Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.
Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.
More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
That's absurd. There surely has to be more to that story. Why would the courts want to provide legal protection for dishonesty? They're normally quite hard on that sort of thing.
A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.
Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.
More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
He was trying to cover up going to Fenland Poly, probably.
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
Surprising lack of coverage of his disappearance after collapsing.
Mitch McConnell remaining technically alive for an extra three weeks because of a manipulative procedural maneuver is exactly how he would have wanted to go out. https://x.com/davidzmorris/status/2073584779123990562
Unpacking that.
A lot of people are asking “why hide McConnell’s state? Not like a Dem would win the special election?”
If McConnell vacated before August 3rd cut off it’d be a special election and any one can register as an independent…
Including Massie.
Which would split the Republican vote, giving him or maybe even the Dem the chance at the plurality.
But, if McConnell’s seat is not vacated before the 3rd by legally stepping down or a signed death certificate, then it’s too close to the next election and rules prevent a special election which bars any new registrations at this point.
With McConnell’s wife having travelled to China AFTER he was hospitalized, the next of kin isn’t available to sign off and so the bar for ending life support is extremely high (would require full brain stem death, which is not present in some patients who are never coming back)
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
Ukrainian company Varta unveiled the Ataman active protection system against FPV drones. It uses 2 cameras to detect drones at 50-80 m and 8 shotgun barrels to intercept them at 5-30 m. The system can be mounted on UGVs and tactical vehicles.
No idea how effective this system is but I think it's a sign of things to come. At some point in the war one side or the other will come up with some combination of counter-measures to protect against drones and, at least temporarily, gain a substantial advantage as a result.
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
I presume as somebody who is uber wealthy all his speaking engagements are pro-bono and all that money is donated to charity as he is only on the wealth tax bandwagon for the greater good?
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
I’m reminded of Hull who came up with the ultimate derivatives trading strategy - guaranteed to make money:
Write books and give seminars on trading derivatives.
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Obviously nothing about cracking down on freeloaders and parasites or encouraging self-reliance.
Just screwing the hard-working and enterprising even more and wasting the proceeds.
As the Wall Street Journal once said, "Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".
What would your "cracking down on freeloaders and parasites" consist of? How would it work?
Please do explain, I am sure we'd all love to hear.
Again another person using "we" would love to hear. There is no "we" on PB or shouldn't be. This idea emanating from 'progressives' on here is just another load of bollocks used to put down anyone with other views. "We'd all love to know who exactly these "we" are.
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
Genuine interest - has anyone seen an anti-wheelchair barrier like this one *? It is one of the most unusual beasts in the local barrier zoo. It was built in about 1975 to stop rat-runners on a route close to me, out of the kind of concrete blocks used at the time to keep vehicles from overrunning roundabouts. I recall being driven to infant school down here, and cycling the unmade road on my RSW14 before 1976.
It is a public footpath so this is an unlawful obstruction, and the width blocks most mobility aids and some pushchairs. On one side is a popular local pub, and on the is a Coop mini-supermarket, so movement matters and there is no easy alternative.
I can force it to be removed, but it needs consideration. That gate is to 10 acres of allotments, and they take their wheelbarrows through with planks on sideways and do not want bollards for that reason. I'll probably suggest replacing that gate on the left with 3 locking bollards at 1.5m spacing.
* I only seen these in 2 places - out here, and in the Lenton area of Nottingham to make an LTN in the late 1970s. It looks like onme designer who moved jobs. You can drive over them (I tried in ~1987 for interest), but I would not do it in a car with modern tyres. My Polo Mark 1 could do it with a lightly held wheel as in heavy snow at about 1mph. https://maps.app.goo.gl/PSSJgk7nYMDRkbTA9
Looks like I could get my electric scooter through. It'd be difficult, though. I couldn't manage it with my 'walking wheels'.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Obviously nothing about cracking down on freeloaders and parasites or encouraging self-reliance.
Just screwing the hard-working and enterprising even more and wasting the proceeds.
As the Wall Street Journal once said, "Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".
To be fair, 'something' has to be dome about house prices in the London and the Home Counties.
Burnham could set a Mansion Tax threshold at a level that would tax people with mansions outwith London and the Home Counties. Places like, e.g. Manchester, Birmingham, Newcastle or Glasgow. If it affects people in HYUFD’s tiny four bedroom slums in London, it may help equalise house prices across the UK.
Trump: And as our Declaration of Independence tells us, we are all made in the image of one almighty god. And a communist will never say that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
I presume there is exception for FIFA committee members?
Incidentally, this was a disgraceful post
For a moment I thought FIFA had imposed ethics on themselves. This temporarily shattered space time and I am now dealing with the trauma of seeing 27 dimensions all at once.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Obviously nothing about cracking down on freeloaders and parasites or encouraging self-reliance.
Just screwing the hard-working and enterprising even more and wasting the proceeds.
As the Wall Street Journal once said, "Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".
To be fair, 'something' has to be dome about house prices in the London and the Home Counties.
Burnham could set a Mansion Tax threshold at a level that would tax people with mansions outwith London and the Home Counties. Places like, e.g. Manchester, Birmingham, Newcastle or Glasgow. If it affects people in HYUFD’s tiny four bedroom slums in London, it may help equalise house prices across the UK.
I don't think equalising prices across the UK would be a good idea. I'd rather see the insane levels in London and Home Counties brought down.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Obviously nothing about cracking down on freeloaders and parasites or encouraging self-reliance.
Just screwing the hard-working and enterprising even more and wasting the proceeds.
As the Wall Street Journal once said, "Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".
To be fair, 'something' has to be dome about house prices in the London and the Home Counties.
Burnham could set a Mansion Tax threshold at a level that would tax people with mansions outwith London and the Home Counties. Places like, e.g. Manchester, Birmingham, Newcastle or Glasgow. If it affects people in HYUFD’s tiny four bedroom slums in London, it may help equalise house prices across the UK.
