• Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Sign in to follow this  
Southmartin

Brexit Party - Policies

Recommended Posts

Can't see any discussion about the policies announced by Nigel at the event last Sunday. 

  1. "Invest in the rest" (as it's being called) spending £200 billion in the regions - basically everywhere outside the M25 thats suffered from a lack of investment. Being paid for by a combination of not paying the £39bn to the EU, scrapping HS2 and halving Foreign Aid
  2. Trying to rebalance retail to make it fairer for 'bricks & mortar; stored to get on a level playing field with the internet giants. Plan is to totally scrap Business Rates outside of London and replace it with an online sales tax
  3. Being fair to students: Offering to wipe out student debt is unfair, as it means that you get a university education for free, while those that didn't go end up paying for it. Likewise the financial burden on students is too high for the value. So TBP policy will be to keep the loans, but cancel the accruing debt upon them. 
  4. To provide free broadband to everyone on public transport, trains, busses etc

My perspective is that it screws them in London - but they won't win there anyway. So it looks to me like London's been thrown under the bus for the good of everywhere else. Certainly the "invest in the rest" is going to resonate in most places (though they'll have to be careful not to specify exactly where to ensure everyone thinks their region will benefit. 

The student thing is reasonable -though they won't win many students as Steptoe is promising to wipe it all out... Maybe some of the brighter ones will realise that's not affordable, but when promised free jam, or cheap jam, most will opt for free and expect 'others' to pay for it

However, as a start I think it's electorally promising

Thoughts?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Southmartin said:

though they'll have to be careful not to specify exactly where to ensure everyone thinks their region will benefit. 

 

 

Surely these silly games is the sort of politics we want to get away from? Can't we just have a party which tells the truth and accepts people will either vote for it or not.

Some reasonable policies - investing outside London seems decent idea- but nothing groundbreaking. They're not going to change the world with an online sales tax. So much politicians could do on house prices, benefits, the environment, immigration. Are they going to do any of it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I didn't know that with a Labour government the Police and local councils would go mad with power, in the previous largely unchecked fashion, and grab any additional funding as a wages increase, I'd vote for much of Corbyn's more socialist type policies. I'd like to see a huge tax on second homes and a huge increase in inheritance tax and the door shutting on the various agricultural land dodge type wheezes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest the only parts of their manifesto I'll be interested in are the planning laws, the housing market/ economy, and the immigration and deportation laws. Guff about public wifi doesn't interest me. 

6 minutes ago, SNACR said:

If I didn't know that with a Labour government the Police and local councils would go mad with power, in the previous largely unchecked fashion, and grab any additional funding as a wages increase, I'd vote for much of Corbyn's more socialist type policies. I'd like to see a huge tax on second homes and a huge increase in inheritance tax and the door shutting on the various agricultural land dodge type wheezes. 

Pourquoi?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, spunko said:

To be honest the only parts of their manifesto I'll be interested in are the planning laws, the housing market/ economy, and the immigration and deportation laws. Guff about public wifi doesn't interest me. 

Pourquoi?

That's why you have an elite because the same families hold on to valuable assets, primarily land and property, for generations. Unfortunately, most ordinary worker bees are in love with the idea of passing on a £100k for their kids - who in most cases just spunk it on a couple of foreign holidays and a new car - that it won't happen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, SNACR said:

That's why you have an elite because the same families hold on to valuable assets, primarily land and property, for generations. Unfortunately, most ordinary worker bees are in love with the idea of passing on a £100k for their kids - who in most cases just spunk it on a couple of foreign holidays and a new car - that it won't happen. 

Blimey, that does sound very socialist. Surely we have an elite because of a lifetime of nepotism, various benefits and handouts given to them, not just because of a death tax. And anyway,  the pissing it up the wall idea applies just as equally to the elite as it does to the little guy, isn't it 3 generations? 

Edited by spunko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You think they will ever wipe student debt?

Theyll sell it to a private company and then wipe it, except the wipe won’t cover the now privately owned debt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, spunko said:

To be honest the only parts of their manifesto I'll be interested in are the planning laws, the housing market/ economy, and the immigration and deportation laws. Guff about public wifi doesn't interest me. 

Pourquoi?

Not one of those things has been a talking point in the Boris v Cunt debates ... well apart from "helping" young people get on the housing bubble ladder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Southmartin said:

Being fair to students: Offering to wipe out student debt is unfair, as it means that you get a university education for free, while those that didn't go end up paying for it. Likewise the financial burden on students is too high for the value. So TBP policy will be to keep the loans, but cancel the accruing debt upon them.

I would much prefer them to put a 2% graduate surcharge on employers NI for ALL graduates, including those that go it for free 30 years ago.

Then they could cancel fees going forwards AND write off the current debt.

It would also get employers thinking if they really need graduates for a job as they would now cost more than non grads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, spunko said:

Blimey, that does sound very socialist. Surely we have an elite because of a lifetime of meritocracy, various benefits and handouts given to them, not just because of a death tax. And anyway,  the pissing it up the wall idea applies just as equally to the elite as it does to the little guy, isn't it 3 generations? 

