The 2017 GE & Politics Thread

[Ekona]

I really wish they'd just double (or triple) the tax on smoking really. Everyone agrees it's a crappy habit, has no benefits at all, so either tax the heck out of it or ban it altogether.

 

And while we're there, let's start taxing vaping properly as well. Disgusting habit, I don't care if it's healthier or not, bloody great plumes of smoke being puffed in your face isn't pleasant.

[Stutopia]

You've gone mad, tax things which smell

[Stutopia]

Back to costing of policies.

 

I don't really care about this for a few reasons, the first one is they ALL lie about funding their policies, so I'd rather be lied to about NHS worker front line salaries than the return of grammar schools. Secondly, we've got loads of money, this myth that the country is a business and we need to "balance the books" is rubbish, it's not a person's current account. Lastly, whilever there's money slushing around for Trident (£167bn) HS2 (£56bn) and Crossrail (£15bn) then I'm not going to get in a twist about a few billion here and a few there.

 

Personally, I'm not against these investments, improving Victorian infrastructure is a good idea. But when you add those sums together, it is still dwarfed by the fact we found a trillion pounds down the back of the sofa for the banks, so I just don't buy into the position that we don't have money to pay for policies.

 

Especially when you consider how rich we're all going to be after Brexit and FREEDOM

[Ekona]

HS2 is a good one actually, why Labour haven't gone after that given how unpopular it is I don't know.

[Jetpilot]

I really wish they'd just double (or triple) the tax on smoking really. Everyone agrees it's a crappy habit, has no benefits at all, so either tax the heck out of it or ban it altogether.

 

And while we're there, let's start taxing vaping properly as well. Disgusting habit, I don't care if it's healthier or not, bloody great plumes of smoke being puffed in your face isn't pleasant.

 

12 Billion into the pot from smokers and you dont think they pay enough, 88% of a packet of cigs goes in duty, however, i agree in principal, if you dont want people smoking, make a packet of fags £100. The problem is they need that revenue, imagine the NHS without that 12 billion, people think its bad now and in reality, a smoker dying at a young age (lets say sub 50) probably balances out to an average health person using the NHS up to 80. I appreciate the views of smoking from non smokers, but i would prefer to be in the company of a smoker than someone pi**ed up wanting a fight, possibly driving, ending up in a&e from falling over/fighting etc etc, i hate the blame solely laid at the feet of smokers for being antisocial, drinking is far more anti social and "can" be equally as damaging on ones health. I hate to think what the clean non smokers think they are breathing in when they walk down a busy road or drive about with their windows open...let alone the planes flying overhead, taking off or landing chucking that sh*t out into our skies but they go completely un taxed on their fuel, inc vat.

 

Any successive government need to get far more imaginative than, up the duty on fuel, cigs, alcohol, increase tax imho.

[Ekona]

It's not the anti-social side that bothers me, it's the hypocrisy of taxing something that is so bloody terrible for you. We keep other bad drugs illegal, why does tobacco get a free ride?

 

Actually, I'd much rather see drugs legalised and taxed as well, extra revenue stream.

[Jetpilot]

12 billion is not a free ride dude!!!! Looking at some figures they assume smokers cost the nhs 6 billion, well they have 6 billion extra to play with, you should be thanking us, not condemning us

 

I agree however, make them legal and tax the whole shooting match, why should some coke head go out and enjoy their habit free of duty and vat and when i get a "free" ride, at minimum at least those drugs would be controlled, i.e not full of sh*t when cut up to make some scum drug dealer more money.

[BobbyZ]

Smoking is demonised, no doubt. All the criticisms of it are true, but they're equally true about other things (alcohol being the prime example).

 

Stu I disagree with your point about not running a country like a business. You can only borrow more and more for so long before it gets you into trouble, unless you think that ending up like Greece is a desirable outcome.

[Flex]

I vote for China, they know how to do things.

[Ekona]

Corbyn now refusing to do a TV debate without May.

