paigntonhibby
Private Member
And before I get called a right wing racist extremist BK lives in a country that welcomes him but puts its own citizens 1st.
Labour
- Thread starter Hattie
- Start date
At very least could have sorted an old warehouse/office with studio or one bed apartments that they can check in and out of when in London.
Japanese are happy with coffin size bed storage cupboards yet these clowns all want 2nd homes when thousands can't get a first home
Stop the boats? Turning into a fantasy. Government gave half a billion to France to bolster Policing and customs. Traffickers work out that Police won't touch people when in the water, so they are sailing dinghy down rivers and canals straight into the English channel. Saw one where they were shouting Thank you Rishi Sunack
You're right Archie.
I apologise.
Archie
Private Member
Thanks for that. I know it gets pretty heated on here, but we move on. I hope to see more posts from you soon. FWIW I was shocked by the announcement.
You have a PM.
Yep, everytime a govt states “this will help the poorer households” you just have to laugh or cry… the threshold is always ridiculously low, even your average “poor” household won’t get it.
Why don’t they make it an income that equates to a 40 hour week on minimum wage rate?
If it’s the minimum you need to live by, by their reckoning, then even £1 a week less is living below the “minimum” living costs, ie poor/poverty stricken households.
I remember seeing in disbelief the Blairs crowing about how they got their “child benefit” and all the other millionaires….. while the millionaires crying about people getting benefits!!!
You mention child benefit to millionaires and the response… ”we are entitled to it”
Outrageous hypocrisy and they don’t even realise it
egb_hibs
Private Member
The cynical spectre of Osbornomics is haunting the Labour party | Aditya Chakrabortty
Emergency cuts, empty pockets, a ‘maxed-out credit card’: why is Rachel Reeves using the language and logic of austerity, asks Guardian columnist Aditya Chakrabortty
www.theguardian.com
I don't know why Archie or anyone else is shocked, including the Guardian.
The country is rooked on one hand and on the other Labour is wedded to the same liberal consensus as Cameron / Sunak style toryism. Anyone who expected a significant economic change wasn't paying attention.
As you were, with enhanced woke bampottery is the likely formula for Labour.
Once the gb energy fantasy cannot survive engagement with reality and the piggy bank scale national investment thingy turns out to generate pocket money sized returns, things should settle into a rhythm. The focus is likely to go to stuff that pleases the liberal choir, while plundering everything they can get their hands on to feather the public sector.
Friendly and supportive establishment plus public sector workforce plus people on dependency, home grown or imported - is the electoral coalition and they will govern accordingly.
If they get a second term the bank casino may be reopened and we'll be off to the races again.
They're just cvnts Stu, widnae be surprised if they dump the triple lock next.Yep, everytime a govt states “this will help the poorer households” you just have to laugh or cry… the threshold is always ridiculously low, even your average “poor” household won’t get it.
Why don’t they make it an income that equates to a 40 hour week on minimum wage rate?
If it’s the minimum you need to live by, by their reckoning, then even £1 a week less is living below the “minimum” living costs, ie poor/poverty stricken households.
I remember seeing in disbelief the Blairs crowing about how they got their “child benefit” and all the other millionaires….. while the millionaires crying about people getting benefits!!!
You mention child benefit to millionaires and the response… ”we are entitled to it”
Outrageous hypocrisy and they don’t even realise it
1 thing I’ve always stated and cannot see any reason at all that it would work, MP’s would lose out on free money at tax payers expense but absolutely nothing in real life wages etc. BUT the tax payers would save (£mn’s) and stop this ludicrous plan of tax payers paying the interest on MP’s 2nd homes and then make a fortune by later selling it
The govt own 1 house for 1 MP… MP changes? Move out and back to his home and new one moves in, same houses over and over again, i mean they must be there as WE are helping to pay for them.
Once bought, MP’s gain nothing, lose nothing apart from making money at our expense, government saves an absolute fortune for untold amount of years
The govt own 1 house for 1 MP… MP changes? Move out and back to his home and new one moves in, same houses over and over again, i mean they must be there as WE are helping to pay for them.
Once bought, MP’s gain nothing, lose nothing apart from making money at our expense, government saves an absolute fortune for untold amount of years
FTJT
Private Member
Totally agree. And alternatively, MPs who already have a London address and need a house in their constituency have it bought, owned, and furnished to minimum spec by a Commons team. Once they move out, if the next MP doesn't need it, it goes into the council housing pool.
