Cloud cuckoo? '2020 Vision' reveals disturbing Tory fantasy world

Original, including a number of links, is at http://wp.me/p2sftc-452

Cloud cuckoo? '2020 Vision' reveals disturbing Tory fantasy world

I wrote the other day about ’2020 vision: an Agenda for Transformation’, the Tories’ new proto-manifesto document, and the power-mania revealed in the Conservatives’ plan to make ministers above the law, answerable only to a Parliament they control and not to inconvenient legal considerations.

Cloud cuckoo land?

But that’s not the full extent of the Tories’ delusions. This document, which can be downloaded in full here if you’re of a masochistic bent, is an enormously-revealing glimpse of what the world looks like through a Conservative lens.

While the title of the document is a play on the US term for ‘perfect eyesight’, a reading of it leaves you wondering just how thick, and how rose-tinted, their spectacles must be to distort reality and sense to such an extent.



There are a number of examples of complete detachment from reality, and of course a few gems of hypocrisy. However, because this article is going to become long enough just in examining one particular section, I’m going to focus for now on just the one section that I consider most telling.

The most jaw-dropping delusion – and no doubt the most interesting one for anyone with an interest in psychology – is what the report envisages the UK will look like in the year 2020 under a continued Tory-led or Tory government.

Let’s take a look at the bizarre ‘word-picture’ painted by chapter 2 of the report – authored/supported by MPs George Freeman, Adam Afriyie, Richard Fuller, Damian Hinds, Peter Luff, John Glen and James Morris. I think it’s well worth reproducing, and reading, in full, as well as highlighting a few of the most significant portions:

It is the morning of the 7th May 2020. Over breakfast, Mr and Mrs Jones, happily married for 50 years with three children, are reflecting on the past and their hopes for the future. Reflecting on the difficult years of 2010-2015, they now know Britain is on the right track.

Britain is topping the world economic tables for competitiveness and unemployment is low. The most striking development is that it seems the whole world wants to invest in the UK.

Mr and Mrs Jones have a large proportion of their savings in bonds. Not Government bonds—which are no longer issued—but in interest-bearing bonds from mutuals, cooperatives, social enterprises and private businesses. Their oldest child, John, is a successful ‘Life Science’ entrepreneur. He is hiring 20 top class science graduates and another 20 apprentices from the local technical college. He happily invests his profits in research and development. His business benefits enormously now that the Government only accepts electronic invoices. The UK online services industry has cornered the market for electronic invoicing standards. Electronic invoicing alone has added about 0.5 percent to GDP. Their daughter, Mary, is a successful maths teacher on the road to promotion. Her husband is an orderly at the local hospital trust. Nobody can remember if it is private or public; it is just a good hospital and they both hold a stake in its future. Their youngest, David, is a perpetual student and hightech entrepreneur. Like so many others, he is also registering his own IP with the Online Intellectual Property Office.

Mr and Mrs Jones seldom see politicians on TV. The only political stories appear to be about tax reductions, high-tech exports and the massive trade surplus. Britain is confident, dynamic and at ease with itself. The only criticism Mrs Jones has is that “the Conservative Government failed to raise the tax-free threshold to £25,000. It’s such a disincentive for lower earners.” However, Mr Jones reminds her of the days of “those awful tax credits, national insurance contributions and year-end tax returns.” Mrs Jones reflects on this, adding, “at least we know where we stand with a 20 percent flat tax.” “But,” Mr Jones says, “never trust a politician, I very much doubt they will get the flat rate down to 15 percent by 2025 as they promised.” “True,” adds Mrs Jones, “but we can’t expect too much, now that Parliament only sits 16 weeks a year.”

Fantasy? Not necessarily.

Just for a moment, let’s leave aside the particular details highlighted. Does the tenor of the whole thing strike you as ‘off’, and for more than just the ludicrous suppositions? Is it just me, or does it have a weird, ‘Stepford Wives‘ feel to it?

It honestly has me wondering whether Tory MPs don’t just have some kind of self-deceiving, rose-tinted view of the world but a complete disconnection from reality so profound that it resembles something from the portrayal of an acid trip on screen?

Anyway. Let’s take a look at how the Tories imagine the world – or at least the UK – is going to look after another 7 years under their gentle rule, and contrast that with how the UK looks now to those of us who haven’t been ingesting LSD or magic mushrooms:

They now know that Britain is on the right track

In the Tories’ fantasy world, their typical British couple (though how typical a couple married for 50 years, with 3 prospering children and savings can be is extremely debatable) no longer has any doubt that the Tories were right all along. Oh, 2010-2015 were ‘difficult’, but all we needed was more of the medicine that appeared to be killing us and ‘Hey Presto’, it magically all turned out right!

Silly, silly people who opposed the Tory wage-slashing, benefit-cutting, state-shrinking ways! Don’t we realise that we’re on the path to a Shining Future? 2.5 million unemployed people, an impending triple-dip recession, Foodbanks opening at the rate of 3 a week and rising rates of suicide – nothing more than a few eggs that needed to be broken to complete the Conservatives’ ‘omelette’.

Hmmm.

Topping the economic tables

Our economy is shrinking, demand is flat, tax receipts are reduced by the lack of recovery so that the deficit – no matter how the government tries to disguise it with accounting tricks – is growing. But this will all magically turn around within just 7 years – to such an extent that the UK has not only started to recover, but will ‘top the world economic tables’.

If the Tories can mass-produce whatever it is that they’ve been smoking and we can export it, maybe. Otherwise, no.

