Best Of

If the Iran invasion is illegal then facilitating attacks on them by the Americans and Israelis is also illegal.

Starmer out.

It’s a grey area .

Because it’s classed as protecting ships from being attacked so goes down as defensive in No 10 . I wish we had nothing at all to do with any of this but as opposed to the rest of Europe Starmer can’t afford a total rupture with the US administration.

No policy change at all

No RAF involvement.

Attacking Iranian sites that are military and attacking Straits of Hormuz

If Ships start moving oil will be another win for Statesman Starmer.

Ahem

https://x.com/marthamaccallum/status/2035021041353846929

I interviewed President Trump by phone. He doubled down on his anger at NATO and said all we need is “numbers” in the Strait to open it, Iran has nothing left. Also, when asked if Japan gave any assurance of military support given that 90 percent of their oil comes from
the Strait, the President say they have Constitutional restraints but would be there for us if we needed them, saying “Japan is better ally than NATO.” More to come on The Story. 3 pm and on The Five tonight.

He hates NATO but wants them to do whatever he says, whilst also insisting the USA needs no allies for anything ever. Hard to see why things have gotten strained.

But in all seriousness he and Vance will be loving the chance to kneecap NATO more than they already have, and given the level of support he still has among the GOP, a large chunk of america is being permanently poisoned against the alliance, so they are achieving their aim.

So at least 50% or more of voters want to keep the triple lock and subsidise energy bills during the Iran War. Most voters from all parties want to keep the triple lock, though less than half of Reform voters want to subsidise energy bills. They are divided on increasing defence spending and not yet ready to believe a UBI is possible but not majority opposed and Green voters back it as do half of Labour voters.

Most voters aren't that bothered about students though, more refusing to forgive student loans or bail out universities than not with Green voters again the main exception. Furlough is also not going to be believed as realistic either again

It doesn't matter what voters want, and this is where Starmer and Reeves are about to come up against reality

It does because voters elect their governments, as this poll proves the triple lock is untouchable, most voters from all parties want to retain it.

At most Labour could get away with means testing it that is it

Means testing the State Pension - that would go down way worse than killing the triple lock.

Throw one big increase on the state pension and few would notice the lock has gone, announce means testing (in any form on any part) and your political party will be gone at the next election

As I keep saying -

1) Merge employee NI And IT
2) Protect the basic rate pensioners. Only those on 50K+ will pay more tax initially.
3) Put all the old age benefits in a blender, and make the result taxable.
4) quadruple lock - the pension is the personal allowance and the personal allowance is the pension. This means that for any pension increase the Chancellor will have to raise the personal allowance. Suddenly....

Taxation is the best way to deal with this.

I’m at a loss as to how 1 and 2 would work. The easiest way of achieving what you want is to rename NI and apply it to people who are below the pension age a - so you may as well keep NI out a plateau on it at £50,000 and increase income tax to 42%.

The other issue that makes other changes impossible is that income tax is a delegated tax in Scotland an I think elsewhere (it just isn’t different in Wales and NI).

You merge employee NI and IT

That (at least in the short term) you create a new rate of basic tax for pensioners (below £50K income) that is the old IT rate - so they don't pay the NI extra.

This is simple to administer, since HMRC has DOB on their systems.

But we already have that with NI - you stop paying it on the April 6th after you get your state pension.

So the easiest way to do what you want is to leave it as it is

No. The point is that pensioners over 50K will be paying more tax. And all the others currently not paying employee NI.

Which again could be done by removing the 2% employee NI rate that NI goes to after £967 a week on to income tax to make income tax 42%.

Easily done and that 2% higher rate NI is a relatively recent invention anyway

The idea is to remove employee NI from the board entirely. So no games to play avoiding NI.

Sensible in many ways. However, two things would follow.

