Why do lefties get so offended by a reporter showing how easy it is to rip off food banks?
Why do righties feel the need to defend the Mail?
This one doesn't, other than on general free speech grounds. Every now and again I pick up a free one and end up feeling dirty.
It's the overweening hypocrisy of their website that gets me. On the left, items about how wonderful Prince George is, and articles aimed at reinforcing palaeo-conservative views about human sexuality. On the right, the titillating bit including this one http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2608759/Tila-Tequila-announces-10-weeks-pregnant-thinks-twins.html I noticed this morning while looking to see if there was an article about the Survation poll. Hello? Who in their target demographic is supposed to have an interest in the trivial exploits of a "bisexual porn star"?
Really weird sentence at the end of an 'Eastleigh News' story about the Survation poll. It says:
"Members of the Political Betting site say Ladbrokes in Eastleigh are currently offering 4/1 on Ukip winning here in 2015"
Why not "Ladbrokes are currently offering 4/1 on UKIP winning the seat in 2015", or even better spend 10 second looking it up and put the actual latest odds.
Ten seconds, more like ten weeks - you ever tried finding a price with Laddy's ?!
The secret to finding prices on Ladbrokes site is to use the search facility and type in the name of a "runner" or something from the market. Up pops the market quickly.
We are a rich country. That there has been an explosion in people having to rely on charity to eat is an outrage, the embodiment of a broken system as presided over by both parties.
The point of the article is that there are alternative explanations for the increased use of food banks.
"...a recent OECD study which suggested that the proportion of people in Britain who say there are times when they cannot afford food fell from 9.8 per cent in 2007 — when the economy was booming and Labour was in power — to 8.1 per cent in 2012.
The British figure is significantly lower than the EU average."
That's the thing about today's generation of politicians -- everyone agrees they're more unprincipled and less charismatic than previous generations, but I honestly think they're worse at basic politics and tactics too. Any fool outside of the Westminster bubble would've been able to tell you that most of those moves were terrible ideas.
I don't!
I suspect while there will be a handful of chancers, the majority are motivated by some desire to perform a 'public service'.
What the two major parties face are challenges in reaching their 'grass roots' - the Conservative Associations have withered on the vine in the same way that the Working Men's clubs and Trades Unions have - both are now dominated by 'professional politicians' whose main job has only ever been 'politics' - or an early adjunct like journalism or think tanks.
With the internet and 24 hour media I suspect our politicians are also more honest than their predecessors - not because they have necessarily become more virtuous, but because the chances of being found out are a lot higher. Interestingly, first the Lib Dems, and now UKIP have floundered under the scrutiny that both Labour and the Tories are used to.
One difference I think, and it may be a function of rhetoric - but the left give the impression that (some on) the right are motivated by bad motives - there is an intrinsic wickedness that guides them. In contrast, the right, I think, view the left as motivated by bad ideas - foolishness, not wickedness.....
Nick, obviously you object to the welfare cuts. So how would you recommend balancing the budget, the deficit on which is still around ~£100bn p.a. IIRC?
And it's completely ridiculous to blame the food banks for it.
Isn't it also ridiculous to blame welfare reform solely for the rise in the use of Food Banks?
Surely this government's decision to let them be promoted - something the previous government blocked - has also played a part?
Alex Salmond really must be pissing himself laughing. The "Better Together" campaign couldn't have played into his hands more if they tried (the refusal to put "devo-max" on the ballot paper, the laughable scaremongering on the currency, the unattractive personalities at the top of the BT campaign, the enlisting of hated big-business fat cats and "Eurocrats" to try and support their argument, the general woeful quality of all the UK parties' policies which makes staying in the UK seem more pointless, etc.).
That's the thing about today's generation of politicians -- everyone agrees they're more unprincipled and less charismatic than previous generations, but I honestly think they're worse at basic politics and tactics too. Any fool outside of the Westminster bubble would've been able to tell you that most of those moves were terrible ideas.
You've almost hit on the reason why this generation of Westminster leaders are so laughably hopeless. It's not that they are rubbish at politicking, quite the opposite. They are EXTREMELY good at the politicking that makes them leader and sh*t at everything else.
Hence little Ed cunningly outmaneuvering David to get the union vote and win the labour leadership. Cammie basically smashing the David Davis leadership campaign into tiny little pieces with his Blair impersonation and the help of the infamous Republican Frank Luntz and his Newsnight focus grouping. Why even Clegg showed a surprising tenacity and ability to get the right people on his side. First with his very quick move against Ming in the whisper campaign and then with the amusing help of Rennard in ruling out a load of postal votes to win the lib dem leadership.
An in-depth exploration of that could prove enlightening. Not on here though obviously.
Nick - I think you'll find the term is "clients" rather than "customers" - but if that's the way you new labour people talk nowadays that is fine by me.
Nick, obviously you object to the welfare cuts. So how would you recommend balancing the budget, the deficit on which is still around ~£100bn p.a. IIRC?
As I said, the food bank issue is not mostly caused by low benefits. It's by it taking SIX MONTHS to find out whether you'll get help or not. When I went to a briefing on this, the non-political organisers said the majority of their customers were not people who'd been turned down, but simply people who had run out of money while awaiting a decision. Often poor credit risks and in cities often without helpful family networks, they had only three options:
Understaffing the offices that decide is a false economy. It's stupid. It's cruel. And it's completely ridiculous to blame the food banks for it.
Sorry Nick, I'm confused: do you, or don't you, support the current level of benefits? Would you increase spending on benefits? Or just increase spending on DWP staffing levels? Do you think just the latter would solve the problem, or both?
What? What would you do? How would you square this with the overall budget deficit we're still faced with? How would you balance out all government spending priorities?
It just won't do just to point out problems. You want to become an MP again in little over a year's time. I'm interested in your views on the solutions.
Nick, obviously you object to the welfare cuts. So how would you recommend balancing the budget, the deficit on which is still around ~£100bn p.a. IIRC?
As I said, the food bank issue is not mostly caused by low benefits. It's by it taking SIX MONTHS to find out whether you'll get help or not. When I went to a briefing on this, the non-political organisers said the majority of their customers were not people who'd been turned down, but simply people who had run out of money while awaiting a decision. Often poor credit risks and in cities often without helpful family networks, they had only three options:
Yet there is political pressure to put payday lenders like Wonga out of business. What do poor people do then?
They either resort to criminal moneylenders, or they don't pay their bills. In the USA anti-payday loan legislation led to increased utility cutoffs, and bounced cheques.
Why do lefties get so offended by a reporter showing how easy it is to rip off food banks?
Why do righties feel the need to defend the Mail?
This one doesn't, other than on general free speech grounds. Every now and again I pick up a free one and end up feeling dirty.
It's the overweening hypocrisy of their website that gets me. On the left, items about how wonderful Prince George is, and articles aimed at reinforcing palaeo-conservative views about human sexuality. On the right, the titillating bit including this one http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2608759/Tila-Tequila-announces-10-weeks-pregnant-thinks-twins.html I noticed this morning while looking to see if there was an article about the Survation poll. Hello? Who in their target demographic is supposed to have an interest in the trivial exploits of a "bisexual porn star"?
