Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

Donald Trump and the SNP have a lot in common – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,736
edited March 12 in General
imageDonald Trump and the SNP have a lot in common – politicalbetting.com

Yesterday I wrote about how the SNP’s ongoing legal issues are impacting their finances which could see them do worse than the polls suggest and over the pond Donald Trump is experiencing similar issues, the Telegraph reports that

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,753
    edited March 10
    Are there rules stopping a single American billionaire writing a big cheque? Or a Scottish millionaire, assuming the SNP can ringfence its accounts.

    ETA though I accept the header's point that a shortfall from grassroots donors could mean they don't vote either.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,753
    Jeremy Hunt’s new Isa is nonsense — only one of my top ten holdings is British
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jeremy-hunt-new-great-british-isa-investing-ian-cowie-nl3sckvss (£££)

    The Sunday Times might be missing the reason for the tax concession.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,753
    Boris Johnson flew to Venezuela for unofficial talks
    ...
    A spokesman for Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron said it was a "private visit" but that Mr Johnson texted him when he was on his way.

    Mr Johnson's office declined to say who paid for the private jet that flew him to Venezuela, saying: "Now that he is a private citizen we don't comment on any of those issues, only to say there was no cost to the UK taxpayer nor the Venezuelan government".

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68526317

    Boris Johnson, the thinking man's Jeremy Corbyn.
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,566
    Trump may be facing money problems, but he doesn't need money to fund his campaign as much as other candidates, as the court cases are giving him unlimited free airtime, and prove that, for his base at any rate, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,052
    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: better race yesterday. Mildly aggrieved Magnussen had the pace to win his group but decided he preferred to go on a penalty-collecting expedition instead. Very good stuff from Bearman.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    Fishing said:

    Trump may be facing money problems, but he doesn't need money to fund his campaign as much as other candidates, as the court cases are giving him unlimited free airtime, and prove that, for his base at any rate, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

    The court cases are *not* free. In fact, one reason $30 million is less than it looks is because he’s been planning to drain the RNC coffers to pay his legal bills. At north $112,000 dollars a day including charges and interest that will vanish pretty quickly.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: better race yesterday. Mildly aggrieved Magnussen had the pace to win his group but decided he preferred to go on a penalty-collecting expedition instead. Very good stuff from Bearman.

    I wonder if in light of that result Ferrari are having buyer’s remorse over Hamilton?

    A good driver, even a great driver, in his heyday, but his heyday was over some time ago.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,753
    One minute of President Reagan on America as leader of the free world. How far the Republican Party has come since then.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akCDcwTHFVo
  • Options
    ClippPClippP Posts: 1,722

    Boris Johnson flew to Venezuela for unofficial talks
    ...
    A spokesman for Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron said it was a "private visit" but that Mr Johnson texted him when he was on his way.

    Mr Johnson's office declined to say who paid for the private jet that flew him to Venezuela, saying: "Now that he is a private citizen we don't comment on any of those issues, only to say there was no cost to the UK taxpayer nor the Venezuelan government".

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68526317

    Boris Johnson, the thinking man's Jeremy Corbyn.

    This Conservative government must be out of its mind if the accept they services of a failure and a has-been like Boris Johnson to take on a diplomatic mission.....
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,052
    Mr. Doethur, Hamilton is past his best, particularly in close racing. Bearman does need to work on his neck but on pace terms he's very good. This may mean Hamilton's contract ends up being shorter rather than longer.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    edited March 10
    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    Trump may be facing money problems, but he doesn't need money to fund his campaign as much as other candidates, as the court cases are giving him unlimited free airtime, and prove that, for his base at any rate, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

    The court cases are *not* free. In fact, one reason $30 million is less than it looks is because he’s been planning to drain the RNC coffers to pay his legal bills. At north $112,000 dollars a day including charges and interest that will vanish pretty quickly.
    In fact, it may even be more than that. In the first six months of last year Trump spent around $40 million in legal fees:

    https://www.reuters.com/world/us/former-us-president-trump-has-spent-40-million-legal-fees-reports-2023-07-30/

    And that was *before* the court cases got under way properly, although before most of his capable lawyers walked out on him.

    Of course, money does not buy everything even in US politics, but a lack of it isn’t going to make the Republicans’ task any easier and candidates wouldn’t be human if they didn’t feel resentful on the money that could be used to help them achieve political office was being wasted on defending Trump’s many admitted crimes.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,753
    ClippP said:

    Boris Johnson flew to Venezuela for unofficial talks
    ...
    A spokesman for Foreign Secretary Lord Cameron said it was a "private visit" but that Mr Johnson texted him when he was on his way.

    Mr Johnson's office declined to say who paid for the private jet that flew him to Venezuela, saying: "Now that he is a private citizen we don't comment on any of those issues, only to say there was no cost to the UK taxpayer nor the Venezuelan government".

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68526317

    Boris Johnson, the thinking man's Jeremy Corbyn.

    This Conservative government must be out of its mind if the accept they services of a failure and a has-been like Boris Johnson to take on a diplomatic mission.....
    In the world of 4d-chess, perhaps deniability of any formal link is an advantage for the government.

    In the real world, it might show Boris's world king ambitions are not quite dead, whether or not he is freelancing.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    Trump claims he will build a wall, and never does.

    Netanyahu has come up with a more inventive idea - build a road. And has done it.

    IDF completes road across width of Gaza, satellite images show
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68514821

    Hard to imagine that they would have bothered if they weren’t planning some kind of control zone across Gaza. If they don’t control it, Hamas or their successors would simply blow it up.
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,566
    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    Trump may be facing money problems, but he doesn't need money to fund his campaign as much as other candidates, as the court cases are giving him unlimited free airtime, and prove that, for his base at any rate, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

    The court cases are *not* free. In fact, one reason $30 million is less than it looks is because he’s been planning to drain the RNC coffers to pay his legal bills. At north $112,000 dollars a day including charges and interest that will vanish pretty quickly.
    The publicity from those court cases is free in the same way that state schools are free to taxpayers - Trump doesn't pay for the airtime directly, but pays indirectly and unavoidably instead. Given that a presidential campaign can cost more than a billion I'm not sure it's such a bad deal either.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    edited March 10
    Fishing said:

    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    Trump may be facing money problems, but he doesn't need money to fund his campaign as much as other candidates, as the court cases are giving him unlimited free airtime, and prove that, for his base at any rate, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

    The court cases are *not* free. In fact, one reason $30 million is less than it looks is because he’s been planning to drain the RNC coffers to pay his legal bills. At north $112,000 dollars a day including charges and interest that will vanish pretty quickly.
    The publicity from those court cases is free in the same way that state schools are free to taxpayers - Trump doesn't pay for the airtime directly, but pays indirectly and unavoidably instead. Given that a presidential campaign can cost more than a billion I'm not sure it's such a bad deal either.
    You're not sure it's going to be a bad deal to see Donald Trump on the stand getting hopelessly confused about names and dates and being torn to shreds by junior attorneys while paying out hundreds of thousands a day for the privilege?

    Well, it's a view.