I don't think equalising prices across the UK would be a good idea. I'd rather see the insane levels in London and Home Counties brought down.
I think that’s what I meant. It would also allow more flexibility of labour if people could afford to move to London for work, without having to commit to the high rent vicious circle.
Trump: And as our Declaration of Independence tells us, we are all made in the image of one almighty god. And a communist will never say that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
Where doesit it say that?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
Trump: And as our Declaration of Independence tells us, we are all made in the image of one almighty god. And a communist will never say that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
Where doesit it say that?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
My Creator may be different from yours.
I think a communist might say that. Not a thirties Russian one though. Probably.
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.
A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.
Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.
One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.
There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?
Also, formally/formerly.
I thought Advance had shut down?
It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.
White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.
Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.
Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.
Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand
Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
No
He’s always been islamophobic but that’s it.
Back in his days a member of the MIG firm he ran with and got on with plenty of black and other races.
His former best mate, Kevin Carroll, has a mixed race daughter.
The EDL was born as a response to a protest by an Islamic group in Luton against the Army. Mid 2000’s
I think one of the most persistent myths is this idea that someone who is intensely bigoted about one group of people is not going to pivot towards hating on other people if it suits them later on. The Goodness Gracious Me sketch with the Kapoors ("pronounced Cooper") getting a brick through their window with a piece of paper saying "p***s out" wrapped round it - to which they of course respond "quite right" - is the best take down of this sort of attitude.
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
I presume as somebody who is uber wealthy all his speaking engagements are pro-bono and all that money is donated to charity as he is only on the wealth tax bandwagon for the greater good?
His is funded by various left wing foundations. The broader push toward a wealth tax is very organised.
Trump: And as our Declaration of Independence tells us, we are all made in the image of one almighty god. And a communist will never say that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
Where doesit it say that?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
My Creator may be different from yours.
Trump confusing Bible with Declaration of Independence? Very much doubt he is familiar with the contents of either.
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
I presume as somebody who is uber wealthy all his speaking engagements are pro-bono and all that money is donated to charity as he is only on the wealth tax bandwagon for the greater good?
His is funded by various left wing foundations. The broader push toward a wealth tax is very organised.
When you start seeing the extensive media management behind campaigns like this (on all sides of the political spectrum - this is not limited to left wing political projects) you can’t unsee it. The stories planted in compliant press to lay the groundwork, the interviews with “thought leaders”, the careful management of MPs to make sure they fall in line, it’s all there out in the open.
Genuine interest - has anyone seen an anti-wheelchair barrier like this one *? It is one of the most unusual beasts in the local barrier zoo. It was built in about 1975 to stop rat-runners on a route close to me, out of the kind of concrete blocks used at the time to keep vehicles from overrunning roundabouts. I recall being driven to infant school down here, and cycling the unmade road on my RSW14 before 1976.
It is a public footpath so this is an unlawful obstruction, and the width blocks most mobility aids and some pushchairs. On one side is a popular local pub, and on the is a Coop mini-supermarket, so movement matters and there is no easy alternative.
I can force it to be removed, but it needs consideration. That gate is to 10 acres of allotments, and they take their wheelbarrows through with planks on sideways and do not want bollards for that reason. I'll probably suggest replacing that gate on the left with 3 locking bollards at 1.5m spacing.
* I only seen these in 2 places - out here, and in the Lenton area of Nottingham to make an LTN in the late 1970s. It looks like onme designer who moved jobs. You can drive over them (I tried in ~1987 for interest), but I would not do it in a car with modern tyres. My Polo Mark 1 could do it with a lightly held wheel as in heavy snow at about 1mph. https://maps.app.goo.gl/PSSJgk7nYMDRkbTA9
Looks like I could get my electric scooter through. It'd be difficult, though. I couldn't manage it with my 'walking wheels'.
I can't measure it on Google, as it is under a tree. It is very narrow, but I'll stroll that way and measure it.
What are walking wheels - do you mean a rollator, or a Dandy Horse type thing where you sit on it and move it with your feet? Google's first responses to me are wheeled half-trolleys for 3-legged dogs !
One issue they get there is cars parked right up against it (the parking across are actually across the public footpath which continues straight on - https://maps.app.goo.gl/p6jR6UmvKMSinks18 ), but that needs a different type of management.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Obviously nothing about cracking down on freeloaders and parasites or encouraging self-reliance.
Just screwing the hard-working and enterprising even more and wasting the proceeds.
As the Wall Street Journal once said, "Goodbye, Great Britain, it was nice knowing you".
What would your "cracking down on freeloaders and parasites" consist of? How would it work?
Please do explain, I am sure we'd all love to hear.
Again another person using "we" would love to hear. There is no "we" on PB or shouldn't be. This idea emanating from 'progressives' on here is just another load of bollocks used to put down anyone with other views. "We'd all love to know who exactly these "we" are.
Fair cop. I did preface it with "I'm sure" which as 'we' all know means, "I think it possible".
However, I fully retract and hereby recognise that some on PB have no interest whatsoever in @Fishing or anyone else having to give any detail to support his frankly populist war-cry about "cracking down on freeloaders and parasites".
I for one though would like to understand what that might actually mean and how it might be achieved, and there may be other PBers who are also interest.
Trump: And as our Declaration of Independence tells us, we are all made in the image of one almighty god. And a communist will never say that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
Where doesit it say that?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
My Creator may be different from yours.
“ I am not a Know-Nothing. That is certain. How could I be? How can any one who abhors the oppression of negroes, be in favor of degrading classes of white people? Our progress in degeneracy appears to me to be pretty rapid. As a nation, we began by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty - to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocrisy”
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
I presume as somebody who is uber wealthy all his speaking engagements are pro-bono and all that money is donated to charity as he is only on the wealth tax bandwagon for the greater good?
His is funded by various left wing foundations. The broader push toward a wealth tax is very organised.