No more government bonds

Well, the most unrealistic thing about this scenario is probably that ‘Mr and Mrs Jones’ have savings at all. But the idea that government bonds – which is how governments finance their spending – ‘are no longer issued’ is far more revealing than you might think at first reading.

That the report thinks such bonds will no longer be necessary betrays the extent to which the Tories, in their secret ‘heart of hearts’, want to slash the state on which many people inevitably have to rely.

Only in a country where virtually everything is provided by private companies, and paid for by direct charges on each individual ‘customer’, could a government even conceivably do away with government bonds. Either that, or we discover that we’re sitting on oil reserves that make those of Saudi Arabia look like a duck-pond.

Without that unlikely event, a country that does not fund its spending through bonds is going to be one that has no place for the vulnerable, for those who through disability or circumstance are unable to pay their own way. Such people are too expensive, and too unprofitable for private providers if the government is not footing the bill.

That this is how the Tories see the future speaks volumes about their plans and ethos – far more than their coded, public statements will ever admit to.

Life sciences and electronic invoices

Here we see what the Tories are pinning their hopes on. The economy is circling the drain because of policies that are either misguided or, more likely, deliberate; full-time jobs are disappearing while poorly-paid part-time jobs replace them if we’re lucky; decision after decision sucks cash – and therefore demand – out of the UK economy. And demand is everything, for economic recovery.

And the panacea – the ‘magic bullet’ that will turn around the whole situation to the degree described in the Tories’ fantasy document?

Electronic invoicing and ‘life sciences’.

Economic invoicing alone, in the 2020 vision ’has added about 0.5 percent to GDP’. The UK’s GDP, give or take a little to allow for the continual recessions under this government, is worth around £1.5 trillion. That’s 1,500 billion pounds. 0.5% may not sound much, but it works out at £7.5 billion. From ‘electronic invoicing’.

I’ve worked in electronic billing, and there is not a snowball in hell’s chance that ‘electronic invoicing standards’ are going to add £7.5 billion to our GDP. There will be enough money in it for one or two companies to make a handsome profit from it, and for some smaller companies to get by, but that’s about it.

‘Life Sciences’, on the other hand, might add £7.5bn to our economy. They might even add £15 billion. But life sciences are a high-tech, low-manpower industry. They will generate big profits for some companies, but the value of ‘life sciences’ to our economy in terms of employment, wages and tax revenues are never going to be the thing that results in our economy ‘topping the world economic tables’.

It’s pure fantasy – nothing but wishful thinking, or else smoke and mirrors to make an idiotic political philosophy seem tenable.

Teachers and orderlies – and all’s well

The scenario painted by the Tories implies that all is well and wonderful in the Jones’ little world, as well as in the country as a whole. But ‘Mary’, their daughter, is a teacher and her husband is an ‘orderly’ at the local hospital. Under the Tory-led government, teachers’ salaries have been frozen, as have those of orderlies, while the pensions of both teachers and NHS workers have been attacked and devalued.

If the hospital where hubby works is privately operated (though apparently, no one can remember if it is or not), then his salary and/or hours will have been cut to increase company profits. Even if it isn’t, by 2020 (in the nightmare world in which they’ve held onto power) the Tories will have completed their plans to destroy national pay frameworks so that the pay and conditions of NHS staff can be attacked regionally and eroded piecemeal.

Mary had better hope that she gets that promotion. She and her husband are going to need the extra cash desperately.

Nobody knows (the trouble we’ve seen)..

Again we have a statement that reveals far more than the authors probably intend:

Nobody can remember if it is private or public; it is just a good hospital

In their future idyll/dystopia, nobody is sure any more whether the local hospital is private or public. Leaving aside the ridiculous supposition that nobody will care by 2020 whether we still have a true National Health Service or a series of privately-owned pseudo-NHS hospitals with all the fragmentation and variation that will inevitably entail, the statement is a classic Freudian slip by the Tory authors.

Without intending to, they’ve given away their game plan for the NHS – to break it up and privatise it while keeping the news out of the public awareness as far as possible and with the collusion of the media.

Sadly, the media have been very collusive so far, and the tactic is working far more than it should. Every person who cares about the NHS needs to shout loud and long to make sure that people can’t be ignorant of ‘if it is public or private’.

‘Tax reductions, high-tech exports & the massive trade surplus’

Once again, the Tories’ slip is showing. The first thing in their list of political news in 2020? Tax reductions. Tax cuts lie at the heart of every Tory goal and strategy, because their aim is to make sure that the rich keep as much as possible, and have to pay as little as possible to keeping the UK a decent place for us all to live in. More on tax shortly.

According to the Tory dream/nightmare scenario, by 2020 the UK is going to be enjoying a ‘massive trade surplus’ because of ‘high-tech exports’ (and don’t forget the electronic invoicing standards!).

The ‘balance of trade’ is the difference between the value of what the UK sells abroad and the value of what it has to import. If we sell more than we buy, we have a ‘trade surplus’. If we sell less, we have a ‘trade deficit’. The Tories predict that, if they are allowed to continue with their policies until 2020, we’ll have a ‘massive trade surplus’. The graph below shows the UK balance of trade since May 2010:



At no point under this government has the UK’s monthly balance of trade been less than £1 billion, and it currently stands at about £3.5 billion. Per month. That’s a trade deficit of about £42 billion a year at current rates. Not only that, but since 1955 the UK has averaged a deficit of almost £1.2 billion.

The Tory party envisages that, by 2020 and in spite of a massive programme of spending cuts that will throw people out of work, crush demand and cause companies to go out of business, the UK can buck the trend of almost 60 years, ignore the foolishness of 'austerity' and will have turned a deficit of £42bn a year into a ‘massive trade surplus‘.