    And again, we come back to it's not just about him. How are any of the downticket candidates going to get airtime if they can"t pay for it? (Although truthfully if they're all as mad as Lake, Greene, Jordan, Trump himself and the governor of North Carolina this may be a good thing in itself.)

    And finally, it would be much cheaper to buy airtime anyway, so your claim still doesn't add up.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,401
    edited March 10
    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342

    Are there rules stopping a single American billionaire writing a big cheque? Or a Scottish millionaire, assuming the SNP can ringfence its accounts.

    ETA though I accept the header's point that a shortfall from grassroots donors could mean they don't vote either.

    There are limits on direct campaign
    contributions, but since the conservatives on the Supreme Court gutted campaign finance rules ("money=free speech"), there are no real limits.
    You can give as much as you want to a "political action committee", and there are no limits on what a PAC can spend independently of a candidate or party.

    Trump's PACs spent over $50m on his legal bills last year.

  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,740

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342

    Jeremy Hunt’s new Isa is nonsense — only one of my top ten holdings is British
    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jeremy-hunt-new-great-british-isa-investing-ian-cowie-nl3sckvss (£££)

    The Sunday Times might be missing the reason for the tax concession.

    The industry has widely condemned the move as an unnecessary complication which will do very little (even if fully taken up by everyone who maxes out their ISAs) to increase UK investment.
    I understand the reason - it's just a highly inefficient way of achieving the aim. A gesture rather than a substantive measure.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342
    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
  • Options
    mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,159
    edited March 10
    Morning all. As far as "betting straws in the wind" go, is the fact that Trump's small donor numbers have fallen off a cliff more of an indicator of where the votes will land, than the shenanigans with billionaire backers?
  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,740

    One minute of President Reagan on America as leader of the free world. How far the Republican Party has come since then.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akCDcwTHFVo

    ...partly due to Reagan's actions in repealing the 'fairness doctrine"
    "The 1987 repeal of the fairness doctrine enabled the rise of talk radio that has been described as "unfiltered" divisive and/or vicious:"
    Rush Limbaugh was an example of the right wing 'shock jocks' that the repeal allowed. Would Fox News have happened without this?
    Reagan is partly responsible for where the Republican Party is now.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193
    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    “overturn, exploit or undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy to confer advantages or disadvantages on specific groups”

    That's quite a few major party donors and their beneficiaries in the jail then.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342

    Nigelb said:

    Are there rules stopping a single American billionaire writing a big cheque? Or a Scottish millionaire, assuming the SNP can ringfence its accounts.

    ETA though I accept the header's point that a shortfall from grassroots donors could mean they don't vote either.

    There are limits on direct campaign
    contributions, but since the conservatives on the Supreme Court gutted campaign finance rules ("money=free speech"), there are no real limits.
    You can give as much as you want to a "political action committee", and there are no limits on what a PAC can spend independently of a candidate or party.

    Trump's PACs spent over $50m on his legal bills last year.

    Good morning everybody. Sadly, light rain here. Might improve later I suppose.

    On topic, more or less, enabling extremely rich people to influence elections at the sort of level discussed is a negation of democracy. As far as the USA is concerned, I’ve long been convinced that it’s claim to be a democracy isn’t borne out by the facts.
    The gutting of the McCain Feingold legislation was one of the first of a run of dreadful decisions by the new conservative majority on the Supreme Court.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC

    There's long been a tussle in the U.S. between the right of the rich to spend on politics as they wish, and the idea that they shouldn't just be given free rein.
    The McCain bill was a huge and consequential reform, which had placed quite strict limits on what individuals or corporations could donate.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193
    edited March 10

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners, which we have rather forgotten of late, is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates.

    With huge pressure to do it online.

    And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it automatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions. And HMRC always get it wrong, more or less, now they don't deduct at source on bank interest.

    In the old days I had to help the odd elderly relative or neighbour fill out the forms to recover overpaid tax on interest, or get the bank not to deduct interest at source, but that was at least safer in terms of potential penalties. Which, as discussed here resently, were never more than the actual sum owed. Until the recent and utterly malicious change.
  • Options
    theProletheProle Posts: 953

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    How exactly did they do pensioners over? As far as I can see, they did nothing that altered the situation for them at-all? Or do you feel entitled to a tax cut and are miffed that the cut they chose doesn't apply to you?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193
    edited March 10
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/10/michelle-donelan-set-to-face-more-questions-over-taxpayer-funded-15000-payout

    More to the story, reportedly ...

    'While the government has said that Donelan was given official advice and lawyers were involved, it remains unclear whether she was given clearance to publish the letter on social media. There also appears to have been a puzzling urgency to putting the letter together: emails uncovered using the Freedom of Information Act reveal that civil servants and lawyers were working until midnight on a Friday night to edit and vet it.

    The process is said to have involved “firm steers” from Donelan, though it is unknown exactly what she ordered to be included.'
  • Options
    Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,404
    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates. With huge pressure to do it online. And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it aytomatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions.
    It'll take a year I suspect, the maximum state pension is 221pw this year which is £1000 below the Personal allowance over the year.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342
    This is a map of all the states with polio vaccine mandates. Trump announced tonight that he will de-fund all schools with vaccine mandates. All of them.
    Check the legend at the bottom. Literally every state requires the polio vaccine.

    https://twitter.com/bobcesca_go/status/1766628143475929129
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,539
    Fishing said:

    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    Trump may be facing money problems, but he doesn't need money to fund his campaign as much as other candidates, as the court cases are giving him unlimited free airtime, and prove that, for his base at any rate, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

    The court cases are *not* free. In fact, one reason $30 million is less than it looks is because he’s been planning to drain the RNC coffers to pay his legal bills. At north $112,000 dollars a day including charges and interest that will vanish pretty quickly.
    The publicity from those court cases is free in the same way that state schools are free to taxpayers - Trump doesn't pay for the airtime directly, but pays indirectly and unavoidably instead. Given that a presidential campaign can cost more than a billion I'm not sure it's such a bad deal either.
    Yes, but it will become bad publicity if and when we can get the slippery bastard into the dock.
  • Options
    Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,404

    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates. With huge pressure to do it online. And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it aytomatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions.
    It'll take a year I suspect, the maximum state pension is 221pw this year which is £1000 below the Personal allowance over the year.
    According to ONS approx 71% have occupational/private penions which can be taxed at source automatically. My wife is in that position and I will be in 3 years.
  • Options
    theProletheProle Posts: 953
    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    Far from it, the problem is that it creates a tool that the labour party will love. Think a person with a penis is always a man - off to the gulags for you, extremist. Dare suggest restricting abortion to 12 weeks like most of the civilised world - go straight to jail, do not pass go. Etc etc.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,619
    edited March 10

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Better off pensioners should be paying more tax.

    Be grateful no-one will come for arrears on the extra they should have been paying for years.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193

    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates. With huge pressure to do it online. And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it aytomatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions.
    It'll take a year I suspect, the maximum state pension is 221pw this year which is £1000 below the Personal allowance over the year.
    Oh, it's already happening judging from the DM, Moneysaving Expert, etc. over the last year or so. Will only get more salient.

