We only benefit if the tax collected is not wasted - efficient use of tax revenues is a good thing a glut of bloated public services is not.

What happened in the NHS when Labour increased funding through NI increases - staff got substantial pay increases and drug companies saw an opportunity to increase prices - that is what will happen again if Corbyn has his way.

And would they still think higher earners paying more tax was so great if they were higher earners themselves? I'm sure some will lie and say they'd still be happy with it. Just jealously with most that they don't have as much money as others.

Not at all - I came from a back to back house in Listerhills in Bradford so I have no objection to anyone working hard and enjoying the fruit of their labour - is it unreasonable that someone sacrifices early in their career, works hard/smart and gets outputs in line with their inputs?

It is also very likely that a number of people have benefited from working in teams I have managed and businesses that I have run.

This government is spending huge sums of money on education 86bn an increase of 1bn on the previous year. It has been pointed out that attainment appears to increasing - which seems to indicate it is about better practises rather than throwing money willy nilly?

Again this is my issue - just throwing money at a problem - Corbyn/Labour mantra isn't a long term strategy. Where is the manifesto is their anything about driving efficiences improving procesess etc? Then they would bite the hand that feeds the unions!!

Why? There is many a hard working poor person and many an idle rich person. Equating the 2 is more striver vs skiver nonsense

Why don't the government just decide how much we all need and let us have some pocket money - that is what you are driving towards IMO

Well, that is the main difference between the Tories and most of the other parties.

The default position of THe Conservatives is to allow people to keep all that they earn, without any regard for those that are unfortunate enough not to be in a position to do so.

Of course there are people who abuse the system, just as there are at the top of the pile wh abuse the system (some of whom defraud HMRC out of huge amounts.

Having moved away from trusting a doctors word that someone is unable to work, we now have another hoop for benefit claimants to jump through, just to prove that they are unfit for work.

Is the "fit for work assessment" really necessary ?

How do you suggest we fund the NHS, schools, Universities, police, armed forces, social care? We can cut it to the bone as the Tories are doing & have always done, resulting in the society we now have, or we can invest in it properly. If you want the former, vote Tory & you can be happy in your own selfish little world. If you think a caring society is one to aspire to then the only way is higher taxation for those who can afford it. Those on the UK average of £26k cannot afford it.

Some people just aren't lucky enough or have the same backing as you did to improve their lot in life. Whether that's because they don't have the support or because they simply aren't smart enough to realise opportunities. They may even have a medical condition which limits what they can do.

Also someone has to do the jobs that are low paid so you can get your groceries or latest gadget from Amazon cheap. Are you saying that anyone who does these jobs should not get help from the state to pay the exorbitant rents that private landlords(most who are in the 40p or 45p tax bracket) charge? To pay for these benefits, the money has to come from somewhere so why shouldn't the people who earn money off those on the lower end of the pay scale pay more for it?

With regards to Education Increasing funds means nothing if the amount of people who need to use our education system has increased. Its like spending £40 on a weekly food shop for 2 then only having an extra £10 added to that when the number of people you need to feed doubles and the price of the food increases.

You can talk about inefficiencies and improving processes all you want but that also takes money for someone to highlight them, plan the change and then implement the changes. To do all this with a real time cut in funding as well as maintain current levels of service(Actually they are expected to increase levels of service) is ridiculous and virtually impossible.

But hey, don't you worry about that. You get to keep more of the money you earn while depriving people the same opportunities you had.

Anybody could get where I am - I don't have a private or university education I just worked really hard to achieve - it is really that simple.

If people can't afford something is it really the job of the state to provide it? If the state didn't then businesses would have to - the question is are the benefits paid out to workers greater than the CT and NI - a tax on employing people - paid by businesses? I suspect not.

Those people running the public sector will already know where the savings can be made - if they don't they are in the wrong job. You don't need expensive consultants to identify savings you already have the people in the know i.e. the employees you just need to engage them. That is a typical Labour trait lets just throw money at it.

I don't mind paying my fair share but I don't its fair that business and the higher paid should be seen as a cash cow to fund inefficient public services.

Ignore all the evidence - take on the views of the right wing media by osmosis - and repeat it ad infinitum until you convince yourself its true. Meanwhile, the NHS is collapsing, we're hurtling towards severing ties with our biggest trading partner, the national debt has gone up by 700 trillion, and more and more people are in poverty. But you're alright - thanks in large part to a better opportunities created by a kinder politics - so balls to everyone else.