The Mail reflects the hypocrisy of its readers, and arguably the wider British public. And that is why it's so popular: it understands them.
It is half-puritanism and half-p0rn, and doesn't bat an eyelid about it. We hate it because it's that same hypocrisy in ourselves that we recognise.
Disband the food banks, It will encourage those workshy, sink estate scum to get off their arses and find a job. The situation is slightly complicated by the number "in work" who also rely on them, but in true Tory fashion we only have to shout that they don't exist! Non existence of problems is a compulsory subject in the private education sector, along with a belief in ones own infallibility.
So - the Mail is complaining that there aren't a load of bureaucratic hoops to jump through in order to get the free food. That detailed and exhaustive (and inherently lengthy) checks aren't taken - bearing in mind that the more detailed and lengthy they are, the more the chance of a mistake being made to preclude acceptance as well.
And the most common bloody reason for people to us food banks right now is because the lengthy exhaustive checks being taken by the system are taking so long that they'd f***ing starve waiting - or mistakes have been made such that they don't get the aid they need!
Partly due to the Daily Hate choosing benefits claimants as one of the hate targets, incentivizing politicians to steadily extend and increase the bureaucratic hoops to jump through.
I suppose the Mail will only be satisfied when a load of poor bastards simply die of hunger, rather than risk some shysters maybe taking advantage (and carefully advertising just how to take advantage).
Disband the food banks, It will encourage those workshy, sink estate scum to get off their arses and find a job.
Presumably that was the reasoning behind Labour's policy of forbidding DWP staff from referring people to foodbanks, a policy sensibly reversed by the coalition.
Nick, obviously you object to the welfare cuts. So how would you recommend balancing the budget, the deficit on which is still around ~£100bn p.a. IIRC?
As I said, the food bank issue is not mostly caused by low benefits. It's by it taking SIX MONTHS to find out whether you'll get help or not. When I went to a briefing on this, the non-political organisers said the majority of their customers were not people who'd been turned down, but simply people who had run out of money while awaiting a decision. Often poor credit risks and in cities often without helpful family networks, they had only three options:
Yet there is political pressure to put payday lenders like Wonga out of business. What do poor people do then?
They either resort to criminal moneylenders, or they don't pay their bills. In the USA anti-payday loan legislation led to increased utility cutoffs, and bounced cheques.
Surely payday lending itself is relatively harmless. It's as if I borrow fifty quid off you until payday, and then buy you a pint when I give you the money back. In theory (assuming I have had the money a week) that's about a 3000% rate of interest. In practice, you have got me out of a hole for a cost of £3.50 which is a bit of a bargain.
The abuse is when people rely on them, over and over again, getting deep into dept and repaying interest out of all proportion to the principal (and probably out of all proportion to the risk to the lender).
Disband the food banks, It will encourage those workshy, sink estate scum to get off their arses and find a job.
Presumably that was the reasoning behind Labour's policy of forbidding DWP staff from referring people to foodbanks, a policy sensibly reversed by the coalition.
Would a new Labour government reverse this change?
It might drive down the use of Food Banks - which could then be hailed as a 'Labour success'!
@Richard_Nabavi Yes, I have noticed the concern shown by the coalition to the plight of the poorer members of society. Cameron does Gods work, even people lying in a coma can be called for a face to face interview or have their benefits cut, Miracles are not just for Easter for this coalition of saints
Anyway, a bit of a washout down here in London. Back in the Midlands tomorrow, hope to finish off the West Midlands Day Ranger railway map by the time I fly off to India on Thursday. Essentially just Stafford to Crewe direct and Stafford to Crewe via Stoke left, aside a few lesser used curves. On Good Friday, I was in Portillo mode for sure: I did New Street to Gobowen near the Welsh border, and Moor Street to Worcester via Kidderminster.
Would a new Labour government reverse this change?
It might drive down the use of Food Banks - which could then be hailed as a 'Labour success'!
In the post-Socialist Miliband nirvana there will be no need for food banks, because Ed Miliband - who as we know is in touch with the concerns of ordinary people - will have passed a law abolishing poverty.
We are a rich country. That there has been an explosion in people having to rely on charity to eat is an outrage, the embodiment of a broken system as presided over by both parties.
The point of the article is that there are alternative explanations for the increased use of food banks.
"...a recent OECD study which suggested that the proportion of people in Britain who say there are times when they cannot afford food fell from 9.8 per cent in 2007 — when the economy was booming and Labour was in power — to 8.1 per cent in 2012.
The British figure is significantly lower than the EU average."
There are a couple of obvious points (another is about the proportion of food banks by Government services as pointed out below). One is that Social Fund Crisis Loans have been abolished. The other is that people have become aware that you can get a food voucher even when your benefits have been sanctioned - in the past, you were generally not able to get a crisis loan in these circumstances.
Nick, obviously you object to the welfare cuts. So how would you recommend balancing the budget, the deficit on which is still around ~£100bn p.a. IIRC?
As I said, the food bank issue is not mostly caused by low benefits. It's by it taking SIX MONTHS to find out whether you'll get help or not. When I went to a briefing on this, the non-political organisers said the majority of their customers were not people who'd been turned down, but simply people who had run out of money while awaiting a decision. Often poor credit risks and in cities often without helpful family networks, they had only three options:
Yet there is political pressure to put payday lenders like Wonga out of business. What do poor people do then?
They either resort to criminal moneylenders, or they don't pay their bills. In the USA anti-payday loan legislation led to increased utility cutoffs, and bounced cheques.
Surely payday lending itself is relatively harmless. It's as if I borrow fifty quid off you until payday, and then buy you a pint when I give you the money back. In theory (assuming I have had the money a week) that's about a 3000% rate of interest. In practice, you have got me out of a hole for a cost of £3.50 which is a bit of a bargain.
The abuse is when people rely on them, over and over again, getting deep into dept and repaying interest out of all proportion to the principal (and probably out of all proportion to the risk to the lender).
It's an unsecured loan. The interest rate reflects the risk.
As I understand it, there are limits on the interest. Regulations oblige them to quote a per annum interest rate, but it's actually capped.
"Wonga is forced to display a representative annual percentage rate (APR) for its loans of 4,214pc. However, Mr Damelin said that, because it offered loans limited to 30 days, the APR was not relevant, and the loan was often cheaper than unauthorised bank charges for the same amount."
@Richard_Nabavi Yes, I have noticed the concern shown by the coalition to the plight of the poorer members of society. Cameron does Gods work, even people lying in a coma can be called for a face to face interview or have their benefits cut, Miracles are not just for Easter for this coalition of saints
Share of people reporting not enough money to buy food:
Under Labour, in the pre-crisis boom years, when money was pouring into the Treasury at a rate never known before or since: 9.8%
Under the coalition, in the most difficult economic conditions since the 1930s: 8.1%
Note also the figures for relative poverty.
But of course, your prejudices are so overwhelming that you haven't the faintest possibility of being able to reconcile facts with your preconceptions.
Speaking of the Mail, Heffer has changed his tune a bit. I wonder what his posting name is on here?
Sep '13: 'Since the mid-Nineties I have been convinced that England and Scotland would benefit from a divorce, or at least from a trial separation. Many Scots don’t much like the English and appear ungrateful for everything that England does for them in showering them with money.'