    Not everyone has a full SP, sure, but lots of people have a small occupational pension and some savings.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    More allegations over Katie Britt's reply to the State of the Union.

    This time, that she used a story from Bush's presidency and updated it to pretend it happened under Biden.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/09/katie-britt-unrelated-sex-trafficking-story-state-of-the-union-rebuttal.html

    To be fair, I don't know why anybody is surprised. She's a Trump supporter, and Trump's very first press statement as president included the phrase 'alternative facts' to explain his lies about the number who attended his inauguration.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193
    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    “overturn, exploit or undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy to confer advantages or disadvantages on specific groups”

    That's quite a few major party donors and their beneficiaries in the jail then.
    This isn't about legislation, or taking legal action against groups. It's a scheme for ministers to "ban from public life" people or groups they arbitrarily define.
    The proposal includes forcing local authorities to do the same.

    It's effectively extrajudicial sanctions applied by ministerial whim.
    Quite so, but what happens when public bodies or the bannees ignore the new rules?
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342
    edited March 10
    One of their customers is the Dept of Defence, so it's not exactly 'privately funded', but an impressive result.

    Ursa Major and @Stratolaunch achieved a major leap forward with the first flight of a privately funded reusable hypersonic vehicle during today's test over the Pacific Ocean.
    https://twitter.com/ursamajortech/status/1766600038266875963
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    “overturn, exploit or undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy to confer advantages or disadvantages on specific groups”

    That's quite a few major party donors and their beneficiaries in the jail then.
    This isn't about legislation, or taking legal action against groups. It's a scheme for ministers to "ban from public life" people or groups they arbitrarily define.
    The proposal includes forcing local authorities to do the same.

    It's effectively extrajudicial sanctions applied by ministerial whim.
    Could we apply it to Gove?

    If so it may be a silly policy but you can understand why it might look attractive.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,329
    ydoethur said:

    More allegations over Katie Britt's reply to the State of the Union.

    This time, that she used a story from Bush's presidency and updated it to pretend it happened under Biden.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/09/katie-britt-unrelated-sex-trafficking-story-state-of-the-union-rebuttal.html

    To be fair, I don't know why anybody is surprised. She's a Trump supporter, and Trump's very first press statement as president included the phrase 'alternative facts' to explain his lies about the number who attended his inauguration.

    SNL's take

    https://x.com/jeffstorobinsky/status/1766685696947851420?s=20
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193
    IanB2 said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Better off pensioners should be paying more tax.

    Be grateful no-one will come for arrears on the extra they should have been paying for years.
    Er, they already do. Like everyone else.

    The real problem is NI. Which is an extra - and which we are repeatedly told is not a tax - that they have been paying for years to get the state pension at all.

    Which satisfies your conditions ...

    It's going to be lethal for the Tories to sort this out, given their voter base.





  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/10/michelle-donelan-set-to-face-more-questions-over-taxpayer-funded-15000-payout

    More to the story, reportedly ...

    'While the government has said that Donelan was given official advice and lawyers were involved, it remains unclear whether she was given clearance to publish the letter on social media. There also appears to have been a puzzling urgency to putting the letter together: emails uncovered using the Freedom of Information Act reveal that civil servants and lawyers were working until midnight on a Friday night to edit and vet it.

    The process is said to have involved “firm steers” from Donelan, though it is unknown exactly what she ordered to be included.'

    If she compelled the advice, the fact that she received civil service advice is no defence at all to her use of public money to settle her
    libel - and she should resign.
    If she was dumb enough to take advice from this incarnation of the civil service rather than a lawyer anyway, she probably isn't best suited to ministerial office.
  • Options
    theProletheProle Posts: 953
    FPT
    kjh said:

    theProle said:

    darkage said:

    pigeon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    an observation from the last thread which I was too late too participate in. I worry that we are painting pensioners as rich fat cats (I am not a pensioner as yet). The previous generation designated as boomer certainly for a lot had good pension provision and got to buy homes at a reasonable cost. However they are dying off bit by bit....my generation...generation x however largely missed out on defined benefit schemes and due to 2 decades of low interest rates most of our pots are not going to be huge and affording an index linked pension over 10k is going to be a pipe dream for most of us. In addition many of my generation like myself missed out on cheap housing as we ended up getting divorced in the late 90's to 2000's and then found a single salary wouldn't get us a mortgage even with the cash realised from our sale of half he house.

    I forsee when I retire being reviled as a rich pensioner because of the attitude being inculcated while I am struggling to make ends meet. As an example I am keeping an eye on my pension pot and have worked solidly since 1987, been paying contributions, and generally been top 30 to top 20% of earners. I am told I should be looking at an annuity of 5 to 7k a year non index linked if I dont take a lump sum. Hardly going to be having my mouth stuffed with gold on that but the idea of rich pensioners will still persist I don't doubt

    I think we all appreciate that not all pensioners are wealthy, and many pensioners still won't be wealthy in twenty years' time. However...

    *Most boomers are outright homeowners, and most of their kids have managed to at least get a mortgage to boot

    *Thus, given that our economy is so warped by the deliberate constriction of property supply (which yields huge capital gains for homeowners, as well as virtually guaranteed fat profits for most landlords,) the average oldie will continue to be comfortably off for the foreseeable future

    *At this point, we remind ourselves that the average pensioner has a higher income than the average worker, after adjustment for housing costs. This doesn't mean that there aren't substantial numbers of dirt poor pensioners, especially amongst those who missed out on home ownership and/or good old fashioned final salary pensions, but most of them are reasonably well to do

    *A large proportion of GenX, including some of us who may still be stuck renting, are also going to receive enormous cash windfalls when they inherit their parents' property. This is entirely untaxed save for about 3-4% of the most valuable estates, and will greatly bolster the prosperity of the next generation of olds

    Thus, well to do pensioners are the norm not the exception (and dig into the stats and I bet you'll discover that a higher proportion of kids are living in poverty than are the elderly.)

    This is the fundamental argument against the Triple Lock, and in favour of its replacement with a much less generous guarantee backed up by means tested payments for the genuinely hard up. Decades of compound inflation in state pension payments will, quite simply, bleed the working population and their children white. It's precisely the same reasoning behind the near-total disappearance of final salary pensions schemes in the private sector: business scrapped them because the contributions were so steep they became unaffordable.

    However, Government ultimately depends on voter support, the median elector is now aged in their mid-50s, and the huge grey vote expects triple locked pensions to carry on forever. Which means they will, until the cost finally bankrupts the entire state. And thus, on we go, circling the plughole.
    A state pension of £10k per year isn't going to get you very far even if you own your own home - it is a very basic income. You can't do much to change your situation, you can't get credit or borrow money.

    It is an error to speak in general terms about pensioners. The fire should be turned on the tax arrangements for pensioners on high incomes due to defined benefit pensions or savings and investments. They demand a lot from the state but as discussed earlier today they pay around half as much tax as working people (due to NI and student loan repayments) on a similar income.
    Married couple - £20k/year, and that's "post-tax". That's loads to live on if you own your house outright.