When you start seeing the extensive media management behind campaigns like this (on all sides of the political spectrum - this is not limited to left wing political projects) you can’t unsee it. The stories planted in compliant press to lay the groundwork, the interviews with “thought leaders”, the careful management of MPs to make sure they fall in line, it’s all there out in the open.
Patriotic Millionaires, of which the UK one he’s a part of is an offshoot of the US one, is simply a lobbying group advocating for wealth taxes and climate justice. Whatever that means.
It is an incredibly well organised lobby and the clever bit is it just gives the impression he’s a guy doing it on his own. But the website shows it’s a well,organised left wing lobby group
Be interested in how it was funded and how he got a platform on Channel 4 to advocate for this specific policy for ninety minutes this week.
The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.
A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.
Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.
One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.
There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?
Also, formally/formerly.
I thought Advance had shut down?
It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.
White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.
Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.
Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.
Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand
Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
No
He’s always been islamophobic but that’s it.
Back in his days a member of the MIG firm he ran with and got on with plenty of black and other races.
His former best mate, Kevin Carroll, has a mixed race daughter.
The EDL was born as a response to a protest by an Islamic group in Luton against the Army. Mid 2000’s
I think one of the most persistent myths is this idea that someone who is intensely bigoted about one group of people is not going to pivot towards hating on other people if it suits them later on. The Goodness Gracious Me sketch with the Kapoors ("pronounced Cooper") getting a brick through their window with a piece of paper saying "p***s out" wrapped round it - to which they of course respond "quite right" - is the best take down of this sort of attitude.
None of which makes the original proposition true. He started off as a football hooligan, became an anti Muslim campaigner. He didn’t start off hating Black people per se, just fans of other teams who wanted a ruck. I’m sure someone of your extensive expertise is well aware of casual culture.
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
I presume as somebody who is uber wealthy all his speaking engagements are pro-bono and all that money is donated to charity as he is only on the wealth tax bandwagon for the greater good?
His is funded by various left wing foundations. The broader push toward a wealth tax is very organised.
By his own admission, the initial handling of his YouTube channel and its growth was carefully controlled by the publishers of his book. They had dedicated staff responsible for it. It wasn't organic operation of some rando in his bedroom who then got a book deal, it was the other way around, it was targetted marketing strategy.
The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.
A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.
Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.
One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.
There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?
Also, formally/formerly.
I thought Advance had shut down?
It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.
White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.
Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.
Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.
Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
I presume as somebody who is uber wealthy all his speaking engagements are pro-bono and all that money is donated to charity as he is only on the wealth tax bandwagon for the greater good?
His is funded by various left wing foundations. The broader push toward a wealth tax is very organised.
When you start seeing the extensive media management behind campaigns like this (on all sides of the political spectrum - this is not limited to left wing political projects) you can’t unsee it. The stories planted in compliant press to lay the groundwork, the interviews with “thought leaders”, the careful management of MPs to make sure they fall in line, it’s all there out in the open.
Patriotic Millionaires, of which the UK one he’s a part of is an offshoot of the US one, is simply a lobbying group advocating for wealth taxes and climate justice. Whatever that means.
It is an incredibly well organised lobby and the clever bit is it just gives the impression he’s a guy doing it on his own. But the website shows it’s a well,organised left wing lobby group
Be interested in how it was funded and how he got a platform on Channel 4 to advocate for this specific policy for ninety minutes this week.
The clue is in the title maybe?
This is quite an interesting list on funding of think tanks (Patriotic Millionaires has not been assessed unfortunately).
Sorry, I can't spend all day on here answering questions about my tax proposals - I've got Andy on the phone, wants to speak to me about a job - comes with a flat in Westminster apparently.
Byes for now
Ed
Tell him not to hire Gary Stevenson.
Another grifter with a fake backstory....I love his interview in Times where he claims wealth tax is for the ultra wealthy like him, except he isn't ultra wealthy is he. He had 2 years where he earned good money at a bank. And when his publisher cut off his funding for his YouTube channel as they had finished promoted his book, he claimed he needed his fans to help fund in order to continue the channel as was expensive (a camera person to film / edtior to produce content from his kitchen). People who are ultra wealthy don't need the begging bowl to fund somebody to film once a week video (for 6 months a year as he goes on vacation half the year).
He also did a speaking tour and charges top dollar for the seats.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
I presume as somebody who is uber wealthy all his speaking engagements are pro-bono and all that money is donated to charity as he is only on the wealth tax bandwagon for the greater good?
His is funded by various left wing foundations. The broader push toward a wealth tax is very organised.
When you start seeing the extensive media management behind campaigns like this (on all sides of the political spectrum - this is not limited to left wing political projects) you can’t unsee it. The stories planted in compliant press to lay the groundwork, the interviews with “thought leaders”, the careful management of MPs to make sure they fall in line, it’s all there out in the open.
Patriotic Millionaires, of which the UK one he’s a part of is an offshoot of the US one, is simply a lobbying group advocating for wealth taxes and climate justice. Whatever that means.
It is an incredibly well organised lobby and the clever bit is it just gives the impression he’s a guy doing it on his own. But the website shows it’s a well,organised left wing lobby group
Be interested in how it was funded and how he got a platform on Channel 4 to advocate for this specific policy for ninety minutes this week.
The clue is in the title maybe?
This is quite an interesting list on funding of think tanks (Patriotic Millionaires has not been assessed unfortunately).
The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.
A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.
Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.
One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.
There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Advance (formerly of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
Advance is in retreat, Restore is in ruins, and Reform is about to collapse?
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.
A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.
Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.
One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.
There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Advance (formerly of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
Advance is in retreat, Restore is in ruins, and Reform is about to collapse?
Step forward my New Party - Revive.
We can’t be outflanked on immigration - our policy is to expel absolutely everyone from the country.
This then leads to inevitable success on balanced budgets, zero income tax, no NHS waiting lists etc…
Trump: And as our Declaration of Independence tells us, we are all made in the image of one almighty god. And a communist will never say that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
Where doesit it say that?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
My Creator may be different from yours.
