personally I think creating a mansion tax is pointless, and it would surely be easier to impose higher council tax rates on such areas. (I just dont want lectures from wealthy people like MK about it... :))
 
Church said:
Sorry mate, but anyone living in a house that is worth £2m and doesnt have a bit spare to pay a one-off tax doesnt really have my sympathy. If the super-rich try and fiddle their way out of this, then that's an inland revenue matter of collecting the money properly.

The modern British culture has somehow lured most decent normal folk who pay their taxes and live fairly steady lives into accepting that the rich keep on getting richer and we just meander along not getting pay rises and having to squeeze more and more out of what money we do earn.
Click to expand...

Church you miss my point. My parents and theirs before them lived in the same house. The value of that house rose over time. This has occurred to many in London - these people can't afford to buy a house of that value, but live in one. Now, Labour are about to punish them for living in the same house as a generational family. Do we force them out of London? I'm not saying those who can afford it shouldn't pay, I'm talking about the average family who live in London. My wife's aunt has just moved out of London, from a 3 bed ex-council maisonette in Islington - they bought it off the council years ago - sold for £550,00 ffs. Now take the detached house and you can easily hit £2M in London, but work on the buses or for the council, if the house has always been in the family.

I'm saying make the wealthy pay, but property wealth does not necessarily equate to the wealthy.
 
York said:
I don't live in london and don't live in what I would class as an expensive house. The majority of individuals who will suffer under this tax proposal though are those who have lived in London all their lives, usually in the same house that belonged to their parents, and which has risen in value at astronomical levels. These are the one's who will be greatly disadvantaged by this tax - and no I'm not including the delectible Mylene. For these reasons, she does have a point. Those who can afford these houses, will not be hurt by paying x or y every year as a Labour tax.

Now, those of us who are fortunate not to live in London, couldn't give a flying fruit, but there are over 10 million living in the Metropolis and many will be taxed under this proposal.
Click to expand...

There are hundreds of thousands of houses in London valued under £2 million, and if you own a £2 million quid house in London you are living in a big house or a rich central area. The vast majority of individuals in the fortunate position of owning such a house will be rich enough by anyone's standards to afford this tax. For the relatively few old people who happened to have bought such a house for £500 in the sixties and don't have the income to pay the tax, the tax could be deferred to be paid at the point they (or the executors of their will) sell it, or they could flog the house, move somewhere slightly smaller or cheaper and avoid the tax altogether. But listening to these old bastards twisting their faces about the fact that their tax-free, seven-figure capital gains might end up costing them a bit of extra tax to support the less fortunate makes me want to vomit.
 
Was expecting a lot more than what I saw in the video. Which was a 15 second point.

if Miliband was talking about taxing junk food, and not posh people's houses, would she had still complained? I think not.
 
Jasper said:
Getting berated again for supposedly being outgunned by Mylene Klass last night of all people. Anyone thing that the continued hammering he is getting in the press might work to his advantage come election time. You know we all love an underdog in this country.
Click to expand...
No 'supposedly' about it
 
But people might be forced out of their house if they can't afford to pay it. Ah well tough they shouldn't be there anyway. Oh hang on that's only for the bedroom tax isn't it.....
 
York said:
I don't live in london and don't live in what I would class as an expensive house. The majority of individuals who will suffer under this tax proposal though are those who have lived in London all their lives, usually in the same house that belonged to their parents, and which has risen in value at astronomical levels. These are the one's who will be greatly disadvantaged by this tax - and no I'm not including the delectible Mylene. For these reasons, she does have a point. Those who can afford these houses, will not be hurt by paying x or y every year as a Labour tax.

Now, those of us who are fortunate not to live in London, couldn't give a flying fruit, but there are over 10 million living in the Metropolis and many will be taxed under this proposal.
Click to expand...
It's an easy vote winner for gullible socialistas,'they have more money than you, let's take it off them'. That is of course regardless of the circumstances of how they got that £2m 'mansion'. It's striking a blow for the politics of envy
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top