    This is the problem with the whole benefits thing. Paying £10k pa to each pensioner regardless of circumstances represents very different outcomes depending on those circumstances. Single person renting will be in grinding poverty, couple who own their house will be comfortably off.
    Why say post tax? The pension is taxable. Admittedly if that is all you have it is under the PA but that would be true of all income. Your argument is valid but the post tax comment is misleading.
    Because your income will always be at least that. The state pension may use up your tax free allowance, but you'll always get *at least* 20k after tax as a couple.

    On the other hand, if you are a working age couple with a single earner on £20k, your take home is substantially less than that, as you'll get hit for about £1500 in income tax and £500 in NI.
    You also are virtually forced to put 5% (£1000) into a pension as otherwise you'll miss out on 3% from your employer. So your actual take home will be around £17k, or 15% less than our pensioners.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,170

    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates. With huge pressure to do it online. And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it aytomatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions.
    It'll take a year I suspect, the maximum state pension is 221pw this year which is £1000 below the Personal allowance over the year.
    According to ONS approx 71% have occupational/private penions which can be taxed at source automatically. My wife is in that position and I will be in 3 years.
    That’s where I am; my occupational and private pensions take me over the tax level, but are taxed at source. I don’t have any other income sources, apart from a small honorarium as auditor for a local charity, so HMRC simply asks me if there’s been any change in my income every year, and doesn’t require me to do anything more.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,401
    edited March 10

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    No.i mean giving tax breaks to workers via ni cut but f all for pensioners. My pension increase has been cut 20pc by tax before I get it.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    edited March 10
    Scott_xP said:

    ydoethur said:

    More allegations over Katie Britt's reply to the State of the Union.

    This time, that she used a story from Bush's presidency and updated it to pretend it happened under Biden.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/09/katie-britt-unrelated-sex-trafficking-story-state-of-the-union-rebuttal.html

    To be fair, I don't know why anybody is surprised. She's a Trump supporter, and Trump's very first press statement as president included the phrase 'alternative facts' to explain his lies about the number who attended his inauguration.

    SNL's take

    https://x.com/jeffstorobinsky/status/1766685696947851420?s=20
    Gosh. That is a truly superb performance by Scarlett Johansen. I would never, ever have guessed it was her.

    She has been utterly wasted in every role she's played up to now if that extraordinary talent has been lurking within all the time.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,994
    ydoethur said:

    More allegations over Katie Britt's reply to the State of the Union.

    This time, that she used a story from Bush's presidency and updated it to pretend it happened under Biden.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/09/katie-britt-unrelated-sex-trafficking-story-state-of-the-union-rebuttal.html

    To be fair, I don't know why anybody is surprised. She's a Trump supporter, and Trump's very first press statement as president included the phrase 'alternative facts' to explain his lies about the number who attended his inauguration.

    Trump and his supporters can do whatever they like, literally, and a minimum of 40% of voters in the US will back them - as will a number of senior UK Tories inside and outside Parliament. Culture war is a powerful drug.

  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,753
    ydoethur said:

    More allegations over Katie Britt's reply to the State of the Union.

    This time, that she used a story from Bush's presidency and updated it to pretend it happened under Biden.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/09/katie-britt-unrelated-sex-trafficking-story-state-of-the-union-rebuttal.html

    To be fair, I don't know why anybody is surprised. She's a Trump supporter, and Trump's very first press statement as president included the phrase 'alternative facts' to explain his lies about the number who attended his inauguration.

    Worse. Not only did the trafficking take place in the Bush era, it was also in Mexico not America.
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,118
    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    “overturn, exploit or undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy to confer advantages or disadvantages on specific groups”

    That's quite a few major party donors and their beneficiaries in the jail then.
    "Confer advantages". "Specific groups".

    Private schools?
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,401
    theProle said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    How exactly did they do pensioners over? As far as I can see, they did nothing that altered the situation for them at-all? Or do you feel entitled to a tax cut and are miffed that the cut they chose doesn't apply to you?
    Why shoukd pensioners be exempt from a tax cut
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,994

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not actively handing pensioners sweeties for once is not the same as screwing them over.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    “overturn, exploit or undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy to confer advantages or disadvantages on specific groups”

    That's quite a few major party donors and their beneficiaries in the jail then.
    This isn't about legislation, or taking legal action against groups. It's a scheme for ministers to "ban from public life" people or groups they arbitrarily define.
    The proposal includes forcing local authorities to do the same.

    It's effectively extrajudicial sanctions applied by ministerial whim.
    Could we apply it to Gove?

    If so it may be a silly policy but you can understand why it might look attractive.
    Ejecting him from public life at the next election is a better idea.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    edited March 10

    ydoethur said:

    More allegations over Katie Britt's reply to the State of the Union.

    This time, that she used a story from Bush's presidency and updated it to pretend it happened under Biden.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/09/katie-britt-unrelated-sex-trafficking-story-state-of-the-union-rebuttal.html

    To be fair, I don't know why anybody is surprised. She's a Trump supporter, and Trump's very first press statement as president included the phrase 'alternative facts' to explain his lies about the number who attended his inauguration.

    Worse. Not only did the trafficking take place in the Bush era, it was also in Mexico not America.
    TBF, that's not necessarily such a problem. I think most MAGA types have always secretly regretted the fact that America ended its occupation of Mexico in 1848 under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. Or just not accepted it.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,401
    IanB2 said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Better off pensioners should be paying more tax.

    Be grateful no-one will come for arrears on the extra they should have been paying for years.
    Bollock. I am not better off I am on fixed income that doesn't or barely changes because of the FAS. I am screwed every year
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,197
    Wishing all mothers, here and elsewhere, a happy day. Where would we be without them?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,589
    geoffw said:

    Wishing all mothers, here and elsewhere, a happy day. Where would we be without them?

    Well, we wouldn't, obvs.
  • Options
    theProletheProle Posts: 953

    theProle said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    How exactly did they do pensioners over? As far as I can see, they did nothing that altered the situation for them at-all? Or do you feel entitled to a tax cut and are miffed that the cut they chose doesn't apply to you?
    Why shoukd pensioners be exempt from a tax cut
    Because they were already exempt from paying that tax anyway? If you want to volunteer to pay NI at its new reduced rate, I'm sure HMRC will cheerfully take your money.

    I don't complain I didn't get anything out of them moving the VAT threshold, despite owning a small business that still has to charge VAT. I'm not complaining that they've moved the child benefit withdrawal threshold, despite the fact that I don't get child benefit.

    Complaining that you've been "screwed" by a tax cut on a tax *you don't need to pay anyway* is simply rediculous.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,744

    theProle said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    How exactly did they do pensioners over? As far as I can see, they did nothing that altered the situation for them at-all? Or do you feel entitled to a tax cut and are miffed that the cut they chose doesn't apply to you?
    Why shoukd pensioners be exempt from a tax cut
    Because they were exempt from all the increases in that tax?
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,813
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/09/labour-calls-punishment-protesters-damaged-balfour-portrait/

    Did this story get discussed yesterday? I predict there will be no meaningful punishment. But it is nonetheless impressive the way that labour have taken the issue up. The right are starting to make gains in the 'war on woke'; the people that carry out these acts are helping the opposition, but the radical mindset is such that they will keep going.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,816
    ydoethur said:

    Trump claims he will build a wall, and never does.