It doesn’t. That’s the point. Trump doesn’t know what the US is celebrating.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
The serious revenue raisers are Income Tax, National Insurance and VAT. Fuel Duty and Corporation Tax as also rans.
There is no way round that, and everything else is tinkering at the edges.
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
Trump: And as our Declaration of Independence tells us, we are all made in the image of one almighty god. And a communist will never say that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
We will always be on top We will always be the best
This must surely take its place in the very top drawer of oratory down the ages.
The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.
A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.
Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.
One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.
There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Advance (formerly of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
Advance is in retreat, Restore is in ruins, and Reform is about to collapse?
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
The serious revenue raisers are Income Tax, National Insurance and VAT. Fuel Duty and Corporation Tax as also rans.
There is no way round that, and everything else is tinkering at the edges.
Burnham would almost certainly put an increase in the additional rate of income tax back to 50% at in the next Labour manifesto, in the meantime Labour will continue to freeze income tax thresholds and keep the rise in employers NI contributions. I wouldn't be surprised to see corporation tax go up either
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.
Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.
More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
I suspect most of his clients will be perfectly happy to have him lie repeatedly on their behalf.
Trump: And as our Declaration of Independence tells us, we are all made in the image of one almighty god. And a communist will never say that. https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
Where doesit it say that?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
My Creator may be different from yours.
For your sake, I hope he is different from whoever created Trump.
'Tomorrow, we both meet our maker. In my case, God. In your case, God knows. But I'd be surprised if he's won any design awards.'
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
My view is that ringfenced taxes are always a silly idea. There is one pot and it needs to be spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Anything that gets in the road of that should be removed.
Genuine interest - has anyone seen an anti-wheelchair barrier like this one *? It is one of the most unusual beasts in the local barrier zoo. It was built in about 1975 to stop rat-runners on a route close to me, out of the kind of concrete blocks used at the time to keep vehicles from overrunning roundabouts. I recall being driven to infant school down here, and cycling the unmade road on my RSW14 before 1976.
It is a public footpath so this is an unlawful obstruction, and the width blocks most mobility aids and some pushchairs. On one side is a popular local pub, and on the is a Coop mini-supermarket, so movement matters and there is no easy alternative.
I can force it to be removed, but it needs consideration. That gate is to 10 acres of allotments, and they take their wheelbarrows through with planks on sideways and do not want bollards for that reason. I'll probably suggest replacing that gate on the left with 3 locking bollards at 1.5m spacing.
* I only seen these in 2 places - out here, and in the Lenton area of Nottingham to make an LTN in the late 1970s. It looks like onme designer who moved jobs. You can drive over them (I tried in ~1987 for interest), but I would not do it in a car with modern tyres. My Polo Mark 1 could do it with a lightly held wheel as in heavy snow at about 1mph. https://maps.app.goo.gl/PSSJgk7nYMDRkbTA9
Looks like I could get my electric scooter through. It'd be difficult, though. I couldn't manage it with my 'walking wheels'.
I can't measure it on Google, as it is under a tree. It is very narrow, but I'll stroll that way and measure it.
What are walking wheels - do you mean a rollator, or a Dandy Horse type thing where you sit on it and move it with your feet? Google's first responses to me are wheeled half-trolleys for 3-legged dogs !
One issue they get there is cars parked right up against it (the parking across are actually across the public footpath which continues straight on - https://maps.app.goo.gl/p6jR6UmvKMSinks18 ), but that needs a different type of management.
Ok - back from walk. It is 750mm wide between kerbs, over a length of about 5m. Clearly anyone falls on those concrete lorry blocks is in trouble, as may be the Council responsible for it.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
My view is that ringfenced taxes are always a silly idea. There is one pot and it needs to be spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Anything that gets in the road of that should be removed.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
My view is that ringfenced taxes are always a silly idea. There is one pot and it needs to be spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Anything that gets in the road of that should be removed.
It hasn’t been ringfenced for about a century, as well.
Certainly before they started designing the Covenanter tank…
Genuine interest - has anyone seen an anti-wheelchair barrier like this one *? It is one of the most unusual beasts in the local barrier zoo. It was built in about 1975 to stop rat-runners on a route close to me, out of the kind of concrete blocks used at the time to keep vehicles from overrunning roundabouts. I recall being driven to infant school down here, and cycling the unmade road on my RSW14 before 1976.
It is a public footpath so this is an unlawful obstruction, and the width blocks most mobility aids and some pushchairs. On one side is a popular local pub, and on the is a Coop mini-supermarket, so movement matters and there is no easy alternative.
I can force it to be removed, but it needs consideration. That gate is to 10 acres of allotments, and they take their wheelbarrows through with planks on sideways and do not want bollards for that reason. I'll probably suggest replacing that gate on the left with 3 locking bollards at 1.5m spacing.
* I only seen these in 2 places - out here, and in the Lenton area of Nottingham to make an LTN in the late 1970s. It looks like onme designer who moved jobs. You can drive over them (I tried in ~1987 for interest), but I would not do it in a car with modern tyres. My Polo Mark 1 could do it with a lightly held wheel as in heavy snow at about 1mph. https://maps.app.goo.gl/PSSJgk7nYMDRkbTA9
Looks like I could get my electric scooter through. It'd be difficult, though. I couldn't manage it with my 'walking wheels'.
I can't measure it on Google, as it is under a tree. It is very narrow, but I'll stroll that way and measure it.
What are walking wheels - do you mean a rollator, or a Dandy Horse type thing where you sit on it and move it with your feet? Google's first responses to me are wheeled half-trolleys for 3-legged dogs !
One issue they get there is cars parked right up against it (the parking across are actually across the public footpath which continues straight on - https://maps.app.goo.gl/p6jR6UmvKMSinks18 ), but that needs a different type of management.
Ok - back from walk. It is 750mm wide between kerbs, over a length of about 5m. Clearly anyone falls on those concrete lorry blocks is in trouble, as may be the Council responsible for it.
Talking of pathways.
