History is certainly repeating itself. First the clergy come out against Tory cruelty then the House of Lords have had enough...next we'll hear whispers that the Queen is unhappy....
The outcome last time was a legacy that still survives...... It survived Iraq and even the worst recession of all time. The Tories since the 80's have been the 'nasty party' and the country only vote them in when they're desperate. All Labour have to do is wait......
On the leadership change question, it's a bit of an odd question as regards Cameron, given that he's already said he's going. I would agree with the statement that he should go, given that he has said he will.
"Rami Ktifan made a snap decision to come out. A fellow Syrian had spotted a rainbow flag lying near the 23-year-old university student’s belongings inside a packed refugee center. The curious man, Ktifan recalled, picked it up before casually asking, “What is this?”
“I decided to tell the truth, that it is the flag for gay people like me,” Ktifan said. “I thought, I am in Europe now. In Germany, I should not have to hide anymore.”
What followed over the next several weeks, though, was abuse — both verbal and physical — from other refugees, including an attempt to burn Ktifan’s feet in the middle of the night. The harassment ultimately became so severe that he and two other openly gay asylum seekers were removed from the refugee center with the aid of a local gay activist group and placed in separate accommodations across town."
Wonderful. As Germans I know have said, they are leaving their shithole countries and turning the countries they are entering in to the same kind of shit holes.
History is certainly repeating itself. First the clergy come out against Tory cruelty then the House of Lords have had enough...next we'll hear whispers that the Queen is unhappy....
The outcome last time was a legacy that still survives...... It survived Iraq and even the worst recession of all time. The Tories since the 80's have been the 'nasty party' and the country only vote them in when they're desperate. All Labour have to do is wait......
You don't think this tax credit stuff will be all forgotten about by Friday then Rog?
"Rami Ktifan made a snap decision to come out. A fellow Syrian had spotted a rainbow flag lying near the 23-year-old university student’s belongings inside a packed refugee center. The curious man, Ktifan recalled, picked it up before casually asking, “What is this?”
“I decided to tell the truth, that it is the flag for gay people like me,” Ktifan said. “I thought, I am in Europe now. In Germany, I should not have to hide anymore.”
What followed over the next several weeks, though, was abuse — both verbal and physical — from other refugees, including an attempt to burn Ktifan’s feet in the middle of the night. The harassment ultimately became so severe that he and two other openly gay asylum seekers were removed from the refugee center with the aid of a local gay activist group and placed in separate accommodations across town."
Wonderful. As Germans I know have said, they are leaving their shithole countries and turning the countries they are entering in to the same kind of shit holes.
Well, what a surprise. There have been similar reports of fights between different religious and ethnic groups and that Christians have been attacked.
Only a fool (or Angela Merkel) would suppose that because someone has magically crossed a border they shed their previous views and become "German" or "French" or whatever. This takes time, effort - on both sides - and, above all, a willingness to change on the part of the immigrant/asylum seeker/refugee.
History is certainly repeating itself. First the clergy come out against Tory cruelty then the House of Lords have had enough...next we'll hear whispers that the Queen is unhappy....
The outcome last time was a legacy that still survives...... It survived Iraq and even the worst recession of all time. The Tories since the 80's have been the 'nasty party' and the country only vote them in when they're desperate. All Labour have to do is wait......
And why, Roger, do you suppose the country is "desperate" at the end of non-Tory governments?
"Rami Ktifan made a snap decision to come out. A fellow Syrian had spotted a rainbow flag lying near the 23-year-old university student’s belongings inside a packed refugee center. The curious man, Ktifan recalled, picked it up before casually asking, “What is this?”
“I decided to tell the truth, that it is the flag for gay people like me,” Ktifan said. “I thought, I am in Europe now. In Germany, I should not have to hide anymore.”
What followed over the next several weeks, though, was abuse — both verbal and physical — from other refugees, including an attempt to burn Ktifan’s feet in the middle of the night. The harassment ultimately became so severe that he and two other openly gay asylum seekers were removed from the refugee center with the aid of a local gay activist group and placed in separate accommodations across town."
Wonderful. As Germans I know have said, they are leaving their shithole countries and turning the countries they are entering in to the same kind of shit holes.
Well, what a surprise. There have been similar reports of fights between different religious and ethnic groups and that Christians have been attacked.
Only a fool (or Angela Merkel) would suppose that because someone has magically crossed a border they shed their previous views and become "German" or "French" or whatever. This takes time, effort - on both sides - and, above all, a willingness to change on the part of the immigrant/asylum seeker/refugee.
Well, if they'd only asked Da'esh they'd have been advised only to enter Europe as conquerors.
History is certainly repeating itself. First the clergy come out against Tory cruelty then the House of Lords have had enough...next we'll hear whispers that the Queen is unhappy....
The outcome last time was a legacy that still survives...... It survived Iraq and even the worst recession of all time. The Tories since the 80's have been the 'nasty party' and the country only vote them in when they're desperate. All Labour have to do is wait......
