|
Post by patman post on Jul 28, 2024 13:03:02 GMT
Labour can stick to its election promises by not raising income tax, VAT, or NI for "working people" — my reckoning is that's probably for people getting less than around £70K a year as Labour won't want to immediately upset RMT and Aslef.
But it still needs to increase the tax take to fund all that needs addressing, and proposals already outlined during the election won't raise enough. However, growth from local sources alone won't alleviate the immediate needs. So getting investment (local and from overseas) by increasing the attraction of the UK economy is surely a must.
One-off corporate deals and exceptions for expansions and set-ups could stimulate business-to-business trade, employment, and professional services.
And specific borrowings could also be a stop-gap measure...
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 28, 2024 14:06:23 GMT
Labour can stick to its election promises by not raising income tax, VAT, or NI for "working people" — my reckoning is that's probably for people getting less than around £70K a year as Labour won't want to immediately upset RMT and Aslef. But it still needs to increase the tax take to fund all that needs addressing, and proposals already outlined during the election won't raise enough. However, growth from local sources alone won't alleviate the immediate needs. So getting investment (local and from overseas) by increasing the attraction of the UK economy is surely a must. One-off corporate deals and exceptions for expansions and set-ups could stimulate business-to-business trade, employment, and professional services. And specific borrowings could also be a stop-gap measure... They could ask the public if they would support tax rises. Maybe the first of a new style of governing where they actually ask the public their opinion on a government website.
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jul 28, 2024 14:48:22 GMT
Labour can stick to its election promises by not raising income tax, VAT, or NI for "working people" — my reckoning is that's probably for people getting less than around £70K a year as Labour won't want to immediately upset RMT and Aslef. But it still needs to increase the tax take to fund all that needs addressing, and proposals already outlined during the election won't raise enough. However, growth from local sources alone won't alleviate the immediate needs. So getting investment (local and from overseas) by increasing the attraction of the UK economy is surely a must. One-off corporate deals and exceptions for expansions and set-ups could stimulate business-to-business trade, employment, and professional services. And specific borrowings could also be a stop-gap measure... They could ask the public if they would support tax rises. Maybe the first of a new style of governing where they actually ask the public their opinion on a government website. It's a thought — but does the electorate really want more referendums? This is where opinion polls and focus groups can inform and steer policy.
The electorate saw that the Tory campaign just accused Labour of having no plans and of being a tax and spend party — despite themselves putting Britain on a path to having the biggest tax burden in its history!!!
Labour was clear during its campaign that there would not be enough money coming in to fix everything overnight. The electorate knew the Tories had bottled it. In the event, the electorate just wanted someone else (anyone else) to clear up the mess...
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 28, 2024 15:57:01 GMT
They could ask the public if they would support tax rises. Maybe the first of a new style of governing where they actually ask the public their opinion on a government website. It's a thought — but does the electorate really want more referendums? This is where opinion polls and focus groups can inform and steer policy.
The electorate saw that the Tory campaign just accused Labour of having no plans and of being a tax and spend party — despite themselves putting Britain on a path to having the biggest tax burden in its history!!!
Labour was clear during its campaign that there would not be enough money coming in to fix everything overnight. The electorate knew the Tories had bottled it. In the event, the electorate just wanted someone else (anyone else) to clear up the mess...
Hi Pat, (Good to see you no here BTW, haven't welcomed you and you've been here a while. Always found your reasoning very good ) Back to the thread. I was thinking more along the lines of a poll rather than a referendum. The sort of thing you do to get something discussed in parliament . Only instead of raising a petition it would be offered by your government. I agree on what people wanted. Any! Just anything! better than being rudderless. I Don't know how much of an indication of new hope it is, but my company has seen a 15% increase in sales across the country since the election, and that's without any clear improvement in the economy of drops in interest rates
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jul 29, 2024 11:43:49 GMT
Thanks for the welcome — even though you'd noticed I'd been hiding behind the sofa for a while.
***
Yep, agreed, those 100,000+ polls could serve in this instance but, like with all proposals for mid-term decisions, it could prove tricky sifting the whacky from the possible and then deciding what's ultimately positive.
Your comment on increased sales is interesting — I thought it was only me sensing an increase in positivity among colleagues and clients, even this quickly after the election. I guess this will be tested by their judgements following this afternoon's statement...
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on Jul 29, 2024 12:52:06 GMT
So rumour is she's going to cancel the Arundel and Stonehenge bypasses which are both desperately needed for anyone that uses the A27 and A303 respectively and have long been delayed too long with the public betrayed time after time.
Why not instead say they will allow private companies to take on the projects and charge tolls (as per M6 toll road)?
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 29, 2024 13:18:19 GMT
So rumour is she's going to cancel the Arundel and Stonehenge bypasses which are both desperately needed for anyone that uses the A27 and A303 respectively and have long been delayed too long with the public betrayed time after time. Why not instead say they will allow private companies to take on the projects and charge tolls (as per M6 toll road)? Have you seen the M6 toll, its empty while the M6 is jam packed.
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jul 29, 2024 13:24:45 GMT
So rumour is she's going to cancel the Arundel and Stonehenge bypasses which are both desperately needed for anyone that uses the A27 and A303 respectively and have long been delayed too long with the public betrayed time after time. Why not instead say they will allow private companies to take on the projects and charge tolls (as per M6 toll road)? Not quite following your main point, but:
My recollection of the A303 is that the bit that gives a view of Stonehenge is not the only narrow section, there's restricted widths along the route both before and after.