Today: 'SIMON HEFFER: How can this great, UNITED Kingdom - which gave the world Christian civilisation - just tear itself apart?'
Have been reading the last thread. Fascinating to see folks starting to come to terms with what the prospect of the break-up of the United Kingdom could mean!
I said right from the out-set in 2011 that I thought there was a very real prospect of Scotland saying yes to independence, so I'm not surprised by recent developments. This is something that's been coming on since the 1970's, really, though the Labour Party has speeded up the process dramatically with anti-Tory/anti Unionist posturing during the 80's and 90's. Talk about reaping what you sow...
As for David Cameron, I believe he will resign in the event of a YES vote. Not that he should have to or that this is particularly his fault. This is first and foremost a Labour created disaster.
Cameron couldn't do anything other than offer a yes/no referendum when the SNP so spectacularly swept the board in the 2011 Scottish elections and the Labour Party was so badly rejected. Devo-max, that was a non starter. Labour and Lib-Dems (plus a significant number of Tories) would have voted it down. The only realistic response to that ground-breaking 2011 result was yes/no.
But, we are where we are and I believe Cameron is the kind of chap to fall on his sword should Scotland be lost. I don't expect Clegg or Milliband would do the same.
The coalition will go on until 2015 - The Lib-Dems will put off the moment they have to face the electorate for as long as possible and I suspect with the trauma of losing Scotland hanging over them, Labour will be in no rush to face the electorate either. I would actually see the UK being extended, ala the 1935 Parliament, until 2016.
No idea who the Tories would elect as leader (and Prime Minister) but I would imagine in this time of crisis and upheval the leadership change will be quick, so William Hague is a possibility.
Possibly prescient article by Alex Massie - from over two months ago:
Alex Salmond is within striking distance of victory. Why hasn’t England noticed? We could be seven months away from the end of Britain. It's time to worry
'SIMON HEFFER: How can this great, UNITED Kingdom - which gave the world Christian civilisation - just tear itself apart?'
Heffer does come out with some remarkable garbage, but the suggestion that the UK 'gave the world Christian civilisation' is spectacular even by his standards.
Anyway, a bit of a washout down here in London. Back in the Midlands tomorrow, hope to finish off the West Midlands Day Ranger railway map by the time I fly off to India on Thursday. Essentially just Stafford to Crewe direct and Stafford to Crewe via Stoke left, aside a few lesser used curves. On Good Friday, I was in Portillo mode for sure: I did New Street to Gobowen near the Welsh border, and Moor Street to Worcester via Kidderminster.
I got absolutely soaked this morning. But on the plus side the vicar was giving out cadbury cream eggs after the service. A win!
It's an unsecured loan. The interest rate reflects the risk.
As I understand it, there are limits on the interest. Regulations oblige them to quote a per annum interest rate, but it's actually capped.
"Wonga is forced to display a representative annual percentage rate (APR) for its loans of 4,214pc. However, Mr Damelin said that, because it offered loans limited to 30 days, the APR was not relevant, and the loan was often cheaper than unauthorised bank charges for the same amount."
There seems to be an assumption that poor people are too stupid to make the right choices. That's just not true.
What middle class people do is, of course, get cash out on their credit cards or use their overdraft (mine costs me £1 a day which I don't mind as I don't use it, but if I were to go £50 overdrawn for a few days works out as an outrageous rate of interest).
What I don't necessarily understand is, if someone didn't pay £100 back for a year, whether the £4,200 in interest would actually be justified. The risk of failure can't be that great, surely. Maybe regulation should require that the interest rate decays over time.
Anyway, a bit of a washout down here in London. Back in the Midlands tomorrow, hope to finish off the West Midlands Day Ranger railway map by the time I fly off to India on Thursday. Essentially just Stafford to Crewe direct and Stafford to Crewe via Stoke left, aside a few lesser used curves. On Good Friday, I was in Portillo mode for sure: I did New Street to Gobowen near the Welsh border, and Moor Street to Worcester via Kidderminster.
I got absolutely soaked this morning. But on the plus side the vicar was giving out cadbury cream eggs after the service. A win!
Lovely spring day up here in Lowland Scotland - spring flowers and buds on the country walk and the first butterflies and hoverflies of the year.
Relative poverty .....that's where if the people who were above you have their net income reduced....there is less poverty. Genius!
That is the standard measure of poverty. It's usually the right who dislike it, but it's good to see that it has opposition across the spectrum when it suits.
It's an unsecured loan. The interest rate reflects the risk.
As I understand it, there are limits on the interest. Regulations oblige them to quote a per annum interest rate, but it's actually capped.
"Wonga is forced to display a representative annual percentage rate (APR) for its loans of 4,214pc. However, Mr Damelin said that, because it offered loans limited to 30 days, the APR was not relevant, and the loan was often cheaper than unauthorised bank charges for the same amount."
There seems to be an assumption that poor people are too stupid to make the right choices. That's just not true.
What middle class people do is, of course, get cash out on their credit cards or use their overdraft (mine costs me £1 a day which I don't mind as I don't use it, but if I were to go £50 overdrawn for a few days works out as an outrageous rate of interest).
What I don't necessarily understand is, if someone didn't pay £100 back for a year, whether the £4,200 in interest would actually be justified. The risk of failure can't be that great, surely. Maybe regulation should require that the interest rate decays over time.
It's not an annual rate. It's just that legislation requires them to present it as such. The interest rate is to cover the defaulters, these are high risk loans.
'SIMON HEFFER: How can this great, UNITED Kingdom - which gave the world Christian civilisation - just tear itself apart?'
Heffer does come out with some remarkable garbage, but the suggestion that the UK 'gave the world Christian civilisation' is spectacular even by his standards.
I think he ties that into the British Empire - of which the Scots were disproportionately enthusiastic participants - and if you look round the world, outside South America, I fear we carry the can for much of the spread of Christianity.....
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
I would like like every single legitimate (but artificially contrived by location and/or age) voter within Scotland to vote "Yes". This would remove the disproportionate "Barnet Formula" AND resolve the wholly unfair "Midlothian Question". I wish Scotland both Good Luck and Good Fortune for the future, but I am not confident about their future because I am NOT convinced that Alex Salmond has (and party have) thought out the implications. Whatever, it solves a number of problems for the rest of the UK.
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
Unspoofable.
LOL
I'm delighted you think, like Salmond, that rUK opinion is irrelevant to separation negotiations.......time to get back to your gay bondage fantasies.....
Anyway, a bit of a washout down here in London. Back in the Midlands tomorrow, hope to finish off the West Midlands Day Ranger railway map by the time I fly off to India on Thursday. Essentially just Stafford to Crewe direct and Stafford to Crewe via Stoke left, aside a few lesser used curves. On Good Friday, I was in Portillo mode for sure: I did New Street to Gobowen near the Welsh border, and Moor Street to Worcester via Kidderminster.
I got absolutely soaked this morning. But on the plus side the vicar was giving out cadbury cream eggs after the service. A win!
Lovely spring day up here in Lowland Scotland - spring flowers and buds on the country walk and the first butterflies and hoverflies of the year.
That does sound nice, I think spring is the prettiest time of year.
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
Unspoofable.