    Netanyahu has come up with a more inventive idea - build a road. And has done it.

    IDF completes road across width of Gaza, satellite images show
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68514821

    Hard to imagine that they would have bothered if they weren’t planning some kind of control zone across Gaza. If they don’t control it, Hamas or their successors would simply blow it up.

    A road from the river to the sea?
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,052
    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners, which we have rather forgotten of late, is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates.

    With huge pressure to do it online.

    And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it automatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions. And HMRC always get it wrong, more or less, now they don't deduct at source on bank interest.

    In the old days I had to help the odd elderly relative or neighbour fill out the forms to recover overpaid tax on interest, or get the bank not to deduct interest at source, but that was at least safer in terms of potential penalties. Which, as discussed here resently, were never more than the actual sum owed. Until the recent and utterly malicious change.
    Why can't pensioners do tax returns? It's not as if they are too busy working!

  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,118

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not actively handing pensioners sweeties for once is not the same as screwing them over.
    Squareroot's reaction mirrors that of lots of retirees. Almost immediately recognising the cut in NICs as a direct attack on them.

    The reasoning varies boomer to boomer, but the meme is born. It's difficult to think of a voting cohort that Sunak hasn't managed to alienate.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,052
    Cyclefree said:

    Gove's proposed extremism definition is an utterly cock-eyed illiberal measure which should be filed in the bin immediately. We have all the laws we need to deal with those who threaten us. We just need to use them. We certainly don't need a woolly definition which will be exploited to make extremists of us all on one topic or other.

    Two very wise women explained why here - https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2024/01/14/the-worst-can-and-does-happen/

    Indeed, and they should know that it is very likely to be a different government enjoying these powers in a year.
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,813
    theProle said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    Far from it, the problem is that it creates a tool that the labour party will love. Think a person with a penis is always a man - off to the gulags for you, extremist. Dare suggest restricting abortion to 12 weeks like most of the civilised world - go straight to jail, do not pass go. Etc etc.
    This is clumsy poundshop authoritarianism. It can just be directed another way by the next government.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,650
    Cyclefree said:

    Gove's proposed extremism definition is an utterly cock-eyed illiberal measure which should be filed in the bin immediately. We have all the laws we need to deal with those who threaten us. We just need to use them. We certainly don't need a woolly definition which will be exploited to make extremists of us all on one topic or other.

    Two very wise women explained why here - https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2024/01/14/the-worst-can-and-does-happen/

    So it's pretty much in tune with his entire career then?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193
    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners, which we have rather forgotten of late, is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates.

    With huge pressure to do it online.

    And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it automatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions. And HMRC always get it wrong, more or less, now they don't deduct at source on bank interest.

    In the old days I had to help the odd elderly relative or neighbour fill out the forms to recover overpaid tax on interest, or get the bank not to deduct interest at source, but that was at least safer in terms of potential penalties. Which, as discussed here resently, were never more than the actual sum owed. Until the recent and utterly malicious change.
    Why can't pensioners do tax returns? It's not as if they are too busy working!

    Sure, but many people don't know how - they've relied on PAYE and the allowance system while working.

    And the new system is unfamiliar, above all the online one. A lot of old folk won't cope. Some will, some won't. For instgance, I've had great trouble dealing with one relative panicked by an £2 underpayment and the ensuing threatening letters from HMRC when the payment didn't go through at the bank (took three payments for one to work, because HMRC had downgraded the bank payment system to try and bully people into using computers). Totally non computer literate, not even a mobile.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342
    .
    Eabhal said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not actively handing pensioners sweeties for once is not the same as screwing them over.
    Squareroot's reaction mirrors that of lots of retirees. Almost immediately recognising the cut in NICs as a direct attack on them.

    The reasoning varies boomer to boomer, but the meme is born. It's difficult to think of a voting cohort that Sunak hasn't managed to alienate.
    To be fair, they are not wrong to identify the budget as (for once) favouring earners over pensioners.

    You might support the NI cut (I think it makes economic sense), but squareroot is perfectly entitled to complain about it.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,589

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    My wife and I are both pensioners, we have two incomes both from contributory pensions and we are not yet old enough to have a state pension (thanks to the qualifying date for this being raised.)

    We both pay a marginal rate of 20% on our incomes. Income tax, nothing else. We were paid to go to university, so no student loans ever. We have no housing costs, having long ago paid off our mortgage (having been fortunate to start out on the housing ladder when properties were cheap, we never had a mortgage of more than £50k.) We have no family to raise. So our incomes are more than enough to live on, indeed our savings our going up and we spend freely.

    Now compare that to my son and his wife, in their early thirties, whose gross income is about the same as ours. They both pay 20% income tax, 10% NI currently, 9% student loan repayments (probably lasting 30 years) and pension contributions of 5% and 6% respectively. So they face a marginal rate of 44%-45% deductions from their income. Whats left goes on a £200k mortgage for a very modest house and raising one child so far. They struggle to make ends meet and have to watch every penny. Luckily for them they have Bank of Mum and Dad to fall back on, but others are not so lucky.

    If this Chancellor and any future Chancellor want to level the playing field between my privileged retired generation and a generation of young adults in work who are struggling to make ends meet, through cutting NI and raising income tax by stealth, then I am all for it. The principle for me is that two people on the same income should pay the same rate of tax on it, regardless of the source of that income.
    The truly scary thing is that if your son and daughter in law had one single income between them of the same amount as they currently earn jointly the situation would be even worse.
  • Options
    DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 712
    Per the header, the Dems' record-breaking grassroots operation is even more impressive given that it is "strapped and straddled with insurmountable costs".
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193

    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates. With huge pressure to do it online. And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it aytomatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions.
    It'll take a year I suspect, the maximum state pension is 221pw this year which is £1000 below the Personal allowance over the year.
    According to ONS approx 71% have occupational/private penions which can be taxed at source automatically. My wife is in that position and I will be in 3 years.
    That’s where I am; my occupational and private pensions take me over the tax level, but are taxed at source. I don’t have any other income sources, apart from a small honorarium as auditor for a local charity, so HMRC simply asks me if there’s been any change in my income every year, and doesn’t require me to do anything more.
    In any case your honorarium (depending on how small) should come under the £1K allowance for side hustles ...
  • Options
    CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,267
    darkage said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/09/labour-calls-punishment-protesters-damaged-balfour-portrait/

    Did this story get discussed yesterday? I predict there will be no meaningful punishment. But it is nonetheless impressive the way that labour have taken the issue up. The right are starting to make gains in the 'war on woke'; the people that carry out these acts are helping the opposition, but the radical mindset is such that they will keep going.

    It's criminal damage. So there could be a prosecution. It may possibly also amount to burglary. Just because you have general permission to enter a property does not give you permission to enter to steal or damage. The college could also take civil action for the value of the painting and the repair costs (assuming it can be repaired).