Has anyone surveyed the congested traffic to check if some drivers slow down to view the site? Seems a possible cause of hold-ups to me — look at the way traffic slows down on motorways (to rubber-neck) when there are crashes on the other carriageway...
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 29, 2024 13:27:33 GMT
So rumour is she's going to cancel the Arundel and Stonehenge bypasses which are both desperately needed for anyone that uses the A27 and A303 respectively and have long been delayed too long with the public betrayed time after time. Why not instead say they will allow private companies to take on the projects and charge tolls (as per M6 toll road)? Not quite following your main point, but:
My recollection of the A303 is that the bit that gives a view of Stonehenge is not the only narrow section, there's restricted widths along the route both before and after.
Has anyone surveyed the congested traffic to check if some drivers slow down to view the site? Seems a possible cause of hold-ups to me — look at the way traffic slows down on motorways (to rubber-neck) when there are crashes on the other carriageway...
Bit off topic, but I always imagine the reason cars slow down approaching a crash on the opposite carriage way is that they see a load of blue flashing lights up ahead.
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Jul 29, 2024 13:48:29 GMT
Not quite following your main point, but:
My recollection of the A303 is that the bit that gives a view of Stonehenge is not the only narrow section, there's restricted widths along the route both before and after.
Has anyone surveyed the congested traffic to check if some drivers slow down to view the site? Seems a possible cause of hold-ups to me — look at the way traffic slows down on motorways (to rubber-neck) when there are crashes on the other carriageway...
Bit off topic, but I always imagine the reason cars slow down approaching a crash on the opposite carriage way is that they see a load of blue flashing lights up ahead. Could be...
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 29, 2024 13:59:02 GMT
So rumour is she's going to cancel the Arundel and Stonehenge bypasses which are both desperately needed for anyone that uses the A27 and A303 respectively and have long been delayed too long with the public betrayed time after time. Why not instead say they will allow private companies to take on the projects and charge tolls (as per M6 toll road)? Not quite following your main point, but:
My recollection of the A303 is that the bit that gives a view of Stonehenge is not the only narrow section, there's restricted widths along the route both before and after.
Has anyone surveyed the congested traffic to check if some drivers slow down to view the site? Seems a possible cause of hold-ups to me — look at the way traffic slows down on motorways (to rubber-neck) when there are crashes on the other carriageway...
Coming from London, Stonehenge and the roundabout a mile or so before are the first interruption to the dual carriageway. In summer the traffic can get pretty horrendous. Total cost of the tunnel though is around £2bn which does seem crazy. Surely there must be a cheaper and better solution.
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on Jul 29, 2024 14:16:51 GMT
So rumour is she's going to cancel the Arundel and Stonehenge bypasses which are both desperately needed for anyone that uses the A27 and A303 respectively and have long been delayed too long with the public betrayed time after time. Why not instead say they will allow private companies to take on the projects and charge tolls (as per M6 toll road)? Have you seen the M6 toll, its empty while the M6 is jam packed. Seen it loads of times, it's not always empty but it's way easier than that crawl through the outskirts of Birmingham
|
|
Steve
Hero Protagonist
Posts: 2,556
Member is Online
|
Post by Steve on Jul 29, 2024 14:25:41 GMT
Not quite following your main point, but:
My recollection of the A303 is that the bit that gives a view of Stonehenge is not the only narrow section, there's restricted widths along the route both before and after.
Has anyone surveyed the congested traffic to check if some drivers slow down to view the site? Seems a possible cause of hold-ups to me — look at the way traffic slows down on motorways (to rubber-neck) when there are crashes on the other carriageway...
Coming from London, Stonehenge and the roundabout a mile or so before are the first interruption to the dual carriageway. In summer the traffic can get pretty horrendous. Total cost of the tunnel though is around £2bn which does seem crazy. Surely there must be a cheaper and better solution. I guess they figure bulldozing Stonehenge would be out of order Back to serious, IMHO the problem is more Winterbourne Stoke than Stonehenge as it's just not possible to get 2 busy lanes of 70mph traffic into one lane of 40mph without getting a huge jam. We haven't done the journey for a while (since the MiL died) but if you are, the diversion via Larkhill often saves a chunk of time.
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Jul 29, 2024 14:28:32 GMT
Not quite following your main point, but:
My recollection of the A303 is that the bit that gives a view of Stonehenge is not the only narrow section, there's restricted widths along the route both before and after.
Has anyone surveyed the congested traffic to check if some drivers slow down to view the site? Seems a possible cause of hold-ups to me — look at the way traffic slows down on motorways (to rubber-neck) when there are crashes on the other carriageway...
Coming from London, Stonehenge and the roundabout a mile or so before are the first interruption to the dual carriageway. In summer the traffic can get pretty horrendous. Total cost of the tunnel though is around £2bn which does seem crazy. Surely there must be a cheaper and better solution. Yep, stop worrying that a road nearby will ruin Stonehenge
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Jul 29, 2024 14:33:20 GMT
There’s already a road nearby.
The tunnel seems mad and is opposed by archeologists.
I suppose it’s a choice between do nothing, widen existing road or find another route for road.
|
|