LOL
I'm delighted you think, like Salmond, that rUK opinion is irrelevant to separation negotiations.......time to get back to your gay bondage fantasies.....
*shriek* But, but, but the comments underneath a Hefferlump column?? *shriek*
'SIMON HEFFER: How can this great, UNITED Kingdom - which gave the world Christian civilisation - just tear itself apart?'
Heffer does come out with some remarkable garbage, but the suggestion that the UK 'gave the world Christian civilisation' is spectacular even by his standards.
I think he ties that into the British Empire - of which the Scots were disproportionately enthusiastic participants - and if you look round the world, outside South America, I fear we carry the can for much of the spread of Christianity.....
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
I would like like every single legitimate (but artificially contrived by location and/or age) voter within Scotland to vote "Yes". This would remove the disproportionate "Barnet Formula" AND resolve the wholly unfair "Midlothian Question". I wish Scotland both Good Luck and Good Fortune for the future, but I am not confident about their future because I am NOT convinced that Alex Salmond has (and party have) thought out the implications. Whatever, it solves a number of problems for the rest of the UK.
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
Unspoofable.
LOL
I'm delighted you think, like Salmond, that rUK opinion is irrelevant to separation negotiations.......time to get back to your gay bondage fantasies.....
*shriek* But, but, but ......*shriek*
I see you are well into your gay bondage fantasy.....we'll leave you to it.....
It's an unsecured loan. The interest rate reflects the risk.
As I understand it, there are limits on the interest. Regulations oblige them to quote a per annum interest rate, but it's actually capped.
"Wonga is forced to display a representative annual percentage rate (APR) for its loans of 4,214pc. However, Mr Damelin said that, because it offered loans limited to 30 days, the APR was not relevant, and the loan was often cheaper than unauthorised bank charges for the same amount."
There seems to be an assumption that poor people are too stupid to make the right choices. That's just not true.
What middle class people do is, of course, get cash out on their credit cards or use their overdraft (mine costs me £1 a day which I don't mind as I don't use it, but if I were to go £50 overdrawn for a few days works out as an outrageous rate of interest).
What I don't necessarily understand is, if someone didn't pay £100 back for a year, whether the £4,200 in interest would actually be justified. The risk of failure can't be that great, surely. Maybe regulation should require that the interest rate decays over time.
It's not an annual rate. It's just that legislation requires them to present it as such. The interest rate is to cover the defaulters, these are high risk loans.
Presumably if you didn't pay it back for a year, it would become an annual rate. or at some point do they send someone round to break your fingers?
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
Unspoofable.
LOL
I'm delighted you think, like Salmond, that rUK opinion is irrelevant to separation negotiations.......time to get back to your gay bondage fantasies.....
*shriek*
I see you are well into your gay bondage fantasy.....we'll leave you to it.....
If you want to obsess over AveryLP and AlanBrookes intimate talk of "prostrates" and "dog collars" then go right ahead. They're the ones who have been embarrassing themselves on here with it.
It still doesn't excuse your utterly hilarious citing of a poster under Hefferlump as proof of anything though dear.
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
Unspoofable.
LOL
I'm delighted you think, like Salmond, that rUK opinion is irrelevant to separation negotiations.......time to get back to your gay bondage fantasies.....
*shriek*
I see you are well into your gay bondage fantasy.....we'll leave you to it.....
If you want to obsess over.........
Oh it's your friend who has gay bondage fantasies!
'SIMON HEFFER: How can this great, UNITED Kingdom - which gave the world Christian civilisation - just tear itself apart?'
Heffer does come out with some remarkable garbage, but the suggestion that the UK 'gave the world Christian civilisation' is spectacular even by his standards.
I think he ties that into the British Empire - of which the Scots were disproportionately enthusiastic participants - and if you look round the world, outside South America, I fear we carry the can for much of the spread of Christianity.....
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
I would like like every single legitimate (but artificially contrived by location and/or age) voter within Scotland to vote "Yes". This would remove the disproportionate "Barnet Formula" AND resolve the wholly unfair "Midlothian Question". I wish Scotland both Good Luck and Good Fortune for the future, but I am not confident about their future because I am NOT convinced that Alex Salmond has (and party have) thought out the implications. Whatever, it solves a number of problems for the rest of the UK.
'SIMON HEFFER: How can this great, UNITED Kingdom - which gave the world Christian civilisation - just tear itself apart?'
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
I would like like every single legitimate (but artificially contrived by location and/or age) voter within Scotland to vote "Yes". This would remove the disproportionate "Barnet Formula" AND resolve the wholly unfair "Midlothian Question". I wish Scotland both Good Luck and Good Fortune for the future, but I am not confident about their future because I am NOT convinced that Alex Salmond has (and party have) thought out the implications. Whatever, it solves a number of problems for the rest of the UK.
I'm familiar with the West Lothian Question, not sure about the Midlothian question - is it 'What's the quickest route to IKEA without getting on the bypass?'
This photo of Yes campaigning yesterday explains why #indyref polls are changing. Every conversation & vote matters. pic.twitter.com/eGQiI65slP
It's been a good few eye opening days of the campaign regardless of the polls. You would almost feel sorry for better together if this keeps up because they really are getting hammered on the ground.
On the flip side of the poverty debate, a lot of people don't seem to help themselves. Someone I know pleaded desperate "no food in the house" poverty and got bailed out by friends and family and within a week spent £100 on trainers. Similarly there are a lot of branded pawn shops appearing like a rash on the high street. At the in-laws last weekend in Basildon, and was amazed at the 14 iPhone 5S handsets in CEX which had clearly not been in their owners possession long before being flogged, similarly half a dozen PS4s and similar Xbox One's.
People are clearly spending money they don't have on things they don't need then wondering why they can't pay their bills. To answer the OECD point in raw numbers the people reliant on food banks has exploded over the last few years - forget the statistics about "might need foodbanks" and look at "are using foodbanks".
And is any scalable use of foodbanks something that decent civilised society is now prepared to accept?
Off topic: I have just cracked eight eggs, for a tortilla paisana. I didn't take too much care but all the yolks came out whole. But as soon as you want one whole egg for frying or, worse, poaching...
No Champions League for Man Utd next season. Let me say that again. No Champions League for Man Utd next season. That's seismic news. What odds would you have got on that, this time last season?
The story above was just plain lazy, and the Mail will be punished by the publicity. I'm sur eit won't have any lasting impact on the food bank debate though.
On the flip side of the poverty debate, a lot of people don't seem to help themselves. Someone I know pleaded desperate "no food in the house" poverty and got bailed out by friends and family and within a week spent £100 on trainers. Similarly there are a lot of branded pawn shops appearing like a rash on the high street. At the in-laws last weekend in Basildon, and was amazed at the 14 iPhone 5S handsets in CEX which had clearly not been in their owners possession long before being flogged, similarly half a dozen PS4s and similar Xbox One's.
People are clearly spending money they don't have on things they don't need then wondering why they can't pay their bills. To answer the OECD point in raw numbers the people reliant on food banks has exploded over the last few years - forget the statistics about "might need foodbanks" and look at "are using foodbanks".
And is any scalable use of foodbanks something that decent civilised society is now prepared to accept?