A local chap in Chiswick is furious about pavement obstructions - and furious about plans to remove trees that have grown to occupy 70% (in places) of the width of the pavement.
In some places, you practically have to turn sideways to get past the gap left between garden walls/hedges and the trees.
Utterly impassable to wheelchairs, prams, or people with walkers.
The vehemence of his ignoring physics is remarkable.
Genuine interest - has anyone seen an anti-wheelchair barrier like this one *? It is one of the most unusual beasts in the local barrier zoo. It was built in about 1975 to stop rat-runners on a route close to me, out of the kind of concrete blocks used at the time to keep vehicles from overrunning roundabouts. I recall being driven to infant school down here, and cycling the unmade road on my RSW14 before 1976.
It is a public footpath so this is an unlawful obstruction, and the width blocks most mobility aids and some pushchairs. On one side is a popular local pub, and on the is a Coop mini-supermarket, so movement matters and there is no easy alternative.
I can force it to be removed, but it needs consideration. That gate is to 10 acres of allotments, and they take their wheelbarrows through with planks on sideways and do not want bollards for that reason. I'll probably suggest replacing that gate on the left with 3 locking bollards at 1.5m spacing.
* I only seen these in 2 places - out here, and in the Lenton area of Nottingham to make an LTN in the late 1970s. It looks like onme designer who moved jobs. You can drive over them (I tried in ~1987 for interest), but I would not do it in a car with modern tyres. My Polo Mark 1 could do it with a lightly held wheel as in heavy snow at about 1mph. https://maps.app.goo.gl/PSSJgk7nYMDRkbTA9
Looks like I could get my electric scooter through. It'd be difficult, though. I couldn't manage it with my 'walking wheels'.
I can't measure it on Google, as it is under a tree. It is very narrow, but I'll stroll that way and measure it.
What are walking wheels - do you mean a rollator, or a Dandy Horse type thing where you sit on it and move it with your feet? Google's first responses to me are wheeled half-trolleys for 3-legged dogs !
One issue they get there is cars parked right up against it (the parking across are actually across the public footpath which continues straight on - https://maps.app.goo.gl/p6jR6UmvKMSinks18 ), but that needs a different type of management.
A rollator, although the front wheels are close together, making it look almost three wheeled, but of course a lot more stable. 57cm wide
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
The serious revenue raisers are Income Tax, National Insurance and VAT. Fuel Duty and Corporation Tax as also rans.
There is no way round that, and everything else is tinkering at the edges.
Burnham would almost certainly put an increase in the additional rate of income tax back to 50% at in the next Labour manifesto, in the meantime Labour will continue to freeze income tax thresholds and keep the rise in employers NI contributions. I wouldn't be surprised to see corporation tax go up either
Are you one of his advisors? You seem almost certain of his every move.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
My view is that ringfenced taxes are always a silly idea. There is one pot and it needs to be spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Anything that gets in the road of that should be removed.
Agreed. Specifically on increasing spending on defence. If it's something we need to do, politicians must sell the need to the public along with the idea taxes will rise to pay for it. Claiming defence spending must rise but we cut undefined welfare to pay for it, as Badenoch is doing, is deeply unserious and should be despised as with all unserious politicians.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
The serious revenue raisers are Income Tax, National Insurance and VAT. Fuel Duty and Corporation Tax as also rans.
There is no way round that, and everything else is tinkering at the edges.
Burnham would almost certainly put an increase in the additional rate of income tax back to 50% at in the next Labour manifesto, in the meantime Labour will continue to freeze income tax thresholds and keep the rise in employers NI contributions. I wouldn't be surprised to see corporation tax go up either
Are you one of his advisors? You seem almost certain of his every move.
'Mr Burnham told this newspaper last year that there was “definitely a case” for raising the top rate of income tax from 45pc to 50pc.'
A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.
Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.
More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
I suspect most of his clients will be perfectly happy to have him lie repeatedly on their behalf.
I thought telling lies was an intrinsic part of a lawyer’s job. How else would they get not guilty verdicts for their guilty clients, or compensation for chancers?
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.
Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.
More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
I suspect most of his clients will be perfectly happy to have him lie repeatedly on their behalf.
I thought telling lies was an intrinsic part of a lawyer’s job. How else would they get not guilty verdicts for their guilty clients, or compensation for chancers?
Scream. This kind of comment winds me up. It is not for the defence to lie on their client's behalf and lawyers will almost never do so.
The onus of proving guilt is on the Crown. If I or my colleagues do not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt it is the duty of the jury to acquit. Pointing out gaps, inconsistencies or discrepancies in the Crown case is not lying. It is giving the accused the protection that beyond a reasonable doubt means.
When making a speech for the defence the defence will very properly make the point that if the jury believe the accused, or if his evidence even creates a reasonable doubt in their minds their duty is to acquit. That is also not lying. Defence counsel do not say that the accused was telling the truth. They invite the jury to consider that.
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
Do you really think the State Pension should be cut by 50%? Because that's what an acturially fair representation of current pensioners' NICs contributions looks like.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
My view is that ringfenced taxes are always a silly idea. There is one pot and it needs to be spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Anything that gets in the road of that should be removed.
No, we need more contributory welfare not less
We absolutely don't. We need welfare to go to those in greatest need. The idea that a generation that elected politicians who were happy to spend more than receipts and to borrow the difference in any way "paid" for their old age pension or any other benefit is delusional, dishonest and inefficient. It results in nonsense like WFA going to those on their international cruises. It results in those in work paying high taxes on their hard earned to subsidise those with far greater resources and more net free income. We really need to stop this nonsense.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
Do you really think the State Pension should be cut by 50%? Because that's what an acturially fair representation of current pensioners' NICs contributions looks like.
NIC income should certainly only be used for the state pension and JSA and based on contributions. There are already top ups like pension credit which could be used for low income pensioners. There would also be no need for triple lock, any increase in state pension has to be linked to an increase in NIC contributions first
A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.
Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.
More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
I suspect most of his clients will be perfectly happy to have him lie repeatedly on their behalf.
I thought telling lies was an intrinsic part of a lawyer’s job. How else would they get not guilty verdicts for their guilty clients, or compensation for chancers?
Scream. This kind of comment winds me up. It is not for the defence to lie on their client's behalf and lawyers will almost never do so.
The onus of proving guilt is on the Crown. If I or my colleagues do not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt it is the duty of the jury to acquit. Pointing out gaps, inconsistencies or discrepancies in the Crown case is not lying. It is giving the accused the protection that beyond a reasonable doubt means.
When making a speech for the defence the defence will very properly make the point that if the jury believe the accused, or if his evidence even creates a reasonable doubt in their minds their duty is to acquit. That is also not lying. Defence counsel do not say that the accused was telling the truth. They invite the jury to consider that.
Hence why he's going to be immensely popular, especially as a commercial lawyer.
A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.
Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.
More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
I suspect most of his clients will be perfectly happy to have him lie repeatedly on their behalf.
I thought telling lies was an intrinsic part of a lawyer’s job. How else would they get not guilty verdicts for their guilty clients, or compensation for chancers?
Scream. This kind of comment winds me up. It is not for the defence to lie on their client's behalf and lawyers will almost never do so.
The onus of proving guilt is on the Crown. If I or my colleagues do not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt it is the duty of the jury to acquit. Pointing out gaps, inconsistencies or discrepancies in the Crown case is not lying. It is giving the accused the protection that beyond a reasonable doubt means.
When making a speech for the defence the defence will very properly make the point that if the jury believe the accused, or if his evidence even creates a reasonable doubt in their minds their duty is to acquit. That is also not lying. Defence counsel do not say that the accused was telling the truth. They invite the jury to consider that.
That is indeed the ideal. The ideal isn't always the actual, of course.
The Post Office enquiry was enlightening on how far lawyers can fall from the ideal.
The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.
A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.
Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.
One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.
There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Advance (formerly of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
Advance is in retreat, Restore is in ruins, and Reform is about to collapse?
Step forward my New Party - Revive.
We can’t be outflanked on immigration - our policy is to expel absolutely everyone from the country.
This then leads to inevitable success on balanced budgets, zero income tax, no NHS waiting lists etc…
I have come to the conclusion that the drop in immigration is wholly related to having a Labour government. No-one wants to come here to be taxed to the hilt.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
My view is that ringfenced taxes are always a silly idea. There is one pot and it needs to be spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Anything that gets in the road of that should be removed.
No, we need more contributory welfare not less
We absolutely don't. We need welfare to go to those in greatest need. The idea that a generation that elected politicians who were happy to spend more than receipts and to borrow the difference in any way "paid" for their old age pension or any other benefit is delusional, dishonest and inefficient. It results in nonsense like WFA going to those on their international cruises. It results in those in work paying high taxes on their hard earned to subsidise those with far greater resources and more net free income. We really need to stop this nonsense.
Inclined to agree with this but... I think part of the reason for the current strife in our politics is so much government spending goes on private goods like healthcare and welfare, versus public goods like parks and defence. In academic circles benefits-in-kind are frowned upon because direct cash transfers are usually much more efficient for reducing things like child poverty. But there is considerable value in the "all in this together" vibe, and I think we should slowly move back to that kind of public service.
In Scotland only 1/3rd of households are net contribtors in a direct tax v social security sense, and increasingly most of our spending goes on welfare/health. That is not healthy.
A barrister who was kicked out of the profession after falsely claiming he attended the University of Oxford during a job interview has won a High Court appeal against the decision.
Why would anybody lie about going to such a second rate university? Also claims studied medicine in 2 years....should have had warning alarms going off.
More seriously, he has told an absolute load of lies e.g. playing cricket for various high profile clubs. How dishonest do you have to be to actually get kicked out of the profession?
I suspect most of his clients will be perfectly happy to have him lie repeatedly on their behalf.
I thought telling lies was an intrinsic part of a lawyer’s job. How else would they get not guilty verdicts for their guilty clients, or compensation for chancers?
Scream. This kind of comment winds me up. It is not for the defence to lie on their client's behalf and lawyers will almost never do so.
The onus of proving guilt is on the Crown. If I or my colleagues do not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt it is the duty of the jury to acquit. Pointing out gaps, inconsistencies or discrepancies in the Crown case is not lying. It is giving the accused the protection that beyond a reasonable doubt means.
When making a speech for the defence the defence will very properly make the point that if the jury believe the accused, or if his evidence even creates a reasonable doubt in their minds their duty is to acquit. That is also not lying. Defence counsel do not say that the accused was telling the truth. They invite the jury to consider that.
Hence why he's going to be immensely popular, especially as a commercial lawyer.
What I don't understand about this is that he is a KC. That means he has been doing this for a long time. At a high level. In England you won't get KC without having been in and having performed in a significant number of complex cases. This seems to refer back to a much, much earlier part of his career.
I can hear @Cyclefree pointing out that dishonesty like this is a red flag indicative of risky and unacceptable behaviour. I generally agree. But it does look someone has tried quite hard here to stir the pot and make trouble for this man. I wonder what their motivation is.
Burnham is certainly already looking at wealth taxes which don't come in the no income or NI tax rises pledge in the Labour manifesto. He would certainly like to increase the additional rate of income tax back up to 50% but may need a Labour manifesto commitment and general election win for that.
''Andy Burnham is set to launch a financial raid on swathes of middle–class homeowners by dragging them into the punitive 'mansion tax' regime, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.
Plans to lower the threshold for the extra levy to include homes worth £1.5million would mean more than 150,000 families – particularly in the South of England – being hit with four–figure tax hikes.
It could prove a double whammy for homeowners in the region, as Mr Burnham is also considering replacing council tax with a system based on land values likely to leave people living in the South paying up to three times as much as those in the North, where property is generally cheaper.Sources told this newspaper that Mr Burnham is considering lowering the threshold for Chancellor Rachel Reeves's so–called mansion tax – due to hit in April 2028 – from £2 million to £1.5 million.