Elsewhere, the report states that the UK cannot possibly compete with countries like India and China on the cost of basic commodities. The majority of our steel, textiles, raw materials for everything from pencils to smartphones and almost all of the finished items themselves, along with myriad other substances and articles and a large proportion of our food, will continue to have to be imported.

And the Tories think that, by 2020, ‘life science’, high-tech exports are not only going to cancel out our £42bn trade deficit, but turn it into a massive trade surplus. But the ‘high-tech’ items that we consume in big quantities are already produced in China etc – and any new technologies are almost certainly going to be produced there as well, under licence. The licensing fees will be valuable – but there is no way that they will be enough to turn a massive deficit into a massive surplus.

‘Cloud cuckoo’? I think that’s unkind to cuckoos. And to clouds.

Flat taxes or flat-earth believers?

Once again, the real agenda comes through in a none-too-subtle disguise. ‘Flat tax’ is the principle – much loved by the wealthy – that everyone, no matter whether they earn £10,000 or £10 million, should pay a single, unchanging rate of tax.

The 2020 scenario pictures the Jones family’s delight with the simplicity of a flat tax and contrasts it with the

awful tax credits, national insurance contributions and year-end tax returns

that we ‘suffer’ in 2013. Right-wingers believe in flat taxes with the same unthinking fervour of those who believe, against all sense and evidence, that the earth is still flat, and argue constantly for its ‘fairness’ and ‘simplicity’. But the reality is obvious – flat taxes hurt the lower-paid, whose disposable income is almost entirely eradicated by the cost of essentials such as energy, food, clothing and housing, while the wealthy get to sit on a bigger proportion of their wealth at the expense of the poor.

Not only that, but the Tories envisage a ‘fair’ flat tax at only 20%, and ideally 15% or possibly less - and the end of the national insurance contributions that help to fund the NHS, pensions and social security. Once again, this betrays the Tory loathing of anything being provided for those who need it by the state at the expense of the fabulously wealthy and extremely comfortable.

I could talk about the ludicrousness of the idea:

that ‘lower earners’ could be earning up to £25,000 when the government is bent on freezing wages and benefits and removing employment protections and refuses even to consider imposing a ‘living wage’ of £8.45 an hour;

that the Jones could have a son who is ‘a perpetual student‘ and still have savings, when this government has tripled the cost of tuition fees and would love to put them up further still;

that Britain can be ‘dynamic, confident and at ease with itself‘ as long as this government continues to play ‘divide and conquer’ by setting the working poor against the unemployed, private workers against public, the able-bodied against disabled people.

But I won’t, because this post is already more than long enough, and I need to wrap it up.

So I’ll finish by inviting you to read the document for yourself if you have the stomach for it, and to make up your own mind about it if you’re not happy with my analysis.

But I think it’s pretty clear: the Tories are suffering from a distortion of, and disconnection from, the real world that makes them a danger to any ordinary person every second that they are in government.

So let’s make sure they’re not, at the earliest opportunity.

I do not think Cameron is wearing rose tinted glasses I think he is carrying a WHITE STICK, with this pile of poop mixed with a big spoon of fantasy and a deluded brain.

Great post skywalker and thanks for sharing with the forum.

Lovely amusing fantasy you've painted there Steve, there are some on hear that actually will read it and won't smile, shame on you.

tlttf wrote:Lovely amusing fantasy you've painted there Steve, there are some on hear that actually will read it and won't smile, shame on you.

No its shame on you and your Tory party tittf, Cameron expects the good people of the UK to vote for him in 2015 after all the cuts he has put upon them even worse the people that can not afford to EAT and HEAT, and yet anybody earning from £150.000 to £1 Million are getting a tax rebate of between £40,000 to £107,000. Yet he thinks in his world of fantasy that the people that he helped to sack with no other jobs to go to plus what has happened this weekend Jessops 1400 job losses Honda cars 800 + (companies that supply Honda cars). His worse crime is the NHS handing 49% to the private health sector and then lied about not cutting the budget to the NHS at the moment there are 17 hospitals that are dangerously under staffed.

Cameron was quick enough to come out and say the private sector would pick up the slack from the public sector, and what has happened the private sector are losing jobs WHY Giddy Gideon and his non-existent growth plan and please do not forget his ill thought out plan A, that has not worked from its conception and the double dip recession with a threat of a triple dip. So when you read this make sure you do not have your Tory tinted specs on and with a open mind taking everything into consideration I am awaiting the next unemployment figures and of course by how much the economy has shrunk.

No its shame on you and your Tory party tittf, Cameron expects the good people of the UK to vote for him in 2015 after all the cuts he has put upon them even worse the people that can not afford to EAT and HEAT, and yet anybody earning from £150.000 to £1 Million are getting a tax rebate of between £40,000 to £107,000.

I am sorry Skywalker, but people are just not fooled by this Labour con job anymore (except those who want to believe it no matter what...Redflag, Ivanhoe etc)
The simple fact is that the rich are paying more taxes under the coalition than they did under New Labour...save the last few weeks of their government. It seems to me that NL were are party for the rich and missed a big trick when it came to collecting more tax revenue from the wealthy. You and other die hards harping on about tax relief for the rich.. blah blah blah, just doesn't wash, isn't true and how been shown to be a lie over and over again on every TV channel going...So lets stop the pretence

Jessops 1400 job losses Honda cars 800 +

Hmmmm a Photography shop chain that cannot survive in the digital age when people can store and print their photos on their own devices at home for a fraction of the cost...or even free. Also most people have excellent cameras on their smart phones, so why would they have the need to buy separate cameras any more (see Kodak)

Honda have made the redundancies because of the drop in demand for their cars in EUROPE, with sales down between 9 and 11% in the last couple of years (See EU financial crisis)

I see you haven't mentioned Jaguar Land Rover who are creating 800 + jobs due to increased sales in China and the far east (See Chinese economic boom)

You see it all makes sense when things are explained in simple terms and I am always here to help if you need thiNgs explaining to you

Honda have made the redundancies because of the drop in demand for their cars in EUROPE

LOL. When it suits, it seems that Tories can recognise that we are affected by events in the rest of the world. When it didn’t suit, it was “all Labour’s fault” that the collapse of Lehman Brothers in the USA started a global credit crunch.