1 Better-off pensioners would pay more than now.
2 The headline rate of income tax would be higher than now.

Both of these are electorally as popular as being told to find a stick, sharpen it and then poke yourself in the eye with the sharp stick. (Sharp sticks and eye pokers were both cut in the coalition austerity round).

The problem remains- we all sort of Intuit that fiscal rebalancing is needed in general, but not in particular.

It's about messaging

1) You announce the abolition of Income Tax and Employee National Insurance
2) You announce the Introduction of the Save The NHS, Protect Cute Kittens and Kick Racists In The Goolies Tax.
3) Any opposition to the proposals is framed as you hate the NHS, you want to kill kittens and you like racists.

A friend worked in charity fundraising. She said the perfect charity to fundraise for would be Kittens for Kids with Kancer (except for the initials).

In the subject of KKK I was scrolling Facebook this morning and saw this and for a good moment o thought the chap on the right was dressed interestingly.

So at least 50% or more of voters want to keep the triple lock and subsidise energy bills during the Iran War. Most voters from all parties want to keep the triple lock, though less than half of Reform voters want to subsidise energy bills. They are divided on increasing defence spending and not yet ready to believe a UBI is possible but not majority opposed and Green voters back it as do half of Labour voters.

Most voters aren't that bothered about students though, more refusing to forgive student loans or bail out universities than not with Green voters again the main exception. Furlough is also not going to be believed as realistic either again

It doesn't matter what voters want, and this is where Starmer and Reeves are about to come up against reality

It does because voters elect their governments, as this poll proves the triple lock is untouchable, most voters from all parties want to retain it.

At most Labour could get away with means testing it that is it

Means testing the State Pension - that would go down way worse than killing the triple lock.

Throw one big increase on the state pension and few would notice the lock has gone, announce means testing (in any form on any part) and your political party will be gone at the next election

As I keep saying -

1) Merge employee NI And IT
2) Protect the basic rate pensioners. Only those on 50K+ will pay more tax initially.
3) Put all the old age benefits in a blender, and make the result taxable.
4) quadruple lock - the pension is the personal allowance and the personal allowance is the pension. This means that for any pension increase the Chancellor will have to raise the personal allowance. Suddenly....

Taxation is the best way to deal with this.

I’m at a loss as to how 1 and 2 would work. The easiest way of achieving what you want is to rename NI and apply it to people who are below the pension age a - so you may as well keep NI out a plateau on it at £50,000 and increase income tax to 42%.

The other issue that makes other changes impossible is that income tax is a delegated tax in Scotland an I think elsewhere (it just isn’t different in Wales and NI).

You merge employee NI and IT

That (at least in the short term) you create a new rate of basic tax for pensioners (below £50K income) that is the old IT rate - so they don't pay the NI extra.

This is simple to administer, since HMRC has DOB on their systems.

But we already have that with NI - you stop paying it on the April 6th after you get your state pension.

So the easiest way to do what you want is to leave it as it is

No. The point is that pensioners over 50K will be paying more tax. And all the others currently not paying employee NI.

Which again could be done by removing the 2% employee NI rate that NI goes to after £967 a week on to income tax to make income tax 42%.

Easily done and that 2% higher rate NI is a relatively recent invention anyway

The idea is to remove employee NI from the board entirely. So no games to play avoiding NI.

Sensible in many ways. However, two things would follow.

1 Better-off pensioners would pay more than now.
2 The headline rate of income tax would be higher than now.

Both of these are electorally as popular as being told to find a stick, sharpen it and then poke yourself in the eye with the sharp stick. (Sharp sticks and eye pokers were both cut in the coalition austerity round).

The problem remains- we all sort of Intuit that fiscal rebalancing is needed in general, but not in particular.

It's about messaging

1) You announce the abolition of Income Tax and Employee National Insurance
2) You announce the Introduction of the Save The NHS, Protect Cute Kittens and Kick Racists In The Goolies Tax.
3) Any opposition to the proposals is framed as you hate the NHS, you want to kill kittens and you like racists.