    And if the person who did it and the one filming it are students of the college, presumably the college can also take disciplinary action.
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,118
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Eabhal said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not actively handing pensioners sweeties for once is not the same as screwing them over.
    Squareroot's reaction mirrors that of lots of retirees. Almost immediately recognising the cut in NICs as a direct attack on them.

    The reasoning varies boomer to boomer, but the meme is born. It's difficult to think of a voting cohort that Sunak hasn't managed to alienate.
    To be fair, they are not wrong to identify the budget as (for once) favouring earners over pensioners.

    You might support the NI cut (I think it makes economic sense), but squareroot is perfectly entitled to complain about it.
    It's an advanced form of self-absorption - "Working people get tax cut, this is bad for me."

    Sadly, Labour must do everything possible to keep pensioners on side if they are to win the election. This cohort are extraordinarily sensitive to things like social care reform, pensions, capital gains tax.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 45,052
    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners, which we have rather forgotten of late, is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates.

    With huge pressure to do it online.

    And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it automatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions. And HMRC always get it wrong, more or less, now they don't deduct at source on bank interest.

    In the old days I had to help the odd elderly relative or neighbour fill out the forms to recover overpaid tax on interest, or get the bank not to deduct interest at source, but that was at least safer in terms of potential penalties. Which, as discussed here resently, were never more than the actual sum owed. Until the recent and utterly malicious change.
    Why can't pensioners do tax returns? It's not as if they are too busy working!

    Sure, but many people don't know how - they've relied on PAYE and the allowance system while working.

    And the new system is unfamiliar, above all the online one. A lot of old folk won't cope. Some will, some won't. For instgance, I've had great trouble dealing with one relative panicked by an £2 underpayment and the ensuing threatening letters from HMRC when the payment didn't go through at the bank (took three payments for one to work, because HMRC had downgraded the bank payment system to try and bully people into using computers). Totally non computer literate, not even a mobile.
    Pensioners can vote, and were the reason we have the current government and rules. It is a useful education of what they have inflicted on the rest of us.

    I have limited sympathy.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Seriously you may still for the this Tory party? why do you think 1 minor concession will change the long term thinking....
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139
    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    Trump may be facing money problems, but he doesn't need money to fund his campaign as much as other candidates, as the court cases are giving him unlimited free airtime, and prove that, for his base at any rate, there is no such thing as bad publicity.

    The court cases are *not* free. In fact, one reason $30 million is less than it looks is because he’s been planning to drain the RNC coffers to pay his legal bills. At north $112,000 dollars a day including charges and interest that will vanish pretty quickly.
    The publicity from those court cases is free in the same way that state schools are free to taxpayers - Trump doesn't pay for the airtime directly, but pays indirectly and unavoidably instead. Given that a presidential campaign can cost more than a billion I'm not sure it's such a bad deal either.
    You're not sure it's going to be a bad deal to see Donald Trump on the stand getting hopelessly confused about names and dates and being torn to shreds by junior attorneys while paying out hundreds of thousands a day for the privilege?

    Well, it's a view.

    And again, we come back to it's not just about him. How are any of the downticket candidates going to get airtime if they can"t pay for it? (Although truthfully if they're all as mad as Lake, Greene, Jordan, Trump himself and the governor of North Carolina this may be a good thing in itself.)

    And finally, it would be much cheaper to buy airtime anyway, so your claim still doesn't add up.
    He's only going to trial before the election in one, maybe two cases. Its possible only one actually concludes, and there's no guarantee it does with conviction. And its a case which his supporters won't care about in the least.

    He's successfully bumped the cases that would be most damaging and risky for his election prospects.

    It all comes down to independents, who we'd hope would be following the cases and disgusted by what they see. But his base already don't believe elections, why would they believe court cases? And he will get 95% of Republicans, I have no doubt.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139
    darkage said:

    theProle said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    Far from it, the problem is that it creates a tool that the labour party will love. Think a person with a penis is always a man - off to the gulags for you, extremist. Dare suggest restricting abortion to 12 weeks like most of the civilised world - go straight to jail, do not pass go. Etc etc.
    This is clumsy poundshop authoritarianism. It can just be directed another way by the next government.
    He's too bright not yo know that. Is this some stupid 'trap' for the next government to try to help the right get martyr sympathy points next term?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193
    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners, which we have rather forgotten of late, is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates.

    With huge pressure to do it online.

    And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it automatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions. And HMRC always get it wrong, more or less, now they don't deduct at source on bank interest.

    In the old days I had to help the odd elderly relative or neighbour fill out the forms to recover overpaid tax on interest, or get the bank not to deduct interest at source, but that was at least safer in terms of potential penalties. Which, as discussed here resently, were never more than the actual sum owed. Until the recent and utterly malicious change.
    Why can't pensioners do tax returns? It's not as if they are too busy working!

    Sure, but many people don't know how - they've relied on PAYE and the allowance system while working.

    And the new system is unfamiliar, above all the online one. A lot of old folk won't cope. Some will, some won't. For instgance, I've had great trouble dealing with one relative panicked by an £2 underpayment and the ensuing threatening letters from HMRC when the payment didn't go through at the bank (took three payments for one to work, because HMRC had downgraded the bank payment system to try and bully people into using computers). Totally non computer literate, not even a mobile.
    Pensioners can vote, and were the reason we have the current government and rules. It is a useful education of what they have inflicted on the rest of us.

    I have limited sympathy.
    I agree on what you are saying - but one can also deplore changes in the tax system which make it more complex and m ore confusing, as well as vastly more punitive, for lower income people in general (£1000 fine now, irrespective of actual sum owed). And older people tend to find it harder to cope with such things. The old system of bank interest taxed at source, combined with PAYE, was both fairer and simpler and any errors tended to bne overpayment of tax, which was 'safer'.

    The fact that DWP do not issue P60s or PAYE is a real concern.

    And objectively, making many more pensioners do tax returns in a system which is already failing to cope won't do the Tories any favours.
  • Options
    Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,404
    edited March 10
    Cyclefree said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/09/labour-calls-punishment-protesters-damaged-balfour-portrait/

    Did this story get discussed yesterday? I predict there will be no meaningful punishment. But it is nonetheless impressive the way that labour have taken the issue up. The right are starting to make gains in the 'war on woke'; the people that carry out these acts are helping the opposition, but the radical mindset is such that they will keep going.

    It's criminal damage. So there could be a prosecution. It may possibly also amount to burglary. Just because you have general permission to enter a property does not give you permission to enter to steal or damage. The college could also take civil action for the value of the painting and the repair costs (assuming it can be repaired).

    And if the person who did it and the one filming it are students of the college, presumably the college can also take disciplinary action.
    If the perpetrators are students at the university they should be thrown out!

    This goes further than just exercising their democratic right to protest.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342
    Eabhal said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Eabhal said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not actively handing pensioners sweeties for once is not the same as screwing them over.
    Squareroot's reaction mirrors that of lots of retirees. Almost immediately recognising the cut in NICs as a direct attack on them.