Blueturando said: The simple fact is that the rich are paying more taxes under the coalition

Absolutely correct Bluey. But if you look at the percentage of earnings that is paid in tax by the wealthy (Those who actually pay tax at all) the amount they pay is a pittance to them, and leaves them able to live the lifestyle they chose without financial hindrance, whereas when the tax is taken through PAYE from the less well off, the lower figure they pay has a much more drastic effect on their lives, where choices have to be made regarding Eating and Heating etc.

blueturando wrote:

No its shame on you and your Tory party tittf, Cameron expects the good people of the UK to vote for him in 2015 after all the cuts he has put upon them even worse the people that can not afford to EAT and HEAT, and yet anybody earning from £150.000 to £1 Million are getting a tax rebate of between £40,000 to £107,000.

I am sorry Skywalker, but people are just not fooled by this Labour con job anymore (except those who want to believe it no matter what...Redflag, Ivanhoe etc)
The simple fact is that the rich are paying more taxes under the coalition than they did under New Labour...save the last few weeks of their government. It seems to me that NL were are party for the rich and missed a big trick when it came to collecting more tax revenue from the wealthy. You and other die hards harping on about tax relief for the rich.. blah blah blah, just doesn't wash, isn't true and how been shown to be a lie over and over again on every TV channel going...So lets stop the pretence

There is only one CON blue and that is in CONSERVATIVE, it is true about the tax cut for those earning £150,000 and up too £1 million will get a TAX BREAK of the amounts in my previous post. As for the rich and wealthy paying more tax now then when Labour was in power you are going to have to "PROVE IT" give me the links and not the Daily Fail a tory paper but real facts and figures. If you are referring to the excuse the tory gov't gave us for the tax break that people would bring back there money from off shore accounts your head might button up the back but mine and the rest of the UKs DO NOT.

As for that old chestnut of Labour not putting up the tax to 50p until a few weeks before they left power, in 2007/8 when the fcuking bankers decided to go to the Casino with our savings and what ever they could get there FILTHY hands on, Labour tried to manage the situation but money that was in the coffers ran out, I would suppose that would have been due the the interest charges on the loans they had to take out to "Bail out the Banks and Building Societies.

If all political parties put as much thought and effort into addressing the country's ills as they do into seeking to hold onto power , we might all be a little better off - both financially and in every other respect.

iIn this increasingly complex world, it becomes more and more a question of whom the electorate can trust the most - or the least - to deliver a solution based on the true national interest, rather than on a narrow basis of party dogma. Whatever excuses the Coalition puts forward - and whatever the justification for those excuses -it will be good old Joe and Josephine Public who will decide for whom their vote will be cast in May 2015 ( or maybe before, if enough J. Publics get out onto the streets in protest).

No party has my undivided confidence. But many ordinary people like me will recognise that it can never really be in their interest -or the nation's - to elect a government into power which is either dominated by right-wing tendencies, or which willingly follows the doctrines of such an influence. Tories will always be Tories. The very purpose of their existence is to promote greed and division and to be a party of elitism. Strangely, they occasionally seem to be able to attract those who should know better ,but who are somehow caught up in a mistaken belief that to follow the Tory line makes them likely to benefit from their ties with them. Perhaps it makes them feel superior in some way, or consider that others will admire them as a member of some higher stratum of society - little realising that they are but fodder for those who ride to power on their backs. Who knows why?

But if Britain does not see the error of its ways from May 2010, when we reach the next General Election, we shall have much more than a deficit to worry about thereafter...

(Tory Party Chairman) Grant Shapps, interviewed in today's Independent is described as an incurable bouncy optimist. Like Tony Blair in his Bambi phase. He is a tireless attack dog who sinks his teeth into Labour at every opportunity. In an hour-long exchange, he mentions Ed Miliband much more than Mr Cameron.

Now where have we seen that debating style before??????

Phil Hornby wrote:-
Tories will always be Tories. The very purpose of their existence is to promote greed and division and to be a party of elitism. Strangely, they occasionally seem to be able to attract those who should know better ,but who are somehow caught up in a mistaken belief that to follow the Tory line makes them likely to benefit from their ties with them. Perhaps it makes them feel superior in some way, or consider that others will admire them as a member of some higher stratum of society - little realising that they are but fodder for those who ride to power on their backs. Who knows why?

Thank you for a very thoughtful post. The above paragraph brings to mind a quote from Nye Bevan:-
“How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? That's the whole art of Tory politics.”

Or perhaps there is a simpler explanation from John Stuart Mill:-
"Although it is not true that all Conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are Conservatives."

Phil Hornby wrote:If all political parties put as much thought and effort into addressing the country's ills as they do into seeking to hold onto power , we might all be a little better off - both financially and in every other respect.

iIn this increasingly complex world, it becomes more and more a question of whom the electorate can trust the most - or the least - to deliver a solution based on the true national interest, rather than on a narrow basis of party dogma. Whatever excuses the Coalition puts forward - and whatever the justification for those excuses -it will be good old Joe and Josephine Public who will decide for whom their vote will be cast in May 2015 ( or maybe before, if enough J. Publics get out onto the streets in protest).

