What a suprise - NOT! Labours election pledge /bribe to scrap University tuition fees was not a "Pledge " but an ambition -says Labours Shadow Education secretary

48 replies
Found 9th Jul
How many of you gullible folks - admit it - voted Labour for what you believed to be a pledge by Corbyn to scrap tuition fees ?

This Pledge /Lie / Bribe was always totally unaffordable . Lets face it Corbyn's Magic money tree couldn't cover the £50 billion hole in his manifesto promises let alone the extra £100 billion on top of that this would have cost !

Shadow education secretary Angela Rayner (and she should know !) admits to Andrew Marr that the "election pledge " would cost £100 billion and is an "ambition "

I thought students were supposed to be intelligent !! How many fell for this blatant unaffordable lie ? I did tell you a couple of months back , any one want to "fess up " to being gullible ?

Top comments

rogparki

Fair comment - I take it you don't mind being conned ?


And the Tories have never pledged anything in their manifestos and done a MayTurn?

Obvious troll thread is obvious. Next.

The election pledge was to scrap tuition fees, Angela Rayner was talking about a 'ambition' to scrap all pre-existing student debt which would cost ~100b. These are not the same thing.

rogparki

II'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your … II'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your children , grandchildren ? or the magic money tree . You can get phones, teles, computers , brand new cars these days without even having a job - Someday it has to be paid for - or am I wrong ?



I'll take the "magic money tree" option. It seems to be the popular option, especially if you're a humiliated PM desperate to cling to power no matter what the cost. No money for Nurses, Firemen etc but they're more than capable of magicking up a billion to save their own skins.
48 Comments

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/masonry/000/287/278/3e5.jpg

Original Poster

kay1992


Fair comment - I take it you don't mind being conned ?

rogparki

Fair comment - I take it you don't mind being conned ?


And the Tories have never pledged anything in their manifestos and done a MayTurn?

Anyone who thought they could deliver on this needs the word gullible tattooed on their forehead.

Obvious troll thread is obvious. Next.

This was what killed the Lib Dems, wouldn't be surprised if Labour get away with this.

'I thought students were supposed to be intelligent ' - The 'intelligence' would truly be tested when they see the real world outside the education safe space and think for themselves.
Edited by: "hass123" 9th Jul

The election pledge was to scrap tuition fees, Angela Rayner was talking about a 'ambition' to scrap all pre-existing student debt which would cost ~100b. These are not the same thing.

Original Poster

Shengis

Obvious troll thread is obvious. Next.


Any question you cant answer, don't agree with - brand it as trolling Pretty Sad IMO

Got a nice 40k debt myself and didn't see this pledge until after the election. Don't care there's was a lot more reasons a Labour government suits me. Pretty sure this is a deals site though and not a political debating forum....

rogparki

Any question you cant answer, don't agree with - brand it as trolling Any question you cant answer, don't agree with - brand it as trolling Pretty Sad IMO



I think they gave you too much credit calling you a troll rather than uninformed. I was going to say what person above said, you are wrong about the pledge.
Edited by: "davidian84" 9th Jul

I voted Labour and I will do so again and again because I detest the Conservatives and everything they stand for. A lot of people Voted Labour last month because they chose a manifesto filled with hope over one filled with five more years of the same old Tory tosh - endless austerity, the piecemeal dismantling of the health service and the welfare state and more cuts aimed at making life that little harder for the working classes. Funny, aren't the Conservatives considering taking a similar position to Labour's to win over the mobilised youth vote? Pledge, Bribe, whatever at least Labour has forced the issue and some good might come out of it.

freakstyler

Funny, aren't the Conservatives considering taking a similar position to … Funny, aren't the Conservatives considering taking a similar position to Labour's to win over the mobilised youth vote? Pledge, Bribe, whatever at least Labour has forced the issue and some good might come out of it.