No fuckin heated stables ever.
They should, as it's economically illiterate. Pensions are fast becoming the biggest Ponzi scheme in history.
paigntonhibby
Private Member
What does that mean? Pensions shouldnae be protected against inflation ?
Smurf
Private Member
I hope they do. It isn't sustainable.
paigntonhibby
Private Member
Neither is mass uncontrolled immigration but hey, let’s just stitch up the fuckin pensioners, they’re an easy target
egb_hibs
Private Member
Its no really a question of should it's a question of how.
The state pension is literally a ponzi scheme- today's pensioners are funded by today's workforce, who in turn will be funded by a future workforce. The problem is the ratios no longer work; there were once 4 or 5 workers per pensioner and other dependents (children, sick, unemployed). Not any more.
It's one reason we need mega migration.
Its a common misconception that people invest in their own pension via tax or NI or whatever but they don't. While you work you pay for the already retired and then when you retire the workforce of the time pay for you. There is no fund so to speak, it's a transfer year to year I believe. @Jack can probably explain in more detail
15 years ago I posted on here about a Scottish Parliamentary scandal. I can't recall getting much support, thumbs up, etc either!
You could not surpass this for irony.
The then SNP Minister in charge of Scotland's affordable housing made £100,000 - from selling his taxpayer-funded second home.
Alex Neil raked in the dough when he sold his two-bedroom flat in Edinburgh for £200,000.
He had paid a paltry £4720 towards the flat, the deposit he put down when he bought the flat in 1999.
Public money was used to pay the rest of his £90,775 interest-only mortgage costs, leaving Neil to make the biggest profit any MSP has ever made on a second home.
Taxpayers money was used to pay the rest of his £90,775 interest-only mortgage costs, leaving Neil to make the biggest profit any MSP had ever made on a second home.
At the time Patrick Harvie of the Scottish Greens, said: "It's perfectly fine for MSPs to recoup out-of-pocket expenses, but not to make a six-figure profit from the system. It is shameless."
Spot on young man.
When challenged about the profit this leech replied ' Do you expect us to live in caravans. '
By selling before that years Budget, Neil also avoided an extra £10,550 in Capital Gains Tax. He had also employed his wife using public money since 1999.
BIG G
Last edited:
paigntonhibby
Private Member
At the moment mega migration will cost us more than we’ll be saving by fucking pensioners over, few of them will get jobs, once they’re given leave to stay their families will start arriving, they’ll have to be housed given benefits etc and I’ll guarantee those that will eventually be deported will be counted in the 100s, if at all
Look after your own 1st? Don’t make me laugh, no wonder people are angry
Have they cancelled nationalising the railways yet
I’d imagine that’s a stick-on billy
egb_hibs
Private Member
Don't shoot the messenger I'm just making the connections between why things happen.
You are right that most migrants are a cost rather than a boost to the economy long term; but they're trying to stop things collapsing today.
The bottom line is how do you fund pensions when you can't maintain the pensioner to worker ratio required to do so?
What an ignorant arrogant prick
Archie
Private Member
I just want to add that Greencol and I had a lovely exchange by PM. Top bloke!
I know a few who would dispute that Archie!
On the Starmer thread at the beginning of December last year I posted....
'Au contraire the only point that I'm missing is you answering my questions regarding the efficacy and trustworthiness of Starmer and the Blairite scoundrels he is surrounded with.
The Tories are no longer reliable representatives of British capitalism at this point. They now have Labour as a reliable a Second XI that can be called upon in times of Tory Party crisis, hence the lies and backtracking of Starmer, who in turn receives very little criticism from the MSM and backing from big Tory Party donors who proclaim 'we can work with them'.
I've argued on here over the past few years that Starmer and his cabal are nnothing less than agents of Capitalism, would reverse all reformist promises and inevitably be a Government of crisis from the outset.
Both the Tories and Labour sing to the tunes of Big Business ending almost every sentence with 'difficult and unpopular decisions will have to be made'
Anyone who does not get what this means for workers and their families is a mug.'
Early doors but stand by this.
BIG G
'Au contraire the only point that I'm missing is you answering my questions regarding the efficacy and trustworthiness of Starmer and the Blairite scoundrels he is surrounded with.