In parts of London, a relatively modest four–bedroomed terraced house would fall above that threshold.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the plans as another example of Labour's 'politics of envy'.
It comes as the prime minister–in–waiting faces increasing pressure from backbenchers and unions to levy 'wealth taxes' on the middle classes to cover the spiralling cost of welfare and public services.'
Hardly worth doing - raises an estimated extra £170m over the existing planned mansion tax. The Defence review alone needs £4.7bn.
Burnham needs something more radical imo. I'd exempt principal residences (one per couple) and pension pots below a new LTA (say £1.5m), then tax all other wealth above a threshold of £0.5m at 1% pa. Apply the existing Deprivation of Capital and 'couples' rules - the rules that are happily applied to benefit claimants.
Extend NI to all income, maybe by reducing employees NI rate and increasing the basic ICT rate.
Even with principal residence exemption, a wealth tax over £500k would hit a lot of people in London and the South East.
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
With NI - the politically smart thing to do is to merge it into income tax, but have a pensioner *basic* rate that is the same as before.
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
No, NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA in my view
My view is that ringfenced taxes are always a silly idea. There is one pot and it needs to be spent as efficiently and effectively as possible. Anything that gets in the road of that should be removed.
No, we need more contributory welfare not less
We absolutely don't. We need welfare to go to those in greatest need. The idea that a generation that elected politicians who were happy to spend more than receipts and to borrow the difference in any way "paid" for their old age pension or any other benefit is delusional, dishonest and inefficient. It results in nonsense like WFA going to those on their international cruises. It results in those in work paying high taxes on their hard earned to subsidise those with far greater resources and more net free income. We really need to stop this nonsense.
Yes we absolutely do. You are advocating an ever more tax and spend dependency based welfare in which taxpayers dole out evermore with no contribution from the welfare claimants.
Most OECD nations fund their unemployment benefits and state pensions mainly from unemployment insurance and social insurance contributions and we should do the same.
WFA is anyway a welfare payment funded by tax introduced by Brown, it has never had any link to NI
The Sunday Times is really going after Farage today. The £5 million bung and the dodgy houses is now being joined by a whole host of naughtiness, which may not be just against the rules of Parliament, but actually illegal.
A few comments here last week suggested that we had not heard all of the Farage corruption story, and that indeed does seem to be the case. I am not of the view that ReformUK (proprietor N P Farage) can survive his departure. So I think the implosion of the Nationalist Right may well be incoming. Mrs Badenoch is probably fairly gleeful, Sir Edward and the Labour Borg collective probably much less so.
Its going to be a fun week... *Popcorn*
It was me who obliquely referred to more scandals.
One thing I would caution is that the Tories and Mrs Badenoch shouldn't be too gleeful is that some of the donors such as Mr Harbone have previously donated to the Tories.
There's also a very messy libel case being brought by Mr Harbone against Ben Habib of Restore (formally of Reform) which also has the potential to get messy for the Tories, Boris Johnson in particular, and any Tory who was involved in the 2019 campaign.
Isn't Habib with Advance - last I heard they rejected merging with Restore?
Also, formally/formerly.
I thought Advance had shut down?
It so confusing with these 87 different right wing parties, Restore, Reform, Advance, Reclaim, Retreat....there are more parties than Yaxley Lennon's nom de plumes
It's all so weird, Tommy Ten Names thinks Restore are far too racist.
White supremacists with links to banned neo-Nazi groups are helping to fund Restore Britain.
Rupert Lowe’s party could hold the balance of power in Thursday’s Makerfield by-election by splitting the Right-wing vote with Reform UK, clearing the way for Labour’s Andy Burnham to win.
Some of Restore’s supporters are so openly racist that Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-Right activist detained last week under counter-terrorism laws, has questioned whether the party is too extreme.
Yaxley-Lennon, who uses the alias Tommy Robinson, challenged Mr Lowe to ask whether black people would be allowed to stand as parliamentary candidates for the party, or whether their skin colour would rule them out. Robinson suggested they should be able to stand
Robinson has pivoted from hating black people to hating Muslims.
No
He’s always been islamophobic but that’s it.
Back in his days a member of the MIG firm he ran with and got on with plenty of black and other races.
His former best mate, Kevin Carroll, has a mixed race daughter.
The EDL was born as a response to a protest by an Islamic group in Luton against the Army. Mid 2000’s
I think one of the most persistent myths is this idea that someone who is intensely bigoted about one group of people is not going to pivot towards hating on other people if it suits them later on. The Goodness Gracious Me sketch with the Kapoors ("pronounced Cooper") getting a brick through their window with a piece of paper saying "p***s out" wrapped round it - to which they of course respond "quite right" - is the best take down of this sort of attitude.
None of which makes the original proposition true. He started off as a football hooligan, became an anti Muslim campaigner. He didn’t start off hating Black people per se, just fans of other teams who wanted a ruck. I’m sure someone of your extensive expertise is well aware of casual culture.
As in what's a Pringle jumper and a clitoris got in common?
Comments
Please do explain, I am sure we'd all love to hear.
So completely understandable.
Fifa's Code of Ethics, external has restrictions on offering and accepting gifts, with article 21 stating that such gifts can only be offered or accepted if they "have symbolic or trivial value".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/clyrpy3kn9po
I presume there is exception for FIFA committee members?
A lot of people are asking “why hide McConnell’s state? Not like a Dem would win the special election?”
If McConnell vacated before August 3rd cut off it’d be a special election and any one can register as an independent…
Including Massie.
Which would split the Republican vote, giving him or maybe even the Dem the chance at the plurality.
But, if McConnell’s seat is not vacated before the 3rd by legally stepping down or a signed death certificate, then it’s too close to the next election and rules prevent a special election which bars any new registrations at this point.