Obviously because the youth have been given a larger share of the vote % based simply by the reduction in the voting age.
Edited by: "hass123" 9th Jul

Original Poster

I

freakstyler

I voted Labour and I will do so again and again because I detest the … I voted Labour and I will do so again and again because I detest the Conservatives and everything they stand for. A lot of people Voted Labour last month because they chose a manifesto filled with hope over one filled with five more years of the same old Tory tosh - endless austerity, the piecemeal dismantling of the health service and the welfare state and more cuts aimed at making life that little harder for the working classes. Funny, aren't the Conservatives considering taking a similar position to Labour's to win over the mobilised youth vote? Pledge, Bribe, whatever at least Labour has forced the issue and some good might come out of it.


I'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your children , grandchildren ? or the magic money tree . You can get phones, teles, computers , brand new cars these days without even having a job - Someday it has to be paid for - or am I wrong ?

Like the conservatives pledge to fund Northern Ireland to the tune of 1.5bn? (_;)

rogparki

Fair comment - I take it you don't mind being conned ?



Thats why people vote labour, they are fed up of being lied to by the Tories.

rogparki

II'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your … II'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your children , grandchildren ? or the magic money tree . You can get phones, teles, computers , brand new cars these days without even having a job - Someday it has to be paid for - or am I wrong ?



And the more people fall for these lies that the Tories keep spouting "that we cannot afford to pay for vital services and they must be cut"
yet can find money for pointless superficial items or to support their own cause. Money does not just "disappear" as they would have you believe, it doesnt take a genious to work out that
more taxes+less spending=more government income.
That deficit should have been history long before now.

asdjjasdas

The election pledge was to scrap tuition fees, Angela Rayner was talking … The election pledge was to scrap tuition fees, Angela Rayner was talking about a 'ambition' to scrap all pre-existing student debt which would cost ~100b. These are not the same thing.



Just wanted to add that this is what was said. Labour will still scrap tuition fees.

rogparki

II'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your … II'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your children , grandchildren ? or the magic money tree . You can get phones, teles, computers , brand new cars these days without even having a job - Someday it has to be paid for - or am I wrong ?



I'll take the "magic money tree" option. It seems to be the popular option, especially if you're a humiliated PM desperate to cling to power no matter what the cost. No money for Nurses, Firemen etc but they're more than capable of magicking up a billion to save their own skins.

rogparki

II'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your … II'm all for "Hope" and freebies - but who is going to pay for it ? Your children , grandchildren ? or the magic money tree . You can get phones, teles, computers , brand new cars these days without even having a job - Someday it has to be paid for - or am I wrong ?



The reality is much more complex than your statement suggests. If you give money to poorer people they spend it and so generate growth within the economy. The same goes for investing in infrastructure; it also generates economic growth. The problem with giving money to the rich is they take it out of the economy. The government then have to keep borrowing to feed money in to keep the economy going.
As an example of how increasing spending on working people, on benefits and on infrastructure and how this affects the economy it is good to look back at the post war Labour government when the country was declared 'bankrupt' but government spending on infrastructure, the welfare state, the NHS created a stable booming economy. Government spending is not like a home budget. It is better to view the movement of money as the fuel for the economy.
It should also be remembered that the Tories have borrowed more in the last few years than all Labour governments put together have ever borrowed in total. This is because they need to keep borrowing to keep the economy moving as, because the money is going to the rich, it keeps being taken out of the economy. Poorer people tend to keep it in the economy by spending.


Edited by: "Susannah" 9th Jul

Original Poster

118luke

And the more people fall for these lies that the Tories keep spouting … And the more people fall for these lies that the Tories keep spouting "that we cannot afford to pay for vital services and they must be cut" yet can find money for pointless superficial items or to support their own cause. Money does not just "disappear" as they would have you believe, it doesnt take a genious to work out that more taxes+less spending=more government income.That deficit should have been history long before now.


You appear to be misinformed , every time higher rate taxes have been raised (obviously by Labour) the nett take to the Exchequer has fallen. Every time Corporation tax has been raised the nett take has fallen - that's an indisputable fact that Corbyn has always failed to answer when failing to justify where the £50 billion to fund his election pledges would come from .