Similarly the "too expensive to eat healthy food" brigade. A lot are just too lazy. I suspect a lot of them wouldn't be seen dead in their local ethnic food emporium, even if the food is half the price of Tesco's.
"At the in-laws last weekend in Basildon" Ahhh, a poor benighted backwater full yummie mummies collecting free rice and basic tinned beans in their 4 x 4's?
On the flip side of the poverty debate, a lot of people don't seem to help themselves. Someone I know pleaded desperate "no food in the house" poverty and got bailed out by friends and family and within a week spent £100 on trainers. Similarly there are a lot of branded pawn shops appearing like a rash on the high street. At the in-laws last weekend in Basildon, and was amazed at the 14 iPhone 5S handsets in CEX which had clearly not been in their owners possession long before being flogged, similarly half a dozen PS4s and similar Xbox One's.
People are clearly spending money they don't have on things they don't need then wondering why they can't pay their bills. To answer the OECD point in raw numbers the people reliant on food banks has exploded over the last few years - forget the statistics about "might need foodbanks" and look at "are using foodbanks".
And is any scalable use of foodbanks something that decent civilised society is now prepared to accept?
Similarly the "too expensive to eat healthy food" brigade. A lot are just too lazy. I suspect a lot of them wouldn't be seen dead in their local ethnic food emporium, even if the food is half the price of Tesco's.
Actually I think the likes of Brighthouse are probably ethically more compromised than Wonga. At least the payday lenders are, in many cases, lending money to people in a real crisis to keep the wolf from the door. Brighthouse are selling people things they don't need, and charging huge interest rates. And before anyone says that people do actually need household appliances and furniture... there will usually be something like a British Heart Foundation household store not far away.
Actually by Mail standards that's almost hyperactive levels of 'investigation'. A journo actually got off his arse to pander to Dacre instead of rewriting copy from Reuters or phoning around from Northcliffe House. Sure, it's laughable but that's hardly the point for the Mail.
TBH it's more likely they were sniffing around hoping for something far more juicy, but a deadline is a deadline and that's the 'best' the hapless journo could come up with.
It's an unsecured loan. The interest rate reflects the risk.
As I understand it, there are limits on the interest. Regulations oblige them to quote a per annum interest rate, but it's actually capped.
"Wonga is forced to display a representative annual percentage rate (APR) for its loans of 4,214pc. However, Mr Damelin said that, because it offered loans limited to 30 days, the APR was not relevant, and the loan was often cheaper than unauthorised bank charges for the same amount."
There seems to be an assumption that poor people are too stupid to make the right choices. That's just not true.
What middle class people do is, of course, get cash out on their credit cards or use their overdraft (mine costs me £1 a day which I don't mind as I don't use it, but if I were to go £50 overdrawn for a few days works out as an outrageous rate of interest).
What I don't necessarily understand is, if someone didn't pay £100 back for a year, whether the £4,200 in interest would actually be justified. The risk of failure can't be that great, surely. Maybe regulation should require that the interest rate decays over time.
It's not an annual rate. It's just that legislation requires them to present it as such. The interest rate is to cover the defaulters, these are high risk loans.
Presumably if you didn't pay it back for a year, it would become an annual rate. or at some point do they send someone round to break your fingers?
Nick, obviously you object to the welfare cuts. So how would you recommend balancing the budget, the deficit on which is still around ~£100bn p.a. IIRC?
As I said, the food bank issue is not mostly caused by low benefits. It's by it taking SIX MONTHS to find out whether you'll get help or not. When I went to a briefing on this, the non-political organisers said the majority of their customers were not people who'd been turned down, but simply people who had run out of money while awaiting a decision. Often poor credit risks and in cities often without helpful family networks, they had only three options:
On the flip side of the poverty debate, a lot of people don't seem to help themselves. Someone I know pleaded desperate "no food in the house" poverty and got bailed out by friends and family and within a week spent £100 on trainers. Similarly there are a lot of branded pawn shops appearing like a rash on the high street. At the in-laws last weekend in Basildon, and was amazed at the 14 iPhone 5S handsets in CEX which had clearly not been in their owners possession long before being flogged, similarly half a dozen PS4s and similar Xbox One's.
People are clearly spending money they don't have on things they don't need then wondering why they can't pay their bills. To answer the OECD point in raw numbers the people reliant on food banks has exploded over the last few years - forget the statistics about "might need foodbanks" and look at "are using foodbanks".
And is any scalable use of foodbanks something that decent civilised society is now prepared to accept?
Similarly the "too expensive to eat healthy food" brigade. A lot are just too lazy. I suspect a lot of them wouldn't be seen dead in their local ethnic food emporium, even if the food is half the price of Tesco's.
Actually I think the likes of Brighthouse are probably ethically more compromised than Wonga. At least the payday lenders are, in many cases, lending money to people in a real crisis to keep the wolf from the door. Brighthouse are selling people things they don't need, and charging huge interest rates. And before anyone says that people do actually need household appliances and furniture... there will usually be something like a British Heart Foundation household store not far away.
That is spot on. I went to the nearest BHF last week to drop off some furniture donations - parked up, walked past Lidl, a pawnbrokers and Brighthouse to get to it. Brighthouse had a sofa (might have included armchairs) in the window, fairly bog standard stuff, not leather - I looked at the payment schedule - it would cost nearly £4,000 to buy it. Did a double take but my eyes did not deceive. BHF had not dissimilar stuff for about £100.
This photo of Yes campaigning yesterday explains why #indyref polls are changing. Every conversation & vote matters. pic.twitter.com/eGQiI65slP
It's been a good few eye opening days of the campaign regardless of the polls. You would almost feel sorry for better together if this keeps up because they really are getting hammered on the ground.
I'm sure the Bettertogether line will be that the good weather is stopping their divisions from marching..or Easter..or school holidays..or fear of Nat bullying..or shyness..or something.
@Antifrank RPI was a standard measure,,,,,,,until it was decided CPI would make things look better. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
CPI is the EU standard measure of inflation. It is mathematically sounder as well. The fact that it makes things look better and saves the Government money was, I'm sure, a happy accident.
My guess is that voters in England would vote for Scotland to be independent from rUK. This is because it would mean independence for rUK from Scottish rule.
So those of us in England should not be too worried if the YES campaign is overtaking the NO campaign.
On the flip side of the poverty debate, a lot of people don't seem to help themselves. Someone I know pleaded desperate "no food in the house" poverty and got bailed out by friends and family and within a week spent £100 on trainers. Similarly there are a lot of branded pawn shops appearing like a rash on the high street. At the in-laws last weekend in Basildon, and was amazed at the 14 iPhone 5S handsets in CEX which had clearly not been in their owners possession long before being flogged, similarly half a dozen PS4s and similar Xbox One's.
People are clearly spending money they don't have on things they don't need then wondering why they can't pay their bills. To answer the OECD point in raw numbers the people reliant on food banks has exploded over the last few years - forget the statistics about "might need foodbanks" and look at "are using foodbanks".
As a perfect exampe of this sort of infantalism, my eldest sons girlfriends parents car broke down.they didn't have the £500 to get it fixed so got another for £3500 on tick. They both smoke and drink and like buying new clothes to go down the pub, live in a rented house and have zero savings, they think money is for spending (and aparently try and do this as fast as possible).