A friend worked in charity fundraising. She said the perfect charity to fundraise for would be Kittens for Kids with Kancer (except for the initials).

In the subject of KKK I was scrolling Facebook this morning and saw this and for a good moment o thought the chap on the right was dressed interestingly.

That's a really shit Pet Shop Boys tribute act.

So at least 50% or more of voters want to keep the triple lock and subsidise energy bills during the Iran War. Most voters from all parties want to keep the triple lock, though less than half of Reform voters want to subsidise energy bills. They are divided on increasing defence spending and not yet ready to believe a UBI is possible but not majority opposed and Green voters back it as do half of Labour voters.

Most voters aren't that bothered about students though, more refusing to forgive student loans or bail out universities than not with Green voters again the main exception. Furlough is also not going to be believed as realistic either again

The question was "could" not "should".
You might think the government could afford to keep the triple lock (borrow more) but that doesn't mean they should.

they need to clear out all the crazy government spending. Minimum 10% efficiency saving across the board , including all benefits, except defense. Illegal immigration minimum 50% cut on hosting them. Should be very simple

I wonder why no-one has tried efficiency savings before?

Well I’m expecting the price of petrol to come down next month.

How’s about you guys?

I don't give a F**k either way

Natasha Bertrand
@NatashaBertrand
A recent internal assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency that was circulating inside the Pentagon in recent weeks determined that Iran could potentially keep the passage shut for anywhere from one to six months, four sources familiar with the document told CNN. But White House and Pentagon officials insisted that the assessment — particularly the longer end timeframe, which some consider a worst-case scenario — was not being seriously considered.

https://x.com/NatashaBertrand/status/2035048222901903410

As I said yesterday you can listen to the people who know — because that $100 billion a year buys a lot of very, very specialist knowledge — or you can just go with the thoughts of one of the dumbest people on Earth.

We'll be lucky if this doesn't turn into WW III.

Of course people believe in the magic money tree. Bar the odd rarity there's nearly always a budget deficit. Regardless of whether the economy is good or bad or whether the tax take is high or low, the government is almost certainly borrowing more than it is raising in taxes or other revenues, and frankly it's just a case of whether they're borrowing more or less in units of very large numbers.

To your average person, magic money tree. You can't do that with your credit card.

The reality is obviously much more complex and nuanced than that, but you can hardly blame folk for thinking it. Analogies like "well think of making your household budget balance up" are clearly bollocks because the government almost never balances it up themselves, and even in a good year the national debt continues to go up, just a bit slower, and yet the whole system continues to trundle on. That's almost the literal definition of magic money tree.

The fact that there's some imaginary line in the sand when ultimately even this state of affairs can't continue is almost by-the-by.

So at least 50% or more of voters want to keep the triple lock and subsidise energy bills during the Iran War. Most voters from all parties want to keep the triple lock, though less than half of Reform voters want to subsidise energy bills. They are divided on increasing defence spending and not yet ready to believe a UBI is possible but not majority opposed and Green voters back it as do half of Labour voters.

Most voters aren't that bothered about students though, more refusing to forgive student loans or bail out universities than not with Green voters again the main exception. Furlough is also not going to be believed as realistic either again

The question was "could" not "should".
You might think the government could afford to keep the triple lock (borrow more) but that doesn't mean they should.

What chance any end to the conflict without boots on the ground?

Given his supporters believe whatever he says, Trump can simply stop at any time and declare victory. The war stops when he gets bored, not when some particular objective is met or some place in Iran seized by boots on the ground.

Trump is in danger of dissatisfying everyone.

Those who don't want foreign wars.
Those who want the Iranian regime destroyed.
Those who hate higher prices.

He's obviously been spending too long with Starmer, who has made getting the worst of all possible worlds his main characteristic.

Given that the only British politicians Trump has met recently are Starmer, Mandelson and Truss I can understand why he thinks the UK has gone down in the world.