We do need tax rises to fund the ever growing cost of elderly care , for policing to protect us against these nutters who want to have a go at our way of life , and for the marvellous NHS - the better they are the longer we live and the more we cost the nation .

Sadly its an uninformed fallacy that punitively taxing the rich and the horrible big corporations will balance the books ( I wish it were that simple , if it was I'd be with you ) . Sorry it has to be 1% on the basic rate , ring fenced for the NHS and police . Get that done then we can argue about Corbyn's Marxist Utopia oO that so many gullible folk are falling for .

Angela Rayner left school with no qualifications and pregnant. She is obviously the poster child for the modern labour party.

University should be free but it can't be at the moment. We don't have the money and Blair wanted every other child to go to uni. That requires money and we either tax every person in society or we tax those who go to uni and earn over £21k.

Susannah

The reality is much more complex than your statement suggests. If you … The reality is much more complex than your statement suggests. If you give money to poorer people they spend it and so generate growth within the economy. The same goes for investing in infrastructure; it also generates economic growth. The problem with giving money to the rich is they take it out of the economy. The government then have to keep borrowing to feed money in to keep the economy going.As an example of how increasing spending on working people, on benefits and on infrastructure and how this affects the economy it is good to look back at the post war Labour government when the country was declared 'bankrupt' but government spending on infrastructure, the welfare state, the NHS created a stable booming economy. Government spending is not like a home budget. It is better to view the movement of money as the fuel for the economy.It should also be remembered that the Tories have borrowed more in the last few years than all Labour governments put together have ever borrowed in total. This is because they need to keep borrowing to keep the economy moving as, because the money is going to the rich, it keeps being taken out of the economy. Poorer people tend to keep it in the economy by spending.



The Tories have borrowed more because Labour increased deficit spending to £153 billion. How do you get that to surplus overnight?

HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

The Tories have borrowed more because Labour increased deficit spending … The Tories have borrowed more because Labour increased deficit spending to £153 billion. How do you get that to surplus overnight?



Labour increased the deficit in order to maintain the economy during a recession. I was referring to overall borrowing not the deficit. The Conservatives consistently borrow more and pay back less.

taxresearch.org.uk/Blo…rs/

anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/201…tml
Edited by: "Susannah" 9th Jul

catbeans

Pretty much sums up the majority of political opinions on HUKD



Uk

HotEnglishAndWelshDeals

The Tories have borrowed more because Labour increased deficit spending … The Tories have borrowed more because Labour increased deficit spending to £153 billion. How do you get that to surplus overnight?



Isn't defeciet worse now ?

Did I hear "Tens of thousands"?
https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/styles/article_small/public/thumbnails/image/2017/05/26/10/theresa-may.jpg

Original Poster

Susannah

The reality is much more complex than your statement suggests. If you … The reality is much more complex than your statement suggests. If you give money to poorer people they spend it and so generate growth within the economy. The same goes for investing in infrastructure; it also generates economic growth. The problem with giving money to the rich is they take it out of the economy. The government then have to keep borrowing to feed money in to keep the economy going.As an example of how increasing spending on working people, on benefits and on infrastructure and how this affects the economy it is good to look back at the post war Labour government when the country was declared 'bankrupt' but government spending on infrastructure, the welfare state, the NHS created a stable booming economy. Government spending is not like a home budget. It is better to view the movement of money as the fuel for the economy.It should also be remembered that the Tories have borrowed more in the last few years than all Labour governments put together have ever borrowed in total. This is because they need to keep borrowing to keep the economy moving as, because the money is going to the rich, it keeps being taken out of the economy. Poorer people tend to keep it in the economy by spending.


At last an informed reply . However in the post war years the National Debt grew almost exponentially ( to be fair it did in all European countries) . The NHS and post war rebuilding did indeed provide many jobs (hence spending) but the National Debt grew at a horrific rate to finance this - OK not so much in £Billion terms as lately ( you could buy a car for £100 in the 50s and a house for less than £1K !) but still significantly more (as a percentage ) than recently .