The problem with those on the left is that they bleat and whine that such people should be bailled out by the more sensible when things go wrong.
It's an unsecured loan. The interest rate reflects the risk.
As I understand it, there are limits on the interest. Regulations oblige them to quote a per annum interest rate, but it's actually capped.
"Wonga is forced to display a representative annual percentage rate (APR) for its loans of 4,214pc. However, Mr Damelin said that, because it offered loans limited to 30 days, the APR was not relevant, and the loan was often cheaper than unauthorised bank charges for the same amount."
There seems to be an assumption that poor people are too stupid to make the right choices. That's just not true.
What middle class people do is, of course, get cash out on their credit cards or use their overdraft (mine costs me £1 a day which I don't mind as I don't use it, but if I were to go £50 overdrawn for a few days works out as an outrageous rate of interest).
What I don't necessarily understand is, if someone didn't pay £100 back for a year, whether the £4,200 in interest would actually be justified. The risk of failure can't be that great, surely. Maybe regulation should require that the interest rate decays over time.
It's not an annual rate. It's just that legislation requires them to present it as such. The interest rate is to cover the defaulters, these are high risk loans.
Presumably if you didn't pay it back for a year, it would become an annual rate. or at some point do they send someone round to break your fingers?
The quoted APR includes not only the interest per se, but also the arrangement fees. So as a representation of what someone who paid their loan off in full at the end of the agreed period had to pay, it is all the more misleading. However, this makes it all the more accurate as a represention of what you would have to pay if you did not. Having said that I believe there is a cap on the "rollover" of loans at services like Wonga - but if a borrower moves their borrowings around multiple lenders, the cap is easily got around.
@Antifrank RPI was a standard measure,,,,,,,until it was decided CPI would make things look better. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
CPI is the EU standard measure of inflation. It is mathematically sounder as well. The fact that it makes things look better and saves the Government money was, I'm sure, a happy accident.
The CPI does not include house price rises (via mortgage cost and house depreciation) nor council tax , vehicle or TV licence.
The RPI was specifically designed to uprate wages and pensions. The CPI was designed for macro economists. Many wage agreements, pension funds and index linked gilts are uprated by RPI. Many people would be disadvantaged by CPI replacing RPI but the Government as a whole might reduce spending.
My guess is that voters in England would vote for Scotland to be independent from rUK. This is because it would mean independence for rUK from Scottish rule.
So those of us in England should not be too worried if the YES campaign is overtaking the NO campaign.
The most recently published poll (albeit with 18 month old fieldwork) had support in England for Scottish independence split 62:38 against, excluding DK.
On "who benefits from the Union" the English thought the Scots benefit more by 49:8 (23 equally, 20, DK).
So despite believing they are being short changed, the English wanted the Scots to stay...
'SIMON HEFFER: How can this great, UNITED Kingdom - which gave the world Christian civilisation - just tear itself apart?'
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
I would like like every single legitimate (but artificially contrived by location and/or age) voter within Scotland to vote "Yes". This would remove the disproportionate "Barnet Formula" AND resolve the wholly unfair "Midlothian Question". I wish Scotland both Good Luck and Good Fortune for the future, but I am not confident about their future because I am NOT convinced that Alex Salmond has (and party have) thought out the implications. Whatever, it solves a number of problems for the rest of the UK.
I'm familiar with the West Lothian Question, not sure about the Midlothian question - is it 'What's the quickest route to IKEA without getting on the bypass?'
Anyway, a bit of a washout down here in London. Back in the Midlands tomorrow, hope to finish off the West Midlands Day Ranger railway map by the time I fly off to India on Thursday. Essentially just Stafford to Crewe direct and Stafford to Crewe via Stoke left, aside a few lesser used curves. On Good Friday, I was in Portillo mode for sure: I did New Street to Gobowen near the Welsh border, and Moor Street to Worcester via Kidderminster.
I got absolutely soaked this morning. But on the plus side the vicar was giving out cadbury cream eggs after the service. A win!
Lovely spring day up here in Lowland Scotland - spring flowers and buds on the country walk and the first butterflies and hoverflies of the year.
That does sound nice, I think spring is the prettiest time of year.
It is. The hoverfly was a honeybee mimic - right down to dummy pollen baskets. Most impressive.
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
Unspoofable.
LOL
Not just the comments. Mr Heffer's notion that the Church of England and the Kirk have the same viewpoint rather shows his understanding of Anglo-Scottish history.
I'm preparing for lots of mocking and sniggering at this, but it seems to me the only person who can keep Scotland in the UK is Ed Miliband. Not by him simply campaigning and wowing people with his "charisma", and certainly not by him joining in with the ludicrous scaremongering that Better Together have been peddling so far. But by him setting out a drastically more left-wing position which will make Scottish Labour voters feel there's actually a point in staying in the UK because there's atleast a CHANCE they'll eventually get a government which doesn't just pander to greedy southern-Englanders and big businesses with their demands for endless austerity, scrounger-bashing and letting the super-rich get away with blue murder.
Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon certainly seem to think that "it's impossible for Scotland to ever get a government we'll be happy with when Labour are peddling these policies" is a potent attack line judging by their conference last week (is it too unrealistic to suggest that conference might be the main reason for the surge in the ICM poll?). Ed is the only person who can defuse that potentially referendum-winning argument.
I'm preparing for lots of mocking and sniggering at this, but it seems to me the only person who can keep Scotland in the UK is Ed Miliband. Not by him simply campaigning and wowing people with his "charisma", and certainly not by him joining in with the ludicrous scaremongering that Better Together have been peddling so far. But by him setting out a drastically more left-wing position which will make Scottish Labour voters feel there's actually a point in staying in the UK because there's atleast a CHANCE they'll eventually get a government which doesn't just pander to greedy southern-Englanders and big businesses with their demands for endless austerity, scrounger-bashing and letting the super-rich get away with blue murder.
Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon certainly seem to think that "it's impossible for Scotland to ever get a government we'll be happy with when Labour are peddling these policies" is a potent attack line judging by their conference last week (is it too unrealistic to suggest that conference might be the main reason for the surge in the ICM poll?). Ed is the only person who can defuse that potentially referendum-winning argument.
Err isn't it evil Tories manipulating the Scottish electorate to vote Yes so they can be in power for ever in England ? Or was that last week ?
I'm preparing for lots of mocking and sniggering at this, but it seems to me the only person who can keep Scotland in the UK is Ed Miliband. Not by him simply campaigning and wowing people with his "charisma", and certainly not by him joining in with the ludicrous scaremongering that Better Together have been peddling so far. But by him setting out a drastically more left-wing position which will make Scottish Labour voters feel there's actually a point in staying in the UK because there's atleast a CHANCE they'll eventually get a government which doesn't just pander to greedy southern-Englanders and big businesses with their demands for endless austerity, scrounger-bashing and letting the super-rich get away with blue murder.
Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon certainly seem to think that "it's impossible for Scotland to ever get a government we'll be happy with when Labour are peddling these policies" is a potent attack line judging by their conference last week (is it too unrealistic to suggest that conference might be the main reason for the surge in the ICM poll?). Ed is the only person who can defuse that potentially referendum-winning argument.