The Tories are no longer reliable representatives of British capitalism at this point. They now have Labour as a reliable a Second XI that can be called upon in times of Tory Party crisis, hence the lies and backtracking of Starmer, who in turn receives very little criticism from the MSM and backing from big Tory Party donors who proclaim 'we can work with them'.
I've argued on here over the past few years that Starmer and his cabal are nnothing less than agents of Capitalism, would reverse all reformist promises and inevitably be a Government of crisis from the outset.
Both the Tories and Labour sing to the tunes of Big Business ending almost every sentence with 'difficult and unpopular decisions will have to be made'
Anyone who does not get what this means for workers and their families is a mug.'
Early doors but stand by this.
BIG G
Been missing since the election, I'm hearing Disney are making a film about him, its called The Lying Cvnt.
'Shocking' decision to axe £800m Edinburgh University supercomputer damages Scotland economy - SNP minister — The Scotsman
The intervention by a senior Scottish Government minister follows confirmation the exascale supercomputer project has been shelved
apple.news
The first major cut, that I’ve noticed, and boom, massive loss to Scotland right away…
£31m already spent by the UNI starting is set up… I’m sure this will happen in “most” cities, but i very much doubt money already promised and a huge amount already spent setting iup a massive project like this would get stopped at a major English uni!
I wonder how much Scotland will lose out in this “better together union” in comparison to the rest of the UK….. time will tell
Smurf
Private Member
There isn't uncontrolled mass immigration though? The UK government is struggling to control the numbers and I too agree it is absolutely an issue but we're deluded if we think the UK can somehow avoid what other similar countries are experiencing...
In terms of pensioners they've probably been the one demographic that's done well the past 20 years. Of course there's more to be done but overall they've done better than others. And truth be told as they're more likely to vote they've been better protected.
egb_hibs
Private Member
Parking for a moment the relative side issue of illegal immigration, you are correct it’s not only not out of control, it’s by design. The Cameron / Sunak continuity of Blairism wanted mass immigration and I doubt Labour will be different.
Back to illegal migration, the much derided Rwanda scheme may have been beginning to claw back a little bit of control - at least according to the Irish who claimed to be getting redirected traffic. Labour have scrapped that without an alternative, and I can’t help wondering if they want to exploit it as the Democrats have done, and naturalise a bunch of fresh Labour voters.
Either way liberal regimes - which is these days both the mainstream left and right - are playing with fire, indeed seem possessed of an almost religious zeal in their determination to do so. Their ideology has created a model that depends on cheap as chips labour and they can’t ween themselves off it. And for Labour there is the added bonus of reducing the electoral significance of those annoying and embarrassing deplorables.
Smurf
Private Member
Come on FFS! The Rwanda scheme - correctly derided as it wasn't at all a serious policy - was to send 200 annually to Rwanda. The idea that this would in any shape or form act as a deterrent stopping folk coming over is an absolute piece of ridiculous fantasy.
egb_hibs
Private Member
Tell it to the Irish
Rwanda Bill causing migrants to head for Ireland instead of UK, deputy PM Micheál Martin says
It comes at a time when tension over immigration levels is high in Ireland, with the country experiencing a housing crisis.
Tell it to the EU
Von der Leyen’s EU group plans Rwanda-style asylum schemes
Centre-right European People’s party says it wants to create deportation deals with non-EU countries to head off rise of far right
www.theguardian.com
Or 19 of its member countries
EU countries demand the right to introduce Rwanda-style schemes
The Czech and Italian PMs are leading a 19-strong group asking Brussels to let them transfer migration procedures outside the bloc's territory.
And why do you think small boat traffic to the UK has gone up again since it was binned?
I mean it seemed like a bonkers scheme to me - but then I’ve been told that repeatedly and nothing else by everyone from the establishment media to Nigel Farage. Nevertheless there is the above.
At minimum, labour have sent a signal, however symbolic it might be. And that’s not insignificant in itself, not least given the rest of the package it has come within. They have so far clearly signalled they are governing for client groups, and for the rest, austerity plus woke authoritarianism is the prescription.