No party has my undivided confidence. But many ordinary people like me will recognise that it can never really be in their interest -or the nation's - to elect a government into power which is either dominated by right-wing tendencies, or which willingly follows the doctrines of such an influence. Tories will always be Tories. The very purpose of their existence is to promote greed and division and to be a party of elitism. Strangely, they occasionally seem to be able to attract those who should know better ,but who are somehow caught up in a mistaken belief that to follow the Tory line makes them likely to benefit from their ties with them. Perhaps it makes them feel superior in some way, or consider that others will admire them as a member of some higher stratum of society - little realising that they are but fodder for those who ride to power on their backs. Who knows why?

But if Britain does not see the error of its ways from May 2010, when we reach the next General Election, we shall have much more than a deficit to worry about thereafter...

This post PH is the best I have read for a long time and I take my hat off to you, most importantly it is very honest and very true thank you PH.

blueturando wrote:

No its shame on you and your Tory party tittf, Cameron expects the good people of the UK to vote for him in 2015 after all the cuts he has put upon them even worse the people that can not afford to EAT and HEAT, and yet anybody earning from £150.000 to £1 Million are getting a tax rebate of between £40,000 to £107,000.

I am sorry Skywalker, but people are just not fooled by this Labour con job anymore (except those who want to believe it no matter what...Redflag, Ivanhoe etc)
The simple fact is that the rich are paying more taxes under the coalition than they did under New Labour...save the last few weeks of their government. It seems to me that NL were are party for the rich and missed a big trick when it came to collecting more tax revenue from the wealthy. You and other die hards harping on about tax relief for the rich.. blah blah blah, just doesn't wash, isn't true and how been shown to be a lie over and over again on every TV channel going...So lets stop the pretence

The richest 1% contributes 26-27% of total tax revenue. Sounds like a lot. Especially when you consider that they contributed 21% in 1997. Looks like they're paying a bigger proportion of their income - about 23% more. The Tories make much of this - notably Jacob Rees-Mogg.

Except that even by 2007 their income had risen by over 60%. So they're actually paying less as a proportion of their income. Income which has risen further since 2007 and continues to rise - so the real imbalance is considerably larger.

The figures speak for themselves, blue - and they show that the con-job wears a blue rosette, not a red one.

Ivan wrote:

Phil Hornby wrote:-
Tories will always be Tories. The very purpose of their existence is to promote greed and division and to be a party of elitism. Strangely, they occasionally seem to be able to attract those who should know better ,but who are somehow caught up in a mistaken belief that to follow the Tory line makes them likely to benefit from their ties with them. Perhaps it makes them feel superior in some way, or consider that others will admire them as a member of some higher stratum of society - little realising that they are but fodder for those who ride to power on their backs. Who knows why?

Thank you for a very thoughtful post. The above paragraph brings to mind a quote from Nye Bevan:-
“How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political freedom to keep wealth in power? That's the whole art of Tory politics.”

Or perhaps there is a simpler explanation from John Stuart Mill:-
"Although it is not true that all Conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are Conservatives."

The answer to 'how?' is:

By giving away only as much as is necessary to bribe the gullible into voting for us.

blueturando wrote:-
The simple fact is that the rich are paying more taxes under the coalition than they did under New Labour

My heart really bleeds for them. Especially as the poor have been clobbered with 20% VAT, plus wage freezes if they have a job and benefit cuts if they don’t.

In 2010/11, the incomes of the chief executives of the largest 100 companies in the UK increased by nearly 50%.

The richest 10% receive 40% of total UK income, while the poorest 10% get 1%.

According to an Institute of Fiscal Studies report (12/09/11), the least well off 20% of British households will lose 6% of their income per year between 2011 and 2014 due to government cuts. The statistics suggested that inequalities were increasing substantially again and in a far shorter period of time.

http://classonline.org.uk/docs/Why_Inequality_Matters.pdf

The 1,000 richest people in Britain saw their average personal wealth rise from £336 million each in 2010 to £369 million by 2011, and then to £414 million by 2012.

The only countries in which the richest 1% earn more than in Britain are Argentina, Singapore, South Africa and the USA.

http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/rack_of_inequality

Except that even by 2007 their income had risen by over 60%. So they're actually paying less as a proportion of their income. Income which has risen further since 2007 and continues to rise - so the real imbalance is considerably larger.

The figures speak for themselves, blue - and they show that the con-job wears a blue rosette, not a red one

So Skywalker and Ivan......We agree that the rich are paing more tax under the coalition than under New Labour and we agree the gap between rich and poor has been growing for more than a decade.

What I don't understand is why you then say the Tories are a party for the rich when it is quite obvious from the facts that both the Tories and Labour are a party for the rich. Does there have to be a recession before a government decides to tax the wealthy at an acceptable level where the poorest in our society will benefit and does that mean they are welcome to get away with it when the economy is good.

The wealthy have been hiding their money for years under the nose of all administrations...The phrase Pot/Kettle always comes to mind when you say its only the Tories who are guilty here. New Labour were just as guilty, if not more so because the money was there to collect in a booming economy. Perhaps you should be asking your own party these questions and while your at it can you ask if there is a guarantee that a future Labour government will close all these tax avoiding loop holes and if so, why aren't they shouting about this now to gain the support of the public and show they are serious in dealing with the economy

The figures speak for themselves, blue - and they show that the con-job wears a blue rosette, not a red one

Yes youre right Ivan the figures do speak from themselves.....