No, a lot of the most powerful families date back to around Tudor times when Henry handed out huges tracts of lands to favoured people. Sure the odd minor aristo gambles and drinks everything away but even a lot of people who are presented as self-made, if you peel back the layers, they often turn out to be an arm of some longstanding dynasty.

Leaving a legacy, like having kids, is some sort of coping mechanism the masses seem to have for the ephemeral nature of human life on earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

I would much prefer them to put a 2% graduate surcharge on employers NI for ALL graduates, including those that go it for free 30 years ago.

Then they could cancel fees going forwards AND write off the current debt.

Can you imagine the utterly stupid courses young people would go on if they were free.

Edited by Panther

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Panther said:

Can you imagine the utterly stupid courses young people would go on if they were going to be at no cost

That's an entirely different subject. Who can go and what they can study needs a serious review.

But they are in theory no cost today. Got a friend doing some kind of 'dance' degree - she is never going to earn over the threshold so will never pay a penny back.

It's only really those doing the 'proper' courses that end up paying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

That's an entirely different subject. Who can go and what they can study needs a serious review.

So not an entirely different subject then, your proposal needs to come with a filter of some kind, as in the days of old

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Panther said:

So not an entirely different subject then, your proposal needs to come with a filter of some kind, as in the days of old

I agree. But no proper politician should mention that side of it until they get into power.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Wight Flight said:

I would much prefer them to put a 2% graduate surcharge on employers NI for ALL graduates, including those that go it for free 30 years ago.

Then they could cancel fees going forwards AND write off the current debt.

It would also get employers thinking if they really need graduates for a job as they would now cost more than non grads.

And the people who didn't/couldn't take a student loan and had to work 30 hours a week on top of uni work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, SNACR said:

No, a lot of the most powerful families date back to around Tudor times when Henry handed out huges tracts of lands to favoured people. Sure the odd minor aristo gambles and drinks everything away but even a lot of people who are presented as self-made, if you peel back the layers, they often turn out to be an arm of some longstanding dynasty.

Leaving a legacy, like having kids, is some sort of coping mechanism the masses seem to have for the ephemeral nature of human life on earth.

Very true. Additionally one can even go back further than that with regards to know why inheritance tax is futile for them. They can increase it all they like but with the (offshore) trusts they're not going to pay much of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, A_P said:

Very true. Additionally one can even go back further than that with regards to know why inheritance tax is futile for them. They can increase it all they like but with the (offshore) trusts they're not going to pay much of it.

It's easily fixed they can't move the actual land or property to the Channel Islands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SNACR said:

It's easily fixed they can't move the actual land or property to the Channel Islands.

Sure it is, that's why it hasn't be done already. The very same people you expect to change the rules are the ones setting up the offshoring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, This Time said:

And the people who didn't/couldn't take a student loan and had to work 30 hours a week on top of uni work?

I am talking primarily about the tuition fees.

I don't have a particular issue with students having to repay / fund from their own pocket their drinking costs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Southmartin said:

and halving Foreign Aid

That will never happen. Foreign aid is too useful as a soft power projection tool. 

 

1 hour ago, Southmartin said:

Plan is to totally scrap Business Rates outside of London and replace it with an online sales tax

Fuck that! No way I am paying extra on my online stuff to subsidise Sheena's Nail Bar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Funn3r said:

That will never happen. Foreign aid is too useful as a soft power projection tool. 

 

Fuck that! No way I am paying extra on my online stuff to subsidise Sheena's Nail Bar

Total non-starter really as I can't see at this stage how you could deal with buying on apps, when you're on the premises, or click and collect.

If you effectively tax delivered to your door orders, which already have a price loaded to cover the delivery cost, all you'll get is people still ordering online but clogging up the roads just using shops as nothing more than collection points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SNACR said:

If I didn't know that with a Labour government the Police and local councils would go mad with power, in the previous largely unchecked fashion, and grab any additional funding as a wages increase, I'd vote for much of Corbyn's more socialist type policies. I'd like to see a huge tax on second homes and a huge increase in inheritance tax and the door shutting on the various agricultural land dodge type wheezes. 

No, that's the wrong way to do it. The Brexit Party will never do that as it's trying to tackle the problem from the wrong direction. IHT is only ever paid by the middle classes that have struggled and worked hard to gather assets and will have already paid tax on the money they earned to buy them with!

The best way to make IHT fair is to abolish it entirely.

At he moment the wealthy just avoid it by putting assets into Trusts. The poor don't pay it as they don't have anything to pass on, and the middle classes get hammered for it - thus increasing the gap between rich and poor. If you abolished it at least everyone would be able to pass it on - not just the wealthy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Southmartin said:

No, that's the wrong way to do it. The Brexit Party will never do that as it's trying to tackle the problem from the wrong direction. IHT is only ever paid by the middle classes that have struggled and worked hard to gather assets and will have already paid tax on the money they earned to buy them with!

The best way to make IHT fair is to abolish it entirely.

At he moment the wealthy just avoid it by putting assets into Trusts. The poor don't pay it as they don't have anything to pass on, and the middle classes get hammered for it - thus increasing the gap between rich and poor. If you abolished it at least everyone would be able to pass it on - not just the wealthy

No, nothing should be passed on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.