    The reasoning varies boomer to boomer, but the meme is born. It's difficult to think of a voting cohort that Sunak hasn't managed to alienate.
    To be fair, they are not wrong to identify the budget as (for once) favouring earners over pensioners.

    You might support the NI cut (I think it makes economic sense), but squareroot is perfectly entitled to complain about it.
    It's an advanced form of self-absorption - "Working people get tax cut, this is bad for me."

    Sadly, Labour must do everything possible to keep pensioners on side if they are to win the election. This cohort are extraordinarily sensitive to things like social care reform, pensions, capital gains tax.
    I'm not saying I agree with him, but he's not wrong to note that fiscal drag means an effective tax increase for him which is not mitigated by the NI cut.

    The bigger reality is that the country is in a financial hard place, and policy making is necessarily going to be less than ideal for many of us, whoever is in government. For quite some time.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342
    Trump in his speech in Rome, Ga. calls the press at the back of the room "criminals"
    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1766607114166813173

    Trump's insults are where he tells the truth about himself.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,744
    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    theProle said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    Far from it, the problem is that it creates a tool that the labour party will love. Think a person with a penis is always a man - off to the gulags for you, extremist. Dare suggest restricting abortion to 12 weeks like most of the civilised world - go straight to jail, do not pass go. Etc etc.
    This is clumsy poundshop authoritarianism. It can just be directed another way by the next government.
    He's too bright not yo know that. Is this some stupid 'trap' for the next government to try to help the right get martyr sympathy points next term?
    Nah, it's just Gove being an adolescent mid-Atlantic culture warrior. He's always done that.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 92,139
    Nigelb said:

    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    “overturn, exploit or undermine the UK’s system of liberal democracy to confer advantages or disadvantages on specific groups”

    That's quite a few major party donors and their beneficiaries in the jail then.
    This isn't about legislation, or taking legal action against groups. It's a scheme for ministers to "ban from public life" people or groups they arbitrarily define.
    The proposal includes forcing local authorities to do the same.

    It's effectively extrajudicial sanctions applied by ministerial whim.
    When you put it that it's no wonder Gove sees the appeal. Indeed, don't expect to see a new government have getting rid of it at the top of their to do list.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 33,329
    The Palace have released a beautiful pic of Kate and the kids for Mothers' Day



    And the nutters are asking "What is wrong with Louis' fingers? Is it AI?" and "Why isn't she wearing a wedding ring?"
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,266
    IanB2 said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Better off pensioners should be paying more tax.

    Be grateful no-one will come for arrears on the extra they should have been paying for years.
    Are you deranged, pensioners pay the same taxes as everyone else and majority of them would love to be paying tax as it would mean they had more money
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,813
    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    theProle said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    Far from it, the problem is that it creates a tool that the labour party will love. Think a person with a penis is always a man - off to the gulags for you, extremist. Dare suggest restricting abortion to 12 weeks like most of the civilised world - go straight to jail, do not pass go. Etc etc.
    This is clumsy poundshop authoritarianism. It can just be directed another way by the next government.
    He's too bright not yo know that. Is this some stupid 'trap' for the next government to try to help the right get martyr sympathy points next term?
    Indeed he knows it. There is this weird Leninist streak that he has - it is from a similar place as the laws expropriating private property (freeholds). Perhaps it is desperation at the constraints of democracy.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,342
    On topic, someone just repeated their libel.

    Trump describes E Jean Carroll's claims against him as "false accusations" even after a jury found him liable for sexual assault
    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1766615422504190131
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,744
    Nigelb said:

    Eabhal said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Eabhal said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not actively handing pensioners sweeties for once is not the same as screwing them over.
    Squareroot's reaction mirrors that of lots of retirees. Almost immediately recognising the cut in NICs as a direct attack on them.

    The reasoning varies boomer to boomer, but the meme is born. It's difficult to think of a voting cohort that Sunak hasn't managed to alienate.
    To be fair, they are not wrong to identify the budget as (for once) favouring earners over pensioners.

    You might support the NI cut (I think it makes economic sense), but squareroot is perfectly entitled to complain about it.
    It's an advanced form of self-absorption - "Working people get tax cut, this is bad for me."

    Sadly, Labour must do everything possible to keep pensioners on side if they are to win the election. This cohort are extraordinarily sensitive to things like social care reform, pensions, capital gains tax.
    I'm not saying I agree with him, but he's not wrong to note that fiscal drag means an effective tax increase for him which is not mitigated by the NI cut.

    The bigger reality is that the country is in a financial hard place, and policy making is necessarily going to be less than ideal for many of us, whoever is in government. For quite some time.
    Purely electorally, the distribution is pretty well calibrated.

    The bottom 40% don't earn enough for the NI cut to counteract the threshold freeze, the next 50% do and the more they earn the better. Then there's the child benefit thing- fiscally the right thing to do, but the people affected are pretty well off in the grand scheme of things.

    Right now, "better off workers" is where the frontline is, the best chance of Conservatives improving their position.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,334
    Of course Trump might try and tap his MAGA grassroots for extra cash if donors fall short of the funds he needs. The SNP have Souter
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,266
    DavidL said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    My wife and I are both pensioners, we have two incomes both from contributory pensions and we are not yet old enough to have a state pension (thanks to the qualifying date for this being raised.)

    We both pay a marginal rate of 20% on our incomes. Income tax, nothing else. We were paid to go to university, so no student loans ever. We have no housing costs, having long ago paid off our mortgage (having been fortunate to start out on the housing ladder when properties were cheap, we never had a mortgage of more than £50k.) We have no family to raise. So our incomes are more than enough to live on, indeed our savings our going up and we spend freely.

    Now compare that to my son and his wife, in their early thirties, whose gross income is about the same as ours. They both pay 20% income tax, 10% NI currently, 9% student loan repayments (probably lasting 30 years) and pension contributions of 5% and 6% respectively. So they face a marginal rate of 44%-45% deductions from their income. Whats left goes on a £200k mortgage for a very modest house and raising one child so far. They struggle to make ends meet and have to watch every penny. Luckily for them they have Bank of Mum and Dad to fall back on, but others are not so lucky.

    If this Chancellor and any future Chancellor want to level the playing field between my privileged retired generation and a generation of young adults in work who are struggling to make ends meet, through cutting NI and raising income tax by stealth, then I am all for it. The principle for me is that two people on the same income should pay the same rate of tax on it, regardless of the source of that income.
    The truly scary thing is that if your son and daughter in law had one single income between them of the same amount as they currently earn jointly the situation would be even worse.
    The truly scary thing is how stupid he is and the bollox he is spouting. Apart from NI which he will have paid for 50 years to get his miserly pension and his son and wife only need pay for 35 years , all other taxes are the same. They must be on good salaries if having to pay their student loans. Sounds like the usual whining of the well off , chances are if same as in his day they would not have got into university and be toiling in a factory ot Tesco and staying in a housing association rented house. My heart bleeds for them when I think of all those who could not go to uni, are in crap jobs working all hours while living in a dump with no pension and no hope of ever owning a modest 200K house.
    There is sure an incredible amount of rich whining bollox on here by green cheesed arseholes.
  • Options
    theProletheProle Posts: 953
    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Better off pensioners should be paying more tax.