I sometimes wish I saw life in as facile and deliberately ill-informed way as people like you; I'd probably sleep better.

Bren Abbott



Top points made as usual. For people like Sal who lives in a bubble where every person has the same opportunity as the next person, and neither he nor anyone he knows is struggling, I can see why he'd be attracted to Tory ideas. It comes down to putting a few extra quid in his pocket above helping those in our society who struggle the most.

A well funded NHS, education, infrastructure, policing etc all help create an environment whereby entrepreneurs and big business can flourish in this country. They're able to take advantage of an educated, talented & skilful workforce, a healthy workforce, infrastructure meaning they can attract talent from a wider area, a safer and stable country that's adequately policed. That's the vital bit he simply can't grasp.

Well said that man

Meanwhile in the real world the Tories, not content with controlling 90% of the written media, are putting more pressure on the BBC, accusing them of left wing bias & effectively blaming them for the Tories pathetic performance at last night's leaders' debate.

Ignore all the comebacks, take on all the views of the lefty media and continually just keep saying the rich are too rich, make them pay for everything!

I agree that all those things do need funding, no doubt about it, but sick of hearing "tax the rich" as the only option.

Who is "all the lefty media"?

Don't worry, if May wins the GE then she will just force NHS trusts to sell their assets. It seems to be the way of Tory Governments to sell everything off so they can say 'Look we have a stable economy'

It's a better tag line than "strong and stable" which is Teresa May's dream and has sod all to do with her government or the country's economy.
Of course, it's far easier to say that you will tax the top 5%, rather than risk upsetting the other 95% and tracking down the tax avoiders at the top of the pile will pay greater dividends than trying to cut a few quid from the disabled and the pensioners.

" I found it particularly amusing when Angus Robertson fired off at the PM for being nowhere to be seen when his esteemed leader was MIA too!"

Robertson is leader of the SNP in the UK Parliament. Sturgeon and the Scottish Parliament are not up for election until 2021. So why would a Leader not involved in an election be expected to take part in this election debate?

It's not the only option, other plans are to renationalise profit making enterprises instead of selling them off while our chums and partners buy shares in the companies that bought them!

All of the austerity budgets have been targeted at the poor. Service cuts, health cuts, schools, social care, police - all cut by address the deficit caused by greedy bankers. We have paid a heavy price for their greed... time for them to pay a bit back.

One thing is for certain anything that is renationalised will run at greater deficit than it does now. IIRC most of us had an option to buy shares in many of the industries the Tories de-nationalised.

The government can only cut the costs it manages - it hardly say to Barclays this is how you must run your company - that is not how it works as much as you would like it to.

Yeah but where are those shares now? Much like the houses they generously allowed us to buy, they are now falling into the hands of wealthy private investors.

The fact is, our railways are the most expensive for the worst service in Europe. Every other nation has got a state owned transport company which makes huge profits off the UK market, in order to subsidise their own tickets at home.

What a farce the other deregulated sectors are too. There is no competition in the water market, the energy companies rip us off and collude with each other to fix ever higher prices.

Time to take back control of our infrastructure in my opinion.

Absolutely if you want to pay more for your energy, trains and water - but that is exactly what you want - why pay current taxation when it would be good for some to pay more as long as it isn't me!!

It will be you - but that is what you want!!

I don't doubt some people are struggling but does that mean that those have worked hard should be less well off to support that? What is the incentive to work hard to succeed?

All our public services are well funded - education is delivering better results than for many years so the talented are being encouraged - do you think putting 10bn into education will give you enhanced results?

The Tories like to say how strong London's economy is and how great they are at managing the economy. Interesting then that in the place that is the beacon for their policies that the latest opinion poll shows that Labour has opened up a 17 per cent lead over them (Labour on a huge 50 per cent) and Corbyn is now seen as better prospective PM than May. If that's what the main beneficaries of the Tory economic miracle (!) I think those in the rest of the country who buy into the Tories bright new economic future for all need to rethink.

Because people are not 'struggling' just because they haven't worked hard enough in life, and to suggest that is the case is at best idiotic and at worst utterly deplorable.