As previously stated you can get a brand new car , phone , computer , tele etc on "credit" without having a job oO . The only thing you can't get is a house , and that's where the real crisis is . Its the "something for nothing " generation who believe they are entitled to everything others have worked for - but can't be bothered to work for those things themselves .

Corbyn boasts he is a Marxist - just read up on Marxism and see what it really means , look at Venezuela a state considered a Marxist idyll by Corbyn. If you really are intelligent at least inform yourselves of the realities before innocently and gleefully jumping on the Bandwagon .

rogparki

At last an informed reply . However in the post war years the National … At last an informed reply . However in the post war years the National Debt grew almost exponentially ( to be fair it did in all European countries) . The NHS and post war rebuilding did indeed provide many jobs (hence spending) but the National Debt grew at a horrific rate to finance this - OK not so much in £Billion terms as lately ( you could buy a car for £100 in the 50s and a house for less than £1K !) but still significantly more (as a percentage ) than recently . As previously stated you can get a brand new car , phone , computer , tele etc on "credit" without having a job oO . The only thing you can't get is a house , and that's where the real crisis is . Its the "something for nothing " generation who believe they are entitled to everything others have worked for - but can't be bothered to work for those things themselves . Corbyn boasts he is a Marxist - just read up on Marxism and see what it really means , look at Venezuela a state considered a Marxist idyll by Corbyn. If you really are intelligent at least inform yourselves of the realities before innocently and gleefully jumping on the Bandwagon .



I was wondering when Venezuela would get a mention.

(_;)

Original Poster

monkey1999

Isn't defeciet worse now ?


Think
a) you need to understand how to spell "Deficit"
b You need to know what the "deficit" is and why it differs from the "National Debt " .

Come back when you have researched and understood these pretty basic things .

Sorry for poor grammar I am well aware of the difference either way the deficit is worse under tories and Theresa may is not your answer she is a bigger joke than corbyn hence the 8 point lead

rogparki

To be fair I do play a lot of golf - You have at least got one thing … To be fair I do play a lot of golf - You have at least got one thing right tonight



Lol

Original Poster

freakstyler

I was wondering when Venezuela would get a mention. (_;)


Corbyn's mate running it and a Marxist Utopia by all accounts - Just think we could have been that same "Utopia " if Corbyn had got 5% more of the vote oO

monkey1999

Isn't defeciet worse now ?



No it's not.
Susannah

Labour increased the deficit in order to maintain the economy during a … Labour increased the deficit in order to maintain the economy during a recession. I was referring to overall borrowing not the deficit. The Conservatives consistently borrow more and pay back less.http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/03/13/the-conservatives-have-been-the-biggest-borrowers-over-the-last-70-years/http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/kawczynskis-tweet.html



The Tories have borrowed more because they've had a deficit. Labour was in deficit before the crash because of increased public spending. The Tories have tried to cut that, but it's a mammoth task.

Labour party and its champagne socialism X)

Susannah51 m ago

The reality is much more complex than your statement suggests. If you …The reality is much more complex than your statement suggests. If you give money to poorer people they spend it and so generate growth within the economy. The same goes for investing in infrastructure; it also generates economic growth. The problem with giving money to the rich is they take it out of the economy. The government then have to keep borrowing to feed money in to keep the economy going.As an example of how increasing spending on working people, on benefits and on infrastructure and how this affects the economy it is good to look back at the post war Labour government when the country was declared 'bankrupt' but government spending on infrastructure, the welfare state, the NHS created a stable booming economy. Government spending is not like a home budget. It is better to view the movement of money as the fuel for the economy.It should also be remembered that the Tories have borrowed more in the last few years than all Labour governments put together have ever borrowed in total. This is because they need to keep borrowing to keep the economy moving as, because the money is going to the rich, it keeps being taken out of the economy. Poorer people tend to keep it in the economy by spending.


