US Election November 5th

[Phil Pascoe]

It does in a way. If someone earns £500 and need three gallons of petrol a week to get to work and someone else earning £5000 a week needs three gallons of petrol a week to get to work, the amount of tax paid on the petrol impacts upon the £500 earner far more.

 

[Jacob]

I see Jacob was confused as well.

If you earn £100 after direct tax and spend it all you get indirectly taxed on it. Let’s say net 50% as an example. If you earn £1000 and spend it all you get indirectly taxed at the same net 50%. So no, indirect tax does not impact the poor more. It’s the same percentage. The difference comes from what you need to spend it on, food vs Ferraris. What you spend on is to do with disposable income not taxation. It is direct taxation that tries to adjust the balance between have and have not.

I see you are confused.
The point about indirect taxes is that the less well off spend a larger proportion of their income on taxed goods and services because they have no choice. Wealthy folk much less so.
Much of it may be spent on savings which are not taxed - you get an unearned income instead which is taxed at lower rates than earned income! Even their council tax is tiny compared to their wealth:
"An average household pays 33.8% of their income in tax. Council tax is sharply regressive even after adjusting for rebates and Council Tax Benefit with the poorest 10% paying 7.1% of their income in council tax whilst the richest 10% pay only 1.5% of their income in council tax."
https://equalitytrust.org.uk/evidence-base/briefings/uk-taxation-unfair-and-unclear/

 

[paulrbarnard]

I see you are confused.
The point about indirect taxes is that the less well off spend a larger proportion of their income on taxed goods and services because they have no choice. Wealthy folk much less so.
Much of it may be spent on savings which are not taxed - you get an unearned income instead which is taxed at lower rates than earned income! Even their council tax is tiny compared to their wealth:
"An average household pays 33.8% of their income in tax. Council tax is sharply regressive even after adjusting for rebates and Council Tax Benefit with the poorest 10% paying 7.1% of their income in council tax whilst the richest 10% pay only 1.5% of their income in council tax."
https://equalitytrust.org.uk/evidence-base/briefings/uk-taxation-unfair-and-unclear/

The problem is apples and oranges. If I go to the shops and spend £100 or £1000 the indirect tax on what you spend will be the same.
When you start talking about council tax you then need to consider the fact that the 10% who are paying less for council tax are paying 20% more in direct taxation.

 

[Noel]

I'm closing this thread, maybe open it again if some exciting news comes across the Atlantic. Despite several friendly warnings it has turned into gurning about Gov.Uk policy etc.

PS- I think one or two folk have been sent on holiday for ignoring Mod team advice earlier in the thread. I'm too busy to go through all the posts but if the thread is reopened and and this advice is ignored, get your post cards ready............

 

[Noel]

So, big knees up tonight/tomorrow in the National Constitution Centre in Philadelphia with the Harris/Trump debate on ABC.
Harris wanted mics open, Trump wanted mics off whilst other candidate speaks. Mics will be muted. No audience.
More info: https://abcnews.go.com/US/abc-news-releases-rules-sept-10-debate-harris/story?id=113019909

Latest polls, for what they are worth, generally show Harris marginally ahead in battle ground states but possibly all square within the margin of error overall.
Not sure how much of an impact this debate will have but as history shows an election can be lost with a poor performance but a good performance isn't necessarily the pathway to victory.

Live coverage on C4 and BBC World News from 2 AM..

 

[paulrbarnard]

So, big knees up tonight/tomorrow in the National Constitution Centre in Philadelphia with the Harris/Trump debate on ABC.
Harris wanted mics open, Trump wanted mics off whilst other candidate speaks. Mics will be muted. No audience.
More info: https://abcnews.go.com/US/abc-news-releases-rules-sept-10-debate-harris/story?id=113019909

Latest polls, for what they are worth, generally show Harris marginally ahead in battle ground states but possibly all square within the margin of error overall.
Not sure how much of an impact this debate will have but as history shows an election can be lost with a poor performance but a good performance isn't necessarily the pathway to victory.

Live coverage on C4 and BBC World News from 2 AM..

Probably it would be a more factual debate if they mute the mics while the candidates is talking.

 

[Jacob]

My guess is that the Republicans will dump Trump at the last minute and substitute something slightly more humanoid in a lighter shade of orange.

 

[Noel]

Probably it would be a more factual debate if they mute the mics while the candidates is talking.

Wonder how much fact checking they'll be, if any.

 

[paulrbarnard]

My guess is that the Republicans will dump Trump at the last minute and substitute something slightly more humanoid. Less orange too.

I’m not so worried about the humanoid or orange aspect just the demented, narcissistic mindset. In fact an orangutan would be a better option.

 

[Chris152]

'President Trump won the coin toss and chose to select the order of statements. The former president will offer the last closing statement...'

Smart choice by him - focusing for two minutes is probably a bit much for his core support, but it allows him the final suite of misrepresentations and lies uninterrupted - all that Harris spoke will be forgotten, the messiah will have spoken.

 

[selectortone]

Watched the key moments from last night. How on earth can anyone seriously want Trump for president. He says the first thing that comes into his head. Immigrants eating people's pets? Abortion after birth? Are the American right wing really that stupid? Harris is right; Putin would eat him for lunch - he'd be in Kiev now and have his eyes on the Baltic States and Poland. The man is an i_diot. And a very dangerous one.

Edited to get past the censor

 

[Spectric]

How on earth can anyone seriously want Trump for president.

For the same reason we got labour , people did not want the conservatives so defaulted to labour and the same in the states where many will not want Harris as she just has a horrible presence about her and comes across as someone who just bares her teeth at everyone.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Harris would be doing herself a huge favour if she managed to stop cackling like an imbecile. Trump is an obnoxious bonus hole but unfortunately he's still the better option.

 

[selectortone]

he's still the better option

Mr Blobby would be a better option than Trump.

 

[whereistheceilidh]

I find it difficult to understand how anyone who has heard the debate, especially the 'eating cats' bit could ever feel that this person should be inflicted on the rest of the 'free world'.
You do not like her 'cackling' but I would suggest Harris has a rather better grip on reality than Trump.
This might be a key qualification.
I am not too sure what positive qualities Trump can possibly bring.

 

[JSW]

The ONE topic I wanted to hear about was the climate crisis, conveniently left till the last topic for debate. Harris gave a good account of the amount of investment made under Biden, "The young people of America care deeply about this issue" etc.
Trump totally skirted the issue.

WHAT!?!

The full transcript is on ABC News.

 

[Blackswanwood]

I’m in the US at the moment and watched the full thing plus the discussion afterwards (the latter channel hopping).

Trump was widely seen as a rambling angry man. The view on Harris is that she won but tempered by the Republican leaning commentators with her not having answered several questions/the moderation being biased.

My view is Trump lost it as his ego took over (his reaction to being told people left his rallies as they were bored is pure comedy) and the moderation was fair (pointing out it’s never been legal to abort a baby after it’s been born etc).

There is now an amazingly long list of Republicans who worked with Trump when he was in the White House saying he’s not fit for the job.

 

[Superduner]

In my view the difference between them (and also between Trump and Biden) is that Trump does not listen to his (presumably) intelligent advisers whereas Biden (and hopefully Harris) do/will.

 

[John Brown]

I watched it all on YouTube last night.
While I hope Trump never gets elected again, it's sad to see such a display of name calling and mud slinging from both parties described as a debate.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

There was an American president (I forget the name) who apparently never once mentioned the opposition in his electoral campaign - I thought that was a brilliant idea. If you're to get elected on your merits your opponent shouldn't matter.