f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Low paid workers don't end up in the audience of Question Time!!! And there are a lot of low paid workers... enough to lose that party an electon.

Our society is democratiic... it is everything to do with a democracy. There is a reason far right or far left societies are usually ruled by a dictator!

Type20Paul

Exactly. I have always thought Ed was the end of a bell but I watched his speech open minded to see what he could say for himself. It was poor at best. And when will politicians learn that humour is not a good idea?! And so what he managed it without notes. I'd personally ban anyone from doing such a speech with notes anyway - if you can't remember a 20 minute speech on a topic you are supposed to be so passionate about that you are wanting the whole country to follow your passion then you aren't the man for the job IMHO.

Type20Paul

And why would a flat rate tax have to hurt low earners? I'd propose a higher limit before income tax and then a flat rate in a manner that would help low earners. And that policy wasn't the parties issue - it was all their others!

Democracy does not dictate we look after the less fortunate. It just says we all have a vote towards how the country is run - and most people will never agree fully with all the policies of the party they vote for - that would be massively unlikely to happen, but we have no more choice than to choose the best fit party for us or to stand ourselves.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

But, sadly, constant repetition has been shown to work.

Complete the following saying....."If only all things in life were as reliable as a.........."

And anyone over twenty, will say, "Volkswagen..."

And it's stuck. Volkys are, apparently, reliable, despite evidence to the contrary.

Dingdongler

Exactly. I regularly give 30 minute lectures without notes, it's not difficult. And my lectures will actually contain facts, figures etc not just waffle and I'll have to answer questions from the audience after.

cster

I don't know, I can't remember who originally made the statement.Plus I dream a lot these days
ps I found this interesting
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23037957

Leslie

I reckon that the definition of a politician is someone who is obsessed with personal power and most will do or say anything to achieve it!

Les

cster

How very prosaic.
My definition of a politician is more concise - C**t!

Leslie

I was just in the mood for a bit more writing than that!

Les

RA Dunk

EFA!

Turbohot

I think Miliband did well as a speaker. It is impressive that he remembered all his brand new pledges without any pre-done notes. Perhaps he came up with all that airy-fairy because he had forgotten his notes, and he just had to knock something together there and then, I don't know. He will regret, I can tell.

Chip

Miliband made a speech that was very well rehearsed, that's all.

We knew most of what he was going to say from the press on the weekend.

It's all bollox anyway.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Harsh...but true.

Turbohot

Ability to rehearse well is a good thing to qualify as a good parrot-speaker.

I wasn't sure about that energy prices pledge, but I might have missed it on the weekend.

+1.

Good parrot-speaker is one thing, but if the contents of the speech are just wooden sheds in the air, its only going to be just by the Miliband, of the Miliband, and for the Miliband. But then again, he happens to a bollox king- a politician. <shrugs>

Leslie

Good speechmaking can certainly get people to believe that the bloke is a star, but I reckon it is what he actually achieves what really matters, and that ability is a lot more thin on the ground!

Les

Leslie

I think the word is "Charlatan!"

I have always wanted the chance to use it!

Les

ReallyReallyGoodMeat

I caught a bit of the speech on the news outlets yesterday...

I didn't particularly like the style of the speech, seems very American in its use of iteration, repetition, even goading the crowd at one point, while pacing around on stage like an entertainer.

Is this what British politics has become? What's wrong with standing behind a pedestal delivering a speech? That's more how the British behave, no?

And I by no means am singling out Labour, I'm sure the Conservative conference will be no different, or worse.

rabbos

He's chock full of anti-charisma, in an age of megapathy.

The best thing labour could do is a soprano style boat trip for the millibands, so we never have to see their stupid personas in the media ever again. Start from scratch.

Decent honourable and competent politicians... can they exist? or does the establishment reject them automatically?

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

I agree, they DO need to start from scratch.

The likes of Harman, Jowell, *****, the Millipedes, Blears etc etc are ALL tainted by what went before.

Personally, I could NOT vote Labour again while any of the old crew are still front bench.

dsmith

But then you couldn't employ half the country in call centres to manage the money go round of taking away only to give it back. This was Labour policy - job creation in the public sector (in geographies they chose), rather than simplification to reduce the cost of government.

And the headline income tax rates are only 1 part of the story - the constant juggling of allowances, credits etc make workout out your own marginal tax rate very difficult (i.e. how much of each extra pound you're allowed to keep)

e.g.
Earn between 50K and 60K with 2 children and the Child benefit ramp down = Marginal Tax Rate of 58%..4 kids = 73%
The removal of personal allowance after £100K creates another area with a marginal tax rate of 60% - higher than if you earn £200K and pay "only" 45%


http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/6527

Whatever you think of the tax system....A single earner earning £50K with 4kids shouldn't be paying a 73% tax rate.

Labour are always obsessed about complicating tax and and benefits to micro manage small number of specific cases - the test for any new policy is "Does it simplify the system...and does it cost less to run"

JGlanzaV

iTrader: (3)

The only man to ever enter parliament with honest intentions was guy fawkes, string the lot of em up imo

Martin2005

I agree with this, the problem is that you presented this as a Labour policy, when the reality is that there is virually no difference between Labour or Conservatives on this

dsmith

Was definitely Labour policy to create complicated systems to justify public sector employment in areas they wanted to benefit.

I am very disappointed that more (anything ?!) has not been done in the last 3 years to simplify the systems and remove cost that way - and by remove cost...yes I mean get rid of public sector jobs needed to look after it.

I once tried to create similar graphs to take into account more of the major benefits/taxes(Income Tax,NI,Tax Credits,Child benefit etc)...but gave up.

The blurring of personal taxation and benefits more typically based on household/family income is my other pet hate - as demonstrated by the shambolic (conservative) approach to Child benefit.

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Why has whether they have any kids got anything to do with it?

^Qwerty^

And is the sole reason I won't be voting for them at the next election. It boils my pi55 that they say it can't be means tested across couples, so use a blunt instrument and base it on one income regardless of if another couple have more take home pay.

Then Labour who objected to it have made no indication at all that they would reverse the decision should they win the next election, probably because they can't afford to, but it was good to object anyway.

To55ers the lot of em.

dsmith

And that level of ability to read more than a few lines and understand it is why politicians get away with so much ****e policy.