Smurf
Private Member
Where's the stats that it has gone up? I mean I'm sure it probably has as the numbers seem to fluctuate all the time so I'd argue you'd need to look at more than short term figures to see any trend?Tell it to the Irish
Rwanda Bill causing migrants to head for Ireland instead of UK, deputy PM Micheál Martin says
It comes at a time when tension over immigration levels is high in Ireland, with the country experiencing a housing crisis.news.sky.com
Tell it to the EU
Von der Leyen’s EU group plans Rwanda-style asylum schemes
Centre-right European People’s party says it wants to create deportation deals with non-EU countries to head off rise of far right
Or 19 of its member countries
EU countries demand the right to introduce Rwanda-style schemes
The Czech and Italian PMs are leading a 19-strong group asking Brussels to let them transfer migration procedures outside the bloc's territory.www.dailymail.co.uk
And why do you think small boat traffic to the UK has gone up again since it was binned?
I mean it seemed like a bonkers scheme to me - but then I’ve been told that repeatedly and nothing else by everyone from the establishment media to Nigel Farage. Nevertheless there is the above.
At minimum, labour have sent a signal, however symbolic it might be. And that’s not insignificant in itself, not least given the rest of the package it has come within. They have so far clearly signalled they are governing for client groups, and for the rest, austerity plus woke authoritarianism is the prescription.
Jack
Private Member
egb_hibs
Private Member
Small boat activity in the English Channel
Data on the number of migrants arriving in the UK in small boats and those who were prevented by French authorities from crossing the English Channel.
You are right that we don't have a long time period to judge it on, and @Jack may be right that the weather plays a role - i mean its certainly the case but is it the only factor is the question. But as things stand it's up.
On a longer term it's way down on those pre Rwanda bill highs mentioned in Jack's post. We'll see if it gets back there.
emerald green
Private Member
Im very glad we have looked after our pensioners better in the last 20 to 25 years.... prior tae that they wernae putting their heating on in the winter and dying o the fucking cold.
Back tae dying o the fucking cold now.
Smurf
Private Member
Nonsense
emerald green
Private Member
phew. Thats a relief.
I'm all for them means testing the fuel payment but the bar needs to be set higher so that people on the breadline aren't missing out. I admit I got it last year and spent the money on a 3 wood so I'm not bothered about not getting it. My pension payments don't reach a 40-hour week on minimum wage but I'm not skint and others will be in my position so, with all due respect, I don't think the government can use your minimum wage strategy mate.Yep, everytime a govt states “this will help the poorer households” you just have to laugh or cry… the threshold is always ridiculously low, even your average “poor” household won’t get it.
Why don’t they make it an income that equates to a 40 hour week on minimum wage rate?
If it’s the minimum you need to live by, by their reckoning, then even £1 a week less is living below the “minimum” living costs, ie poor/poverty stricken households.
I remember seeing in disbelief the Blairs crowing about how they got their “child benefit” and all the other millionaires….. while the millionaires crying about people getting benefits!!!
You mention child benefit to millionaires and the response… ”we are entitled to it”
Outrageous hypocrisy and they don’t even realise it
Jack
Private Member
Global warming will see the pensioners are OK
Smurf
Private Member
It's difficult to argue against not giving more to pensioners, those on benefits or public sector workers without coming across as heartless or as some kind of Tory.
However, I think a lot of people think government (whether it's Tory or Labour in Westminster or indeed SNP at Holyrood) are sitting on some huge amount of money and are actively seeking to hurt or harm sections of our economy just through the sheer hell of it.
Let's be honest in the main at Westminster the Tories want to restrict public spending where they can in order to cut taxes. Their belief (and it's true) is that it's good for the economy if people retain more of their money to choose how they spend it. And spending it is good for the economy. In the main Labour don't want to cut taxes. They want to generate as much taxation as possible for public spending. And whatever anyone thinks of New Labour with steady economic growth they absolutely did ramp up public spending and things like winter heating allowances....
Now the environment and reality is completely different. There's been no real economic growth for years. We are at best bumping along. Public services are no longer fit for purpose following years of austerity. They need huge investment. Public service wages have fallen behind. For every £4 the government spends £1 has to be borrowed. Taxation is at an overall huge high historically.
I've no doubt whatsoever that this Labour Government will want to increase public spending to an extent of huge opposition and criticism of the Tories and the right wing media. However, it needs economic growth to generate higher tax receipts.
Tough choices though in the short term is needed. Making the heating allowance means tested wouldn't have been the obvious target but it's obviously been used to send a message. I hope that they make choices on things like land & wealth to generate funds short term. And don't just look at measures to pacify the Daily Mail.
Time will tell. But they need time. And they need to make huge decisions before this year ends otherwise they're heading to inevitable defeat 2029.