 

Apparently that makes her weak, but him strong. Yeah okay mate...

[Fodder]

Corbyn now refusing to do a TV debate without May.

 

Apparently that makes her weak, but him strong. Yeah okay mate...

To be fair, is there any point without May?

It's effectively a 2 horse raise and they risk losing even more voters by having him televised.

[Ekona]

Totally agree, it is pointless, but this is a bit pot kettle black.

[Jetpilot]

Media circus imho, they only ever turn into a slanging match and just shows all the party leaders up.

[coldel]

I get all the above, but I would also like to see a leader under pressure and how they respond. I don't know if any of you have sat in board level meetings of large corporations but its easy to spot the 'script reader' get torn apart by opposition leaders who are capable of thinking on their feet, responding to the unknown, driving their own agenda better than the opposition. As much as this lot can have a plan of what they want i.e. a manifesto, how strong and capable are they when sat across the table when debating with Putin or Trump? Personally, I don't see strength in leadership in any of the current candidates, I rate the televised debates as it does give an insight into strength of character, calmness under pressure and many other attributes I believe a figurehead/leader should have - along with good advisors, manifesto, economic beliefs etc.

[Stutopia]

It's not the anti-social side that bothers me, it's the hypocrisy of taxing something that is so bloody terrible for you. We keep other bad drugs illegal, why does tobacco get a free ride?

 

Actually, I'd much rather see drugs legalised and taxed as well, extra revenue stream.

 

Couldn't be a more sensible option, the positive impact it'd have on tax revenues and the negative impact it'd have on organised crime would be huge wins. In fact the tax payer recently paid for an independent report into this, which the government chose to completely disregard because drugs are bad a decriminalisation it didn't chime with the "core voter".

 

Lunacy.

[coldel]

Drugs is an interesting one, thinking the process through to legitimise it would mean legitimising the whole process end to end - so somehow putting controls in globally around how its produced, stored, transported, distributed, sold, used etc. I cannot even imagine thats possible with so many in the chain being likely murders/extortionists etc

[AliveBoy]

Drugs is an interesting one, thinking the process through to legitimise it would mean legitimising the whole process end to end - so somehow putting controls in globally around how its produced, stored, transported, distributed, sold, used etc. I cannot even imagine thats possible with so many in the chain being likely murders/extortionists etc

 

Let's take marijuana as an example though, it's been legalised in a couple of US states and there has been very little in the way of negative side affects. A few more car crashes are being reported, but is that correlation or is it a coincidence. Since Marijuana has been legalised in California the dreadful drought conditions of the last decade have improved slightly, I highly doubt the two are connected

 

Just for the record, I hate the stuff, it smells awful and it doesn't interest me in the slightest, but we can't deny that there would be tax increases if they made it legal with a nice 20% added on the top. You'd also be able to regulate it to ensure that people were buying what they thought they were buying.

Edited April 26, 2017 by AliveBoy

[coldel]

Well its a no brainer it would bring in money, you have an incremental tax stream. Although would that then encourage less cigarette smoking and more marijuana smoking? So drop in one tax and increase in the other, does one outweigh the other, who knows until someone does some research.

 

My point was really that I am not sure or convinced it would be that easy to pass in the UK though, remember the US still allows all sorts of mental laws that make no sense with no consideration for the rest of the world. I would not expect the UK to make legal say Heroin when the supply of it involves murder, corruption, smuggling, extortion, slave trade and all sorts of other processes. Simply making the end product ok, and the distribution in this country ok is not the solution. Hell it only took a report about underpaid workers in China for Apple to pretty much make Apple reconsider how to ensure their products remain on sale in various countries. Imagine it, they legalise Heroin here, but the Daily Mail turns up a report on the supply chain showing children working in fields and families threatened with death etc to get you your exotic product? How would that sit with our countries political heads from a global standpoint?