Err isn't it evil Tories manipulating the Scottish electorate to vote Yes so they can be in power for ever in England ? Or was that last week ?
Please find me where I said that. In fact, I've been one of those pointing out that Scotland leaving would make very little difference to Labour's or the Tories' chances of winning UK elections.
I'm preparing for lots of mocking and sniggering at this, but it seems to me the only person who can keep Scotland in the UK is Ed Miliband. Not by him simply campaigning and wowing people with his "charisma", and
Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon certainly seem to think that "it's impossible for Scotland to ever get a government we'll be happy with when Labour are peddling these policies" is a potent attack line judging by their conference last week (is it too unrealistic to suggest that conference might be the main reason for the surge in the ICM poll?). Ed is the only person who can defuse that potentially referendum-winning argument.
Err isn't it evil Tories manipulating the Scottish electorate to vote Yes so they can be in power for ever in England ? Or was that last week ?
Please find me where I said that. In fact, I've been one of those pointing out that Scotland leaving would make very little difference to Labour's or the Tories' chances of winning UK elections.
I'm preparing for lots of mocking and sniggering at this, but it seems to me the only person who can keep Scotland in the UK is Ed .
Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon certainly seem to think that "it's impossible for Scotland to ever get a government we'll be happy with when Labour are peddling these policies" is a potent attack line judging by their conference last week (is it too unrealistic to suggest that conference might be the main reason for the surge in the ICM poll?). Ed is the only person who can defuse that potentially referendum-winning argument.
Err isn't it evil Tories manipulating the Scottish electorate to vote Yes so they can be in power for ever in England ? Or was that last week ?
Please find me where I said that. In fact, I've been one of those pointing out that Scotland leaving would make very little difference to Labour's or the Tories' chances of winning UK elections.
I see Nick Palmer has sloped off and failed to answer my question of earlier on what he'd do on welfare spending and how he'd reconcile that with the deficit and balancing the UK budget. He's happy to list the problems. He's very reluctant to spell out practical solutions.
Tells you everything you need to know about him and his party's readiness for power.
Comments
It's the overweening hypocrisy of their website that gets me. On the left, items about how wonderful Prince George is, and articles aimed at reinforcing palaeo-conservative views about human sexuality. On the right, the titillating bit including this one http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2608759/Tila-Tequila-announces-10-weeks-pregnant-thinks-twins.html I noticed this morning while looking to see if there was an article about the Survation poll. Hello? Who in their target demographic is supposed to have an interest in the trivial exploits of a "bisexual porn star"?
Good day for David Moyes not.
"...a recent OECD study which suggested that the proportion of people in Britain who say there are times when they cannot afford food fell from 9.8 per cent in 2007 — when the economy was booming and Labour was in power — to 8.1 per cent in 2012.
The British figure is significantly lower than the EU average."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2606545/STEPHEN-GLOVER-Forget-food-banks-Why-doesnt-Church-fight-evil-welfare-dependency.html
I suspect while there will be a handful of chancers, the majority are motivated by some desire to perform a 'public service'.
What the two major parties face are challenges in reaching their 'grass roots' - the Conservative Associations have withered on the vine in the same way that the Working Men's clubs and Trades Unions have - both are now dominated by 'professional politicians' whose main job has only ever been 'politics' - or an early adjunct like journalism or think tanks.
With the internet and 24 hour media I suspect our politicians are also more honest than their predecessors - not because they have necessarily become more virtuous, but because the chances of being found out are a lot higher. Interestingly, first the Lib Dems, and now UKIP have floundered under the scrutiny that both Labour and the Tories are used to.
One difference I think, and it may be a function of rhetoric - but the left give the impression that (some on) the right are motivated by bad motives - there is an intrinsic wickedness that guides them. In contrast, the right, I think, view the left as motivated by bad ideas - foolishness, not wickedness.....
Surely this government's decision to let them be promoted - something the previous government blocked - has also played a part?
Hence little Ed cunningly outmaneuvering David to get the union vote and win the labour leadership. Cammie basically smashing the David Davis leadership campaign into tiny little pieces with his Blair impersonation and the help of the infamous Republican Frank Luntz and his Newsnight focus grouping. Why even Clegg showed a surprising tenacity and ability to get the right people on his side. First with his very quick move against Ming in the whisper campaign and then with the amusing help of Rennard in ruling out a load of postal votes to win the lib dem leadership.
An in-depth exploration of that could prove enlightening. Not on here though obviously.
What? What would you do? How would you square this with the overall budget deficit we're still faced with? How would you balance out all government spending priorities?
It just won't do just to point out problems. You want to become an MP again in little over a year's time. I'm interested in your views on the solutions.
I thought they just topped the EU poll and have had their best ever 2015
They either resort to criminal moneylenders, or they don't pay their bills. In the USA anti-payday loan legislation led to increased utility cutoffs, and bounced cheques.
It is half-puritanism and half-p0rn, and doesn't bat an eyelid about it. We hate it because it's that same hypocrisy in ourselves that we recognise.
The situation is slightly complicated by the number "in work" who also rely on them, but in true Tory fashion we only have to shout that they don't exist!
Non existence of problems is a compulsory subject in the private education sector, along with a belief in ones own infallibility.
Only someone who loved foodbanks would say something like that.
And the most common bloody reason for people to us food banks right now is because the lengthy exhaustive checks being taken by the system are taking so long that they'd f***ing starve waiting - or mistakes have been made such that they don't get the aid they need!
Partly due to the Daily Hate choosing benefits claimants as one of the hate targets, incentivizing politicians to steadily extend and increase the bureaucratic hoops to jump through.
I suppose the Mail will only be satisfied when a load of poor bastards simply die of hunger, rather than risk some shysters maybe taking advantage (and carefully advertising just how to take advantage).
The abuse is when people rely on them, over and over again, getting deep into dept and repaying interest out of all proportion to the principal (and probably out of all proportion to the risk to the lender).
It might drive down the use of Food Banks - which could then be hailed as a 'Labour success'!
Yes, I have noticed the concern shown by the coalition to the plight of the poorer members of society.
Cameron does Gods work, even people lying in a coma can be called for a face to face interview or have their benefits cut,
Miracles are not just for Easter for this coalition of saints
Hope the eggs you received were cracking!
Anyway, a bit of a washout down here in London. Back in the Midlands tomorrow, hope to finish off the West Midlands Day Ranger railway map by the time I fly off to India on Thursday. Essentially just Stafford to Crewe direct and Stafford to Crewe via Stoke left, aside a few lesser used curves.
On Good Friday, I was in Portillo mode for sure: I did New Street to Gobowen near the Welsh border, and Moor Street to Worcester via Kidderminster.
They're called, either, mothers or mums
You were privately educated and I claim my five unearned degrees!
As I understand it, there are limits on the interest. Regulations oblige them to quote a per annum interest rate, but it's actually capped.