Great, I can't wait for the great Keynesian economist John McDonnell to put that into action

http://a65.tinypic.com/dpermd.jpg

Original Poster

Rubisco

Great, I can't wait for the great Keynesian economist John McDonnell to … Great, I can't wait for the great Keynesian economist John McDonnell to put that into action


I think now we have got on to economic realities its gone beyond the stock insults from the rent a crowd mob oO Until they are told what to say and repeat it Parrot fashion

rogparki2 h, 0 m ago

You appear to be misinformed , every time higher rate taxes have been …You appear to be misinformed , every time higher rate taxes have been raised (obviously by Labour) the nett take to the Exchequer has fallen. Every time Corporation tax has been raised the nett take has fallen - that's an indisputable fact that Corbyn has always failed to answer when failing to justify where the £50 billion to fund his election pledges would come from . We do need tax rises to fund the ever growing cost of elderly care , for policing to protect us against these nutters who want to have a go at our way of life , and for the marvellous NHS - the better they are the longer we live and the more we cost the nation . Sadly its an uninformed fallacy that punitively taxing the rich and the horrible big corporations will balance the books ( I wish it were that simple , if it was I'd be with you ) . Sorry it has to be 1% on the basic rate , ring fenced for the NHS and police . Get that done then we can argue about Corbyn's Marxist Utopia oO that so many gullible folk are falling for .


No im not referring to Corbyn's policy of income tax for the 80k+ earners.

Im actually referring to Cameron's years.
He raised VAT from 15% to 20%. - just think alone how much extra money that bought into the treasury every single day. Thats mysteriously disappeared from the radar
He drastically slashed benefits (indiscriminately to both the non-essential claimants and those genuinely in need of state support)
- again, saving many billions
He tore through public service funding and cut anything he could to the bone.

Theresa may is still following the same path and actually had a wake up call in the election that people have had enough of austerity. People agreed to an austerity policy at first because they believed it would eliminate the deficit, and go towards paying the national debt.
Now people have seen that there is drastic cuts, public services are failing and everything is more expensive, yet its still not good enough and the deficit still exists. Its also a middle finger to the public face when the Conservatives paid for an expensive funeral for Margret thatcher, the MPs also have a whopping pay rise while freezing public sector pay, give £1bn to NI to support their own cause, pay for an extensive refurbishment of Buckingham palace out of the public purse etc etc. theres many other examples.

I just do not believe everything that the government says, and the figures do not add up.

On the student loan, it is toxic loan whichever right , middle or left politics. It was a toxic idea and no clever bloke would have or should have made available student loans except for STEM subjects plus law.
So IMHO, the best is to let tax payers burden the entire student loan, write off the lot, so the 6.1% burden is gotten ride off and replaced with much lower government borrowing rate, adding 5% efficiency to the nation on the entire outstanding student loan.
The nation is in debt by £100 billion anyway. It is at least 5% more efficient nationally burdening the state with it than the individuals, tax the corporations and business elsewhere to recover the £100b, surely the £100 billion worth of brain power buys the extra productivity gains and inventions as well as superior problem solving skills to have produced ship load of extra profits as a result of this £100 billion investment. If not, why not, did we make a mistake about this investment gain at £100 billion?
Then close student loans scheme for all except STEM students plus law, slash student fees to no more than £3000 to these students.
.
Along with all the easy loans they are all toxic because people borrow them without financial planning with realistic projected earning capacity : subprime mortgage, buy to let mortgage, sub prime car loans, student loans, iPhone loans, new furniture loans, even holiday loans.

Summary of my above comment, disregarding politics, "Mr England" had made a £100 billion of educational brain power and high order thinking investment, that which produced no industrial gain and profit gain to allow £100 billion to be recouped from industry as a result of this investment?! C'mon , get real, you folks here with common sense.
In business , if you made £100 billion investment training your employees, you would expect a return on investment of £200 billion at least with extra revenue and profits without your employees having to pay training costs.

Edited by: "splender" 10th Jul
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text
    Top Discussions
    1. Topcashback Trick or Treat competition60626
    2. Magazine competitions - Issue 41 @ tvchoicemagazine.co.uk1717
    3. daily mail comp - win a trip to queensland - comp closes 8th november, 201777
    4. Win a £100 Amazon Voucher From LoveMyVouchers11

    See more discussions