    Be grateful no-one will come for arrears on the extra they should have been paying for years.
    Are you deranged, pensioners pay the same taxes as everyone else and majority of them would love to be paying tax as it would mean they had more money
    Pensioners don't pay the same taxes. Ni being the case in point.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,054

    theProle said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    How exactly did they do pensioners over? As far as I can see, they did nothing that altered the situation for them at-all? Or do you feel entitled to a tax cut and are miffed that the cut they chose doesn't apply to you?
    Why shoukd pensioners be exempt from a tax cut
    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Better off pensioners should be paying more tax.

    Be grateful no-one will come for arrears on the extra they should have been paying for years.
    Are you deranged, pensioners pay the same taxes as everyone else and majority of them would love to be paying tax as it would mean they had more money
    Well which one is it ?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 40,193
    edited March 10
    darkage said:

    kle4 said:

    darkage said:

    theProle said:

    Nigelb said:

    Less than a year left in government.
    I doubt this miserable scheme will survive for long.
    But it's further evidence of his arrogance and bad judgment.
    Far from it, the problem is that it creates a tool that the labour party will love. Think a person with a penis is always a man - off to the gulags for you, extremist. Dare suggest restricting abortion to 12 weeks like most of the civilised world - go straight to jail, do not pass go. Etc etc.
    This is clumsy poundshop authoritarianism. It can just be directed another way by the next government.
    He's too bright not yo know that. Is this some stupid 'trap' for the next government to try to help the right get martyr sympathy points next term?
    Indeed he knows it. There is this weird Leninist streak that he has - it is from a similar place as the laws expropriating private property (freeholds). Perhaps it is desperation at the constraints of democracy.
    Did the proposed freehold laws not allow for compensation? When the Scottish feudal tenorial system was abolished in 2000, all feu duties and suchlike tenures were summarily cancelled for good but the feudal superior could demand a capital sum in proportion to the annual duty. (In practice many had already been bought out by mutual agreement.)
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,813
    Cyclefree said:

    darkage said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/09/labour-calls-punishment-protesters-damaged-balfour-portrait/

    Did this story get discussed yesterday? I predict there will be no meaningful punishment. But it is nonetheless impressive the way that labour have taken the issue up. The right are starting to make gains in the 'war on woke'; the people that carry out these acts are helping the opposition, but the radical mindset is such that they will keep going.

    It's criminal damage. So there could be a prosecution. It may possibly also amount to burglary. Just because you have general permission to enter a property does not give you permission to enter to steal or damage. The college could also take civil action for the value of the painting and the repair costs (assuming it can be repaired).

    And if the person who did it and the one filming it are students of the college, presumably the college can also take disciplinary action.
    The question is:
    a. does the law get enforced
    b. Is there any punishment.
    Or is it a case that reasons are found not to pursue either of the above in any meaningful way - which would be percieved as evidence of favouritism from the authorities towards progressive causes. That is why it is interesting to hear labour get on to this issue.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 42,266
    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    Not just pensioners.
    I'm assuming you refer to the inaction of raising tax bands in line with inflation but let me know if that isn't the case.
    That affects everyone including the lowest paid.
    Of course, another reason for unhappy pensioners, which we have rather forgotten of late, is that quite a few pensioners will be finding themselves needing to do tax returns at all for the first time in many years, because of fiscal drift, the reduction of the £1K interest rate allowance to £500, and the increase in interest rates.

    With huge pressure to do it online.

    And fines of £1000 if they don't, irrespective of the actual sum involved.

    Sure, HMRC could do it automatically - except that DWP doesn't do PAYE on state pensions. And HMRC always get it wrong, more or less, now they don't deduct at source on bank interest.

    In the old days I had to help the odd elderly relative or neighbour fill out the forms to recover overpaid tax on interest, or get the bank not to deduct interest at source, but that was at least safer in terms of potential penalties. Which, as discussed here resently, were never more than the actual sum owed. Until the recent and utterly malicious change.
    Why can't pensioners do tax returns? It's not as if they are too busy working!

    Sure, but many people don't know how - they've relied on PAYE and the allowance system while working.

    And the new system is unfamiliar, above all the online one. A lot of old folk won't cope. Some will, some won't. For instgance, I've had great trouble dealing with one relative panicked by an £2 underpayment and the ensuing threatening letters from HMRC when the payment didn't go through at the bank (took three payments for one to work, because HMRC had downgraded the bank payment system to try and bully people into using computers). Totally non computer literate, not even a mobile.
    Pensioners can vote, and were the reason we have the current government and rules. It is a useful education of what they have inflicted on the rest of us.

    I have limited sympathy.
    I have limited sympathy for whingers , especially those who are too lazy to vote or want to blame everything on pensioners rather than looking in the mirror.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 25,147
    malcolmg said:

    DavidL said:

    Off thread but I have to say it...The Tories have got one more shot to get my vote back. They've screwed pensioners in this budget. If they don't do something in the Next statement I will do something I never thought I could do and Vote Labour.

    My wife and I are both pensioners, we have two incomes both from contributory pensions and we are not yet old enough to have a state pension (thanks to the qualifying date for this being raised.)

    We both pay a marginal rate of 20% on our incomes. Income tax, nothing else. We were paid to go to university, so no student loans ever. We have no housing costs, having long ago paid off our mortgage (having been fortunate to start out on the housing ladder when properties were cheap, we never had a mortgage of more than £50k.) We have no family to raise. So our incomes are more than enough to live on, indeed our savings our going up and we spend freely.

    Now compare that to my son and his wife, in their early thirties, whose gross income is about the same as ours. They both pay 20% income tax, 10% NI currently, 9% student loan repayments (probably lasting 30 years) and pension contributions of 5% and 6% respectively. So they face a marginal rate of 44%-45% deductions from their income. Whats left goes on a £200k mortgage for a very modest house and raising one child so far. They struggle to make ends meet and have to watch every penny. Luckily for them they have Bank of Mum and Dad to fall back on, but others are not so lucky.

    If this Chancellor and any future Chancellor want to level the playing field between my privileged retired generation and a generation of young adults in work who are struggling to make ends meet, through cutting NI and raising income tax by stealth, then I am all for it. The principle for me is that two people on the same income should pay the same rate of tax on it, regardless of the source of that income.
    The truly scary thing is that if your son and daughter in law had one single income between them of the same amount as they currently earn jointly the situation would be even worse.
    The truly scary thing is how stupid he is and the bollox he is spouting. Apart from NI which he will have paid for 50 years to get his miserly pension and his son and wife only need pay for 35 years , all other taxes are the same. They must be on good salaries if having to pay their student loans. Sounds like the usual whining of the well off , chances are if same as in his day they would not have got into university and be toiling in a factory ot Tesco and staying in a housing association rented house. My heart bleeds for them when I think of all those who could not go to uni, are in crap jobs working all hours while living in a dump with no pension and no hope of ever owning a modest 200K house.
    There is sure an incredible amount of rich whining bollox on here by green cheesed arseholes.
    You start paying a student loan off if you income is above £28,600...

This discussion has been closed.