Top tax rate under New Labour....40% and under the coalition...45%. The figures are quite clear for all to see

blueturando wrote:So Skywalker and Ivan......We agree that the rich are paing more tax under the coalition than under New Labour and we agree the gap between rich and poor has been growing for more than a decade.

No, we don't agree that. The level of revenue collected from the richest is higher now than it was in 1997 (i.e. at the end of the previous Tory government). Much of that increase will have happened under Labour. It's true that income inequality continued to grow under New Labour, which is something that should never have been allowed. However, it did slow down under NL compared to what had happened under the Tories since Thatcher.

What I don't understand is why you then say the Tories are a party for the rich when it is quite obvious from the facts that both the Tories and Labour are a party for the rich. Does there have to be a recession before a government decides to tax the wealthy at an acceptable level where the poorest in our society will benefit and does that mean they are welcome to get away with it when the economy is good.

New Labour was more generous to the richest than I would like. However, the list of achievements in terms of improving the lot of the ordinary man and woman, as Ivan showed, shows that New Labour, for all its faults, was better for ordinary people than its Tory predecessor or coalition successor. Under Tories of the neoliberal stripe, real-terms incomes for the bottom 60% rose little - and for the lowest 10% almost not at all - while incomes for the richest increased almost exponentially. There is no question which is the party of the rich - and which is better for the common man or woman.

The wealthy have been hiding their money for years under the nose of all administrations...The phrase Pot/Kettle always comes to mind when you say its only the Tories who are guilty here. New Labour were just as guilty, if not more so because the money was there to collect in a booming economy. Perhaps you should be asking your own party these questions and while your at it can you ask if there is a guarantee that a future Labour government will close all these tax avoiding loop holes and if so, why aren't they shouting about this now to gain the support of the public and show they are serious in dealing with the economy

I have never said that it's 'only the Tories who are guilty here'. I've said repeatedly that I am no great fan of New Labour for the very reason that they were not sufficiently 'Labour' - and I press constantly via every available means (including direct communications to Labour shadow ministers and MPs) for the parliamentary Labour party to embrace its roots and original purpose wholeheartedly. For the record, if you follow the Hansard record as I do, you'll find that Labour make plenty of noise in the Commons about tax avoidance and the need to prevent it - just as they do in TV interviews when appropriate.

blueturando wrote:

Except that even by 2007 their income had risen by over 60%. So they're actually paying less as a proportion of their income. Income which has risen further since 2007 and continues to rise - so the real imbalance is considerably larger.

The figures speak for themselves, blue - and they show that the con-job wears a blue rosette, not a red one

So Skywalker and Ivan......We agree that the rich are paing more tax under the coalition than under New Labour and we agree the gap between rich and poor has been growing for more than a decade.

What I don't understand is why you then say the Tories are a party for the rich when it is quite obvious from the facts that both the Tories and Labour are a party for the rich. Does there have to be a recession before a government decides to tax the wealthy at an acceptable level where the poorest in our society will benefit and does that mean they are welcome to get away with it when the economy is good.

The wealthy have been hiding their money for years under the nose of all administrations...The phrase Pot/Kettle always comes to mind when you say its only the Tories who are guilty here. New Labour were just as guilty, if not more so because the money was there to collect in a booming economy. Perhaps you should be asking your own party these questions and while your at it can you ask if there is a guarantee that a future Labour government will close all these tax avoiding loop holes and if so, why aren't they shouting about this now to gain the support of the public and show they are serious in dealing with the economy

I can tell you why the Tories are a party for the rich, firstly they are quite good at upcasting that the Labour party get its funds from the Union members and say they are our masters and they tell us what policies to bring in when Labour was in power. Secondly do you remember the dinners at No10 and Chequers that cost your donors £250,000 a pop and for dessert they got the ear of tory party policy makers just lets say Lord Beecroft to start with he got his policy through you know the one I mean "Hire & Fire at Will Bill", Plus it is common knowledge Tory funding comes from City bankers and the Hedge fund managers as things have got to be transparent now so please do not try and deny it.

I see your party also believes in jobs for the boys I believe the Tory party have just given a job in the Education dept and he is not even a MP or a Minister and did not have to go to the public and ask for there vote this stink of Nepotism to get a job with the Tories its not what you know its WHO you know or could it be how much you have given the Tory party funds.

Also Union funding for the Labour party comes from members of the Union who are your public sector workers ie Dustbin men nurses transport workers in both private and public sector, none of these people are getting a wage of £250,000 per annum. I hope this answer your question blue.

Its quite late so I will just come back on your last part for now Redflag. The Labour party wa predominantly created by the Unions, so benefit from Union funding ( its a bit like the TV licence fee) If the Labour party did not have Union funding then they would have to receive private donations like the other political parties....would they not?

Excellent post from Phil, a true libertarian(nearly).

Blue, your wasting your time, it's all Thatchers fault didn't you know?

There are no answers, no original thought simply Thatcher, the whole thread is becoming disillusional on the responsibility issue. When denial of fact takes precedence over reality (Labour spent 13 years sucking up to the City). Labour consistently increased the gap between rich and poor, they allowed Private landlords to charge whatever they wanted they built a system based on continued borrowing and got caught out when the banks went tits up. Yet it's still not there fault.

Unfortunately it's the same gang that are trying to tell us they'll do better this time and their master plan appears to be "throw more money at it". Apparently some believe them.

tlttf wrote:Excellent post from Phil, a true libertarian(nearly).

Blue, your wasting your time, it's all Thatchers fault didn't you know?