[AliveBoy]

I don't think they'd ever be able to legalise heroin, that literally kills people. Marijuana is no worse than smoking, some would say less severe, it depends how you view paranoia I guess. Obviously they can't blanket all drugs as legal, just the ones which do less net damage to the country than say, alcohol does. Alcohol certainly kills/injures a LOT of people. I completely get what you're saying though, it is a slippery slope.

[coldel]

I think we are coming at this from different angles, its not the effects that are the issue for me, its the supply chain. People are murdered/enslaved/trapped/threatened etc outside this country getting you your marijuana to safely smoke here - politically its suicide to legalise something that encourages this sort of thing in the supply chain, you are effectively saying you make it easier for widespread use and subsequently more money and demand for something that encourages slavery/murder in another country.

[BobbyZ]

Yeah but you can't say you'd be happy about your local convenience store selling heroin just because no humans were harmed in the production of it, surely?

 

I think it would be political suicide for any politician to propose legalising any drugs - I just can't see that many people being in favour.

[Zeezeebaba]

I've been saying for years all drugs should be legalised regulated and taxed. As for the supply chain well that's another bonus, why, well it legitimises a currently criminal enterprise and makes it a legit business.

The war on drugs is a phallacy, a waste of time and money that achieves nothing but criminalising otherwise law abiding citizens and clogging up our legal and reform systems.

The tax gained would help to pay for all sorts of things from the NHS to quit programs.

Prohibition just doesn't work at all, the US found this out when banning alcohol all those years ago.

One of the biggest problems aside from smoking over here is alcohol. Will they try to ban that, of course not. Just because something is socially and culturally accepted that makes it ok does it.

Drugs have been vilified for absolutely no reason and criminalising it has made it worse without question.

[AliveBoy]

There was a guy on my road who used to grow it in his loft, no-one died for that. There's plenty of farms which get found all over the country here:

 

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/police-uncover-legoland-windsor-cannabis-farm-a3460616.html

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/771173/Cannabis-factory-drugs-bust-nuclear-bunker-Wiltshire

 

There's seeds for marijuana in bird seed:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-29301803

 

It seems pretty easy to grow here without death, smuggling or enslaving, it could effectively be it's own industry. Almost like indoor Strawberry farms:

 

[BobbyZ]

I've been saying for years all drugs should be legalised regulated and taxed. As for the supply chain well that's another bonus, why, well it legitimises a currently criminal enterprise and makes it a legit business.

The war on drugs is a phallacy, a waste of time and money that achieves nothing but criminalising otherwise law abiding citizens and clogging up our legal and reform systems.

The tax gained would help to pay for all sorts of things from the NHS to quit programs.

Prohibition just doesn't work at all, the US found this out when banning alcohol all those years ago.

One of the biggest problems aside from smoking over here is alcohol. Will they try to ban that, of course not. Just because something is socially and culturally accepted that makes it ok does it.

Drugs have been vilified for absolutely no reason and criminalising it has made it worse without question.

 

No, but that doesn't mean that you should then make everything else that's not okay legal as well

[coldel]

Without wanting to derail the thread, but clearly there is multi-trillion dollar global supply of drugs, and that will all be cut out by the UK setting up nice country farms with attractive looking girls holding woven baskets picking bits and bobs in the sunshine? Or growing enough for a handful of people in the loft? I don't mean to sound flippant but it 'aint going to happen. Making it legal won't mean everyone involved in that money chain suddenly decides all bets are off and that's it time to get a job stacking shelves in the supermarket. The complexities of it would boggle the brain and probably cost more to implement controls globally than would bring in via tax revenues.

 

Would you ban alcohol, of course not as its not historically been classified as a class A drug (although appreciate its highly addictive). In hindsight you could say if we were to start over you should ban alcohol, cigarettes, cars, plastic, batteries and a multitude of other things that are damaging to us and the environment but thats not realistic, we are were we are now.

 

All that aside, as above, political suicide to legalise drugs!