UK Parliamentary General Election 8th June 2017

[mongers]

The Tories do have a commanding lead in the polls, but I suspect that their vote is soft. If another party manages to present a worthwhile alternative a lot of Tory votes could evaporate. We saw the SNP do this to Labour in Scotland last time round. Which underlines what a disaster Corbyn is I suppose 

That's a hell of an "if"

You never know, though I guess it isn't going to be as close as the French presidential race. 

[Josquius]

UKIP are quiet so far.

[The Larch]

UKIP are quiet so far.

What are they going to campaign on? They've already achieved their raison d'etre.

[Syt]

Ensuring that it will be the "right" Brexit, and not a wishy-washy half baked thing.

[Tamas]

UKIP are quiet so far.

What are they going to campaign on? They've already achieved their raison d'etre.

I still expect them to go all the way and start an anti-immigrant program. Unfortunately it will concentrate on Eastern Europeans because they will not want to be beheaded.

[The Larch]

Given how quickly Farage bolted after the Brexit referendum I don't think that they were really counting on winning at any time and just wanted to be a protest party for as long as possible.

[Valmy]

The main hope for this election is simply that the Tory majority decreases. That presents the only realistic possibility for the UK to hold together and the Brexit train to hit a snag. Now how likely that is I have no idea. I don't know what percentage of the 48% who voted to stay in the EU have decided hard fast Brexit is something they can now support, or if any of the 51% who did support Brexit have gotten cold feet.

[garbon]

Not exactly related but the woman who would be my MP if I could vote (of man in the van controversy) has made this headline:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/20/people-on-70000-do-not-feel-rich-emily-thornberry-admits

Some people earning £70,000 do not feel rich, says Emily Thornberry

[Valmy]

It is true. You could barely afford a cardboard box by the sewage treatment plant in London with that kind of salary.

[Grinning_Colossus]

$90,000. (The exchange rate is much lower now than I expected!) I can see that as not really being affluent in London.

[Tamas]

See, instantly you are in the territory where you seek to define who is the enemy of the people to be punished, and who isn't. If you have  a flat tax rate, there is no such issue.

70k must be pretty sweet, even in London, but I don't think it could go above an upper middle class lifestyle.

[garbon]

$90,000. (The exchange rate is much lower now than I expected!) I can see that as not really being affluent in London.

You definitely can't use exchange rates now to understand what people get paid in the UK. Makes everyone seem like paupers.

[Richard Hakluyt]

I prefer the term "well-off" or "comfortable"  for people on that sort of income. Rich is more of a substantial house in London, place in the country, all children sent to public schools sort of thing. You need a lot more than £70k for that sort of thing.

[Tamas]

I prefer the term "well-off" or "comfortable"  for people on that sort of income. Rich is more of a substantial house in London, place in the country, all children sent to public schools sort of thing. You need a lot more than £70k for that sort of thing.

This reminds me, I'll need to read up on definitions of schools over here. I'd have thought "public" schools are the state-run ones, not private schools.

[Valmy]

Why would you think something ridiculous like that?