With McConnell’s wife having travelled to China AFTER he was hospitalized, the next of kin isn’t available to sign off and so the bar for ending life support is extremely high (would require full brain stem death, which is not present in some patients who are never coming back)
So all they have to do is drag their feet until August 3rd, then tell you that he didn’t make it...
https://x.com/adamscochran/status/2073623242162450709
Though perhaps he's just resting.
He has a documentary coming up on channel4 next week which is basically his pitch for a wealth tax.
He reminds me of these people on the net who are very successful day traders or forex traders or crypto and the like but want to sign you up for a ‘course’
If they’re so successful why need your money ?
After watch chat the other day, these are the ads I am getting at the moment.
https://t.me/noel_reports/48889
Ukrainian company Varta unveiled the Ataman active protection system against FPV drones. It uses 2 cameras to detect drones at 50-80 m and 8 shotgun barrels to intercept them at 5-30 m. The system can be mounted on UGVs and tactical vehicles.
No idea how effective this system is but I think it's a sign of things to come. At some point in the war one side or the other will come up with some combination of counter-measures to protect against drones and, at least temporarily, gain a substantial advantage as a result.
Write books and give seminars on trading derivatives.
You have to give a present to the FIFA executive team as well. Obviously.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/2073609728752754806
For a moment I thought FIFA had imposed ethics on themselves. This temporarily shattered space time and I am now dealing with the trauma of seeing 27 dimensions all at once.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
My Creator may be different from yours.
The Goodness Gracious Me sketch with the Kapoors ("pronounced Cooper") getting a brick through their window with a piece of paper saying "p***s out" wrapped round it - to which they of course respond "quite right" - is the best take down of this sort of attitude.
What are walking wheels - do you mean a rollator, or a Dandy Horse type thing where you sit on it and move it with your feet? Google's first responses to me are wheeled half-trolleys for 3-legged dogs !
One issue they get there is cars parked right up against it (the parking across are actually across the public footpath which continues straight on - https://maps.app.goo.gl/p6jR6UmvKMSinks18 ), but that needs a different type of management.
However, I fully retract and hereby recognise that some on PB have no interest whatsoever in @Fishing or anyone else having to give any detail to support his frankly populist war-cry about "cracking down on freeloaders and parasites".
I for one though would like to understand what that might actually mean and how it might be achieved, and there may be other PBers who are also interest.
It is an incredibly well organised lobby and the clever bit is it just gives the impression he’s a guy doing it on his own. But the website shows it’s a well,organised left wing lobby group
Be interested in how it was funded and how he got a platform on Channel 4 to advocate for this specific policy for ninety minutes this week.
This is quite an interesting list on funding of think tanks (Patriotic Millionaires has not been assessed unfortunately).
https://whofundsyou.org/the-ratings/
This is quite an interesting list on funding of think tanks (Patriotic Millionaires has not been assessed unfortunately).
https://whofundsyou.org/the-ratings/
Extending NI to all incomes would hit pensioners, increasing the basic ICT rate would be very unpopular with most voters who pay it
So only pensioners on £50k+ a year pay more.
We can’t be outflanked on immigration - our policy is to expel absolutely everyone from the country.
This then leads to inevitable success on balanced budgets, zero income tax, no NHS waiting lists etc…
There is no way round that, and everything else is tinkering at the edges.
We will always be the best
This must surely take its place in the very top drawer of oratory down the ages.
@Ipsos_in_the_UK
/
@LBC
poll: Labour narrows the gap to 2 🚨
Reform UK 26% (-1)
Labour 24% (+4)
Conservative 18% (-1)
Greens 13% (-1)
Lib Dem 11% (-1)
Others 8% (-)
1,045 GB adults interviewed online 25–30 June 2026. Changes from May.
https://x.com/keiranpedley/status/2073645373818581169?s=20
'Tomorrow, we both meet our maker. In my case, God. In your case, God knows. But I'd be surprised if he's won any design awards.'
Certainly before they started designing the Covenanter tank…
A local chap in Chiswick is furious about pavement obstructions - and furious about plans to remove trees that have grown to occupy 70% (in places) of the width of the pavement.
In some places, you practically have to turn sideways to get past the gap left between garden walls/hedges and the trees.
Utterly impassable to wheelchairs, prams, or people with walkers.
The vehemence of his ignoring physics is remarkable.
You seem almost certain of his every move.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/income/burnham-50pc-income-tax-rate-would-be-a-disaster/
The onus of proving guilt is on the Crown. If I or my colleagues do not prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt it is the duty of the jury to acquit. Pointing out gaps, inconsistencies or discrepancies in the Crown case is not lying. It is giving the accused the protection that beyond a reasonable doubt means.
When making a speech for the defence the defence will very properly make the point that if the jury believe the accused, or if his evidence even creates a reasonable doubt in their minds their duty is to acquit. That is also not lying. Defence counsel do not say that the accused was telling the truth. They invite the jury to consider that.
Really. Labour about to "lurch to the left", and yet the Tories can't benefit from centrists having a nosebleed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTWLDa5DnpQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUlUzZd0Fhc
That is indeed the ideal.
The ideal isn't always the actual, of course.
The Post Office enquiry was enlightening on how far lawyers can fall from the ideal.
In Scotland only 1/3rd of households are net contribtors in a direct tax v social security sense, and increasingly most of our spending goes on welfare/health. That is not healthy.
The interesting thing is to look at the wikiworm average;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
The really interesting thing there is that the Greens have lost about half of the Polanski Peak; down from about 16% in late April to about 12% now.
I can hear @Cyclefree pointing out that dishonesty like this is a red flag indicative of risky and unacceptable behaviour. I generally agree. But it does look someone has tried quite hard here to stir the pot and make trouble for this man. I wonder what their motivation is.
Most OECD nations fund their unemployment benefits and state pensions mainly from unemployment insurance and social insurance contributions and we should do the same.
WFA is anyway a welfare payment funded by tax introduced by Brown, it has never had any link to NI