There are no answers, no original thought simply Thatcher, the whole thread is becoming disillusional on the responsibility issue. When denial of fact takes precedence over reality (Labour spent 13 years sucking up to the City). Labour consistently increased the gap between rich and poor, they allowed Private landlords to charge whatever they wanted they built a system based on continued borrowing and got caught out when the banks went tits up. Yet it's still not there fault.

Unfortunately it's the same gang that are trying to tell us they'll do better this time and their master plan appears to be "throw more money at it". Apparently some believe them.

I've considered, so far, that we've had a fairly cordial 'relationship' on here, t. Don't spoil it by spouting nonsense - I and others have provided you constantly with facts and figures, and plenty of thought, and haven't said it's 'all' Thatcher's fault.

Major, Cameron, Clegg and many others are also culpable - and also, to a degree, Blair and Brown. You do your argument no favours by just asserting stuff like that in the face of lots of recorded evidence to the contrary.

There are no answers, no original thought simply Thatcher, the whole thread is becoming disillusional on the responsibility issue. When denial of fact takes precedence over reality (Labour spent 13 years sucking up to the City). Labour consistently increased the gap between rich and poor, they allowed Private landlords to charge whatever they wanted they built a system based on continued borrowing and got caught out when the banks went tits up....their master plan appears to be "throw more money at it". Apparently some believe them.

tlttf. Yet another pile of hypocritical garbage – when have you ever posted an “original thought” instead of your usual ‘Daily Mail’ prejudices? “Benefits are a lifestyle choice” and “throwing money at it” are just tired old Tory cliches that you keep repeating, and then we have your downright lies such as “unlimited immigration” and “continued borrowing”, when debt as a % of our GDP was lower under Labour than the Tories for eleven years. Goebbels would have been proud of you for your enthusiasm for misinformation, but only an idiot would believe anything you post.

The “gap between rich and poor” argument has been answered extensively already, but you still re-post the lie. Who "denies the facts"? Try looking in the mirror. Inequality is rising faster than ever under this government, because not only are the rich still getting richer but the poor are becoming considerably poorer.

You can’t even be consistent. On 14 January, you praised the new Tory pension plan because “it does away with means testing”, yet on 8 January you wanted everyone to be means tested for both child benefit and the winter fuel allowance.

Of course Cameron (with his exclusive dining club) and your lying adulterous friend Boris Johnson don’t “suck up to the City”, do they? And the Tories didn’t introduce rent controls, did they? In fact, one of Thatcher’s first actions was to abolish rent tribunals in the Housing Act of 1980. But don’t let the truth get in the way of any of your attempts to deceive people. Who is "disillusional"?

bobby wrote:Blueturando said: The simple fact is that the rich are paying more taxes under the coalition

Absolutely correct Bluey.

That all depends whether you define 'more' as a cash figure or as a percentage of earnings. The wealthiest pay more in cash terms, but less as a percentage of income - their overall contribution has in no way kept pace with the increase in their earnings.

If I pay £1k tax on an income of £5k, then get a new job paying me £50k and then pay £3k tax, I'm paying more in cash terms, but by any meaningful measure, I'm paying less tax. The Tories frame the argument dishonestly - they redistribute more and more income to the wealthiest, and then use that fact to argue that they're 'paying their share'. Taking us all for idiots with their usual contemptuousness.

But if you look at the percentage of earnings that is paid in tax by the wealthy (Those who actually pay tax at all) the amount they pay is a pittance to them, and leaves them able to live the lifestyle they chose without financial hindrance, whereas when the tax is taken through PAYE from the less well off, the lower figure they pay has a much more drastic effect on their lives, where choices have to be made regarding Eating and Heating etc.

Absolutely.

blueturando wrote:

The figures speak for themselves, blue - and they show that the con-job wears a blue rosette, not a red one

Yes youre right Ivan the figures do speak from themselves.....

Top tax rate under New Labour....40% and under the coalition...45%. The figures are quite clear for all to see

The reason for the difference blue when NL was in power the bankers had not been to the bloody Casino Yet, and after it Labour tried to manage but the coffers where running on empty so the top rate of tax had to go up.

Nice to see banks like Goldman Sachs is planning to save it's employees money by delaying paying their mega-bonus's until after Aprils reduction in top rate income tax.........What a noble gesture.........

Taxpayers risk losing millions as Goldman Sachs bankers plot to delay £8.3billion in bonuses to avoid the 50p tax rate

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2262181/Taxpayers-risk-losing-millions-Goldman-Sachs-bankers-plot-delay-8-3billion-bonuses-avoid-50p-tax-rate.html#ixzz2I35GRJtf

blueturando wrote:Its quite late so I will just come back on your last part for now Redflag. The Labour party wa predominantly created by the Unions, so benefit from Union funding ( its a bit like the TV licence fee) If the Labour party did not have Union funding then they would have to receive private donations like the other political parties....would they not?

Did you never wonder why the Unions created the Labour party as a political party to give funding too, as the Tory party was already the only ruling party I wonder why the Unions did not approach the tories and offer them the funding

skwalker said: That all depends whether you define 'more' as a cash figure or as a percentage of earnings.

Steve, When I agreed with bluey and sometimes I do. I mean that if the wealthy ( those who actualy pay that is) pay more in cash terms than the less well off, its because they do pay more. Its as simple as that.

I never said they pay their share, simply that a man with a declaired income of 60,000 pa actually pays more individual tax than a man on 20,000 pa.

bobby wrote:skwalker said: That all depends whether you define 'more' as a cash figure or as a percentage of earnings.

Steve, When I agreed with bluey and sometimes I do. I mean that if the wealthy ( those who actualy pay that is) pay more in cash terms than the less well off, its because they do pay more. Its as simple as that.