"Wonga is forced to display a representative annual percentage rate (APR) for its loans of 4,214pc. However, Mr Damelin said that, because it offered loans limited to 30 days, the APR was not relevant, and the loan was often cheaper than unauthorised bank charges for the same amount."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/8774054/Wongas-interest-rate-of-4200pc-Its-not-an-automatic-red-card.html
There seems to be an assumption that poor people are too stupid to make the right choices. That's just not true.
http://www.oecd.org/unitedkingdom/OECD-SocietyAtaGlance2014-Highlights-UnitedKingdom.pdf
Share of people reporting not enough money to buy food:
Under Labour, in the pre-crisis boom years, when money was pouring into the Treasury at a rate never known before or since: 9.8%
Under the coalition, in the most difficult economic conditions since the 1930s: 8.1%
Note also the figures for relative poverty.
But of course, your prejudices are so overwhelming that you haven't the faintest possibility of being able to reconcile facts with your preconceptions.
Sep '13:
'Since the mid-Nineties I have been convinced that England and Scotland would benefit from a divorce, or at least from a trial separation. Many Scots don’t much like the English and appear ungrateful for everything that England does for them in showering them with money.'
Today:
'SIMON HEFFER: How can this great, UNITED Kingdom - which gave the world Christian civilisation - just tear itself apart?'
http://archive.today/cNJU1#selection-599.0-598.1
Which was appointed by?
I said right from the out-set in 2011 that I thought there was a very real prospect of Scotland saying yes to independence, so I'm not surprised by recent developments. This is something that's been coming on since the 1970's, really, though the Labour Party has speeded up the process dramatically with anti-Tory/anti Unionist posturing during the 80's and 90's. Talk about reaping what you sow...
As for David Cameron, I believe he will resign in the event of a YES vote. Not that he should have to or that this is particularly his fault. This is first and foremost a Labour created disaster.
Cameron couldn't do anything other than offer a yes/no referendum when the SNP so spectacularly swept the board in the 2011 Scottish elections and the Labour Party was so badly rejected. Devo-max, that was a non starter. Labour and Lib-Dems (plus a significant number of Tories) would have voted it down. The only realistic response to that ground-breaking 2011 result was yes/no.
But, we are where we are and I believe Cameron is the kind of chap to fall on his sword should Scotland be lost. I don't expect Clegg or Milliband would do the same.
The coalition will go on until 2015 - The Lib-Dems will put off the moment they have to face the electorate for as long as possible and I suspect with the trauma of losing Scotland hanging over them, Labour will be in no rush to face the electorate either. I would actually see the UK being extended, ala the 1935 Parliament, until 2016.
No idea who the Tories would elect as leader (and Prime Minister) but I would imagine in this time of crisis and upheval the leadership change will be quick, so William Hague is a possibility.
Genius!
Alex Salmond is within striking distance of victory. Why hasn’t England noticed?
We could be seven months away from the end of Britain. It's time to worry
http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9131482/union-in-peril/
What I don't necessarily understand is, if someone didn't pay £100 back for a year, whether the £4,200 in interest would actually be justified. The risk of failure can't be that great, surely. Maybe regulation should require that the interest rate decays over time.
Lest our friends in the north think this divorce is going to be easy, the top rated comment is:
I would like like every single legitimate (but artificially contrived by location and/or age) voter within Scotland to vote "Yes". This would remove the disproportionate "Barnet Formula" AND resolve the wholly unfair "Midlothian Question". I wish Scotland both Good Luck and Good Fortune for the future, but I am not confident about their future because I am NOT convinced that Alex Salmond has (and party have) thought out the implications. Whatever, it solves a number of problems for the rest of the UK.
RPI was a standard measure,,,,,,,until it was decided CPI would make things look better.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
LOL
Lies, damned lies, and statistics.]
Yeah, but to be fair I did find the study of it (sp. RPI V CPI) quite fun. Economics Is fun - you get to draw graphs and everything.
Just as well those at the top manage to hire accountants to blur the lines on their earnings.
Unlike the plebs who can't be trusted and have to use PAYE
If you've ever come across an office with payroll you would know that it is the plebs who run PAYE
Truly priceless.
It still doesn't excuse your utterly hilarious citing of a poster under Hefferlump as proof of anything though dear.
Lol, it's almost like they had no knowledge of Scotland (or the relative populations of Luxembourg and Andorra).
Jock, we hardly knew ye.
I see!
Well, best leave you him to it eh?
It's as if the PB tory idiocy is spreading.
Meanwhile back in the real world.
Michael Gray @GrayInGlasgow 7h
This photo of Yes campaigning yesterday explains why #indyref polls are changing. Every conversation & vote matters. pic.twitter.com/eGQiI65slP
It's been a good few eye opening days of the campaign regardless of the polls. You would almost feel sorry for better together if this keeps up because they really are getting hammered on the ground.
People are clearly spending money they don't have on things they don't need then wondering why they can't pay their bills. To answer the OECD point in raw numbers the people reliant on food banks has exploded over the last few years - forget the statistics about "might need foodbanks" and look at "are using foodbanks".
And is any scalable use of foodbanks something that decent civilised society is now prepared to accept?
The DWP is better managed than Manchester United at the moment.
Danny Blanchflower @D_Blanchflower
'You can't trust Scots to pay back the debt' - idiotic columns like this precisely why many Scots want independence
thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/business/E…
"At the in-laws last weekend in Basildon"
Ahhh, a poor benighted backwater full yummie mummies collecting free rice and basic tinned beans in their 4 x 4's?
TBH it's more likely they were sniffing around hoping for something far more juicy, but a deadline is a deadline and that's the 'best' the hapless journo could come up with.
http://www.wonga.com/money/how-to-wonga/
http://help.wonga.com/articles/What_Is_external/What-if-I-can-t-pay-my-loan-on-time
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4480695
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=4103861
And your solution to this is what? More rules and regulations which only push prices up and trap people in the states incompetent clutches.
Okaaay.....
For anyone wanting classic comedy, "The Man in the White Suit" is on BBC 4 from 19.00.
So those of us in England should not be too worried if the YES campaign is overtaking the NO campaign.
The problem with those on the left is that they bleat and whine that such people should be bailled out by the more sensible when things go wrong.
The CPI does not include house price rises (via mortgage cost and house depreciation) nor council tax , vehicle or TV licence.
The RPI was specifically designed to uprate wages and pensions. The CPI was designed for macro economists. Many wage agreements, pension funds and index linked gilts are uprated by RPI. Many people would be disadvantaged by CPI replacing RPI but the Government as a whole might reduce spending.
On "who benefits from the Union" the English thought the Scots benefit more by 49:8 (23 equally, 20, DK).
So despite believing they are being short changed, the English wanted the Scots to stay...
Evening all, and happy Easter.
For anyone that would like to play, the India election game is available here, entries close 29th April:
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/india14/
Full opinion poll and background links in the game.
Many thanks,
DC
Daily Mail ? Daily Lies more likely.
If it were a letter in Viz Letterbocks it would barely be more stupid
If so I guess they have done a reasonable job !
The extra commas used in India are "Lakhs", or units of 100,000. So in India, 100,000 is usually written "1,00,000".
Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon certainly seem to think that "it's impossible for Scotland to ever get a government we'll be happy with when Labour are peddling these policies" is a potent attack line judging by their conference last week (is it too unrealistic to suggest that conference might be the main reason for the surge in the ICM poll?). Ed is the only person who can defuse that potentially referendum-winning argument.
Tells you everything you need to know about him and his party's readiness for power.