I never said they pay their share, simply that a man with a declaired income of 60,000 pa actually pays more individual tax than a man on 20,000 pa.

I know mate. It wasn't an argument with your points, just an addendum.

The reason for the difference blue when NL was in power the bankers had not been to the bloody Casino Yet, and after it Labour tried to manage but the coffers where running on empty so the top rate of tax had to go up..

I take it you are joking Redflag?! The banks had been undertaking casino style investments for years....Many people knew about it and even Vince Cable kept warning us and the government what was going to happen....Totally ignored and denied at the time by Gordon Brown of course.

The sh*t hit the fan in late 2008 Redflag, not April 2010...So why didn't the top rate go up before this then. You know full well why it was raised then and not before....Pointless even attempting to say otherwise

Did you never wonder why the Unions created the Labour party as a political party to give funding too, as the Tory party was already the only ruling party I wonder why the Unions did not approach the tories and offer them the funding

.

So Red, you didn't answer the question, but I have pointed out why other political parties receive private donations. I am more than happy for this to be banned if youre happy for Union funding for the Labour party to be banned also

blueturando wrote:

The reason for the difference blue when NL was in power the bankers had not been to the bloody Casino Yet, and after it Labour tried to manage but the coffers where running on empty so the top rate of tax had to go up..

I take it you are joking Redflag?! The banks had been undertaking casino style investments for years....Many people knew about it and even Vince Cable kept warning us and the government what was going to happen....Totally ignored and denied at the time by Gordon Brown of course.

The sh*t hit the fan in late 2008 Redflag, not April 2010...So why didn't the top rate go up before this then. You know full well why it was raised then and not before....Pointless even attempting to say otherwise

But the total crash never came until 2008 as you rightly KNOW, What has Gideon done to stop it from ever happening AGAIN NOTHING at the time of 2008 a top Economist said if regulation was not brought in the same thing would happen within 5-25 years and the bankers would be back holding out there caps for another BAIL OUT, and to keep the record straight Gordon Brown admitted that he should have had a tighter grip on the banks but as you know nobody expected our high street banks to behave in such a way and what they are being accused of at the moment to there position of today where noit many people in the UK would trust any banker as far as they could throw them, my savings are no where near a bank.

The shyte ddid hit the fan in 2008 but had started in 2007, if you remember if you can get passed your bias Gordon Brown done his upmost to keep the UK economy going I think giving car owners £3,000 if they bought a new one providing there old car was 10 years or older to keep the car industry in work he also CUT VAT to 15% for a couple years again trying to get the economy so if people had extra money in there pockets they would spend it in there local shops or on there high street, this is something your lot have not got a clue about that is why HMV Jessops JJB and plenty of others have gone to the WALL.

The Tories' claim to be the ‘Workers' Party’ is just another cheap rebrand
 
From an article by Owen Smith MP:-
 
Mitt Romney said: "There are 47% of the people who will vote for Obama no matter what. My job is not to worry about those people". Telling half of the USA that he wasn’t interested in them or their vote wasn’t the smartest move but it was a revealing acknowledgement of how little appeal the austerian right has to blue collar workers there. There’s no straightforward read-across from American politics to our own, but there’s been more than a whiff of Romney-esque high-handedness in some recent comments here, and a hint of panic in the risible re-launch of the Tories as the 'Workers’ Party'.

The problem for the Tories is no-one believes this tripe. No-one believes that a party which cut taxes for millionaires while millions struggle to pay their bills can ever be on the side of workers. And no-one will believe that a party which stands up for crony capitalists and corporate vested interests can ever truly work in the interests of working men and women – and of those seeking work or unable to work too.

After the Wythenshawe by-election, a senior Tory said they couldn’t possibly hope to win in Manchester as it was "a safe Labour seat with the largest council estate in Europe”. Eight million British citizens live on estates - perhaps Cameron thinks it isn’t his job to worry about "those people"?

Still, with a chairman as inventive as Shapps, you know there’ll be another make over coming soon. Tea Party Tories has got a ring to it, Grant, and a ring of truth too.
 
For the whole article:-
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/02/tories-claim-be-workers-party-just-another-cheap-rebrand

The soubriquet "largest council estate in Europe" originally applied to Becontree Heath, surrounding the eventual Ford works at Dagenham.  It was built by the LCC in response to (Liberal) government promises of "Homes fit for heroes" after the First World War, but not completed until 1935 - ready for the next one.

blueturando wrote:Its quite late so I will just come back on your last part for now Redflag. The Labour party wa predominantly created by the Unions, so benefit from Union funding ( its a bit like the TV licence fee) If the Labour party did not have Union funding then they would have to receive private donations like the other political parties....would they not?

The capitalists, as you know, tax us all a vast percentage of our earnings to pay for them to live high and tell lies. WE pay for the bloody awful tory party, the liberals and every other kind of filth that suits the thieves, as well you know, out of what they pinch.

We can blame nobody but ourselves for allowing the Tories to pull the wool over (some of us) our eyes, I am glad to say I was not one of them, knowing exactly what the Tories are the first thing I did was to join the Labour party instead of just being a Labour voter. I do agree with what you have said Penderyn, what I do not understand is how anybody that normally votes Labour could have put there X in the box for Tories.

"what I do not understand is how anybody that normally votes Labour could have put there X in the box for Tories."

Many actually put their mark in the Lib-Dem box. It is due to their duplicity we now have what we do

I just hope you are right bobby, and the voters of the UK know exactly what to do come May 2015 avert their eyes from the yellow & blue Tory papers, and stick ear pluges in their lugholes when Cleggy starts to talk.