Last nine elections:
5 Tory wins 1 Tory-led coalition 3 wins by a Labour leader most of their membership now regards as a Tory.
(This isn't a UKIP thing; it's a how-the-heck-can-we-trust-pollsters thing)
To be fair to the pollsters it us not easy for them when a group of people not only tell them they are going to vote Labour and don't do so, but then claim that they have done so if subsequently polled.
History is certainly repeating itself. First the clergy come out against Tory cruelty then the House of Lords have had enough...next we'll hear whispers that the Queen is unhappy....
The outcome last time was a legacy that still survives...... It survived Iraq and even the worst recession of all time. The Tories since the 80's have been the 'nasty party' and the country only vote them in when they're desperate. All Labour have to do is wait......
I admire your optimism Roger. Don't you think however that a party led by Jeremy Corbyn, a man linked admittedly in some cases rather tenuously with unabashed support for the IRA, the Islington paedophile scandal, Holocaust denial, threats to rape female opponents and Tom Watson is going to struggle somewhat to portray its opponents as 'the nasty party'?
I know you didn't vote for him, and I am not criticising you personally. But I think you as a party have made the whole country pretty desperate to ensure Labour do not hold office for the foreseeable future.
On topic, does this mean that Farage has put his shambolic 'I-resigned-but-then-the-party-said-I-was-so-brilliant-I-had-to-carry-on-and-I-always-follow-the-will-of-my-party' moment behind him? And if so does anyone have any plausible explanations for why that might be?
History is certainly repeating itself. First the clergy come out against Tory cruelty then the House of Lords have had enough...next we'll hear whispers that the Queen is unhappy....
The outcome last time was a legacy that still survives...... It survived Iraq and even the worst recession of all time. The Tories since the 80's have been the 'nasty party' and the country only vote them in when they're desperate. All Labour have to do is wait......
Last nine elections:
5 Tory wins 1 Tory-led coalition 3 wins by a Labour leader most of their membership now regards as a Tory.
Long wait.
Quite. The politics of class is over & done with. What we are looking at - here and in other countries - is the politics of identity (race, religion). The ability of Parliamentary democracy to contain such politics is unproven at best.
(This isn't a UKIP thing; it's a how-the-heck-can-we-trust-pollsters thing)
To be fair to the pollsters it us not easy for them when a group of people not only tell them they are going to vote Labour and don't do so, but then claim that they have done so if subsequently polled.
And it's not easy for us to believe them when they not only utterly fail to account for such factors (if that isn't just an excuse), but they then also fail to release polls that seem out of sync (when it turns out they were more accurate than the other polls they did release).
No-one doubts polling is difficult. Perhaps it is too difficult for the pollsters that we have.
Corbyn's net personal satisfaction ratings better than Cameron. Amongst own party supporters Corbyn is +48, Farron +47. You would expect Farron with much less publicity should be way ahead.
"I admire your optimism Roger. Don't you think however that a party led by Jeremy Corbyn, a man linked admittedly in some cases rather tenuously with unabashed support for the IRA, the Islington paedophile scandal, Holocaust denial, threats to rape female opponents and Tom Watson is going to struggle somewhat to portray its opponents as 'the nasty party'?"
"......threats to rape female opponents" That's a new one! Are we talking Theresa May or one of the more nubile Tory spokewomen?
Corbyn's net personal satisfaction ratings better than Cameron. Amongst own party supporters Corbyn is +48, Farron +47. You would expect Farron with much less publicity should be way ahead.
Not necessarily, Surbiton. Remember, politicians prefer controversy to anonymity. Farron has not made much of a splash so far, so hardly anyone has heard of him. Like him (a few people do) loathe him (not many probably really loathe him) or think he's round the twist (almost everybody) Corbyn has at least been very visible - Labour have dominated the news cycles for the last month.
"I doubt that the Chancellor realised any of this when he set out to reform tax credits. I suspect he is having one of his omnishambles moments, when the implications of his proposals are evident only after their publication. He kept this a secret during the campaign, and is now paying the price – because it meant very little proper analysis has been done. As Osborne found out during the Omnishambles Budget, the Treasury isn’t very good at working out unintended consequences of its actions.
In tearing tax credits away from people – rather than phasing them out, which is the obvious thing to do – Osborne now risks inflicting grave damage to his party’s reputation. Doing it his way will save just £3.5 billion, not much for a government that spends north of £600 billion. There are many, many other ways to find this saving. Economically, it is just not necessary. Politically, this could be an epic act of self-harm."
@Roger I was thinking of those Labour supporting activists at Manchester that Corbyn said were doing a fine job, and who shouted at female Tories that they would be raped come the revolution.
I do not think any actual member of the Labour party would say that, because in my experience with a few dishonourable exceptions they are decent and sensible people. But the fact is, they said those things and the Labour leader praised them for being there. In the public mind, there is a link. And it's not a pretty one.
History is certainly repeating itself. First the clergy come out against Tory cruelty then the House of Lords have had enough...next we'll hear whispers that the Queen is unhappy....
The outcome last time was a legacy that still survives...... It survived Iraq and even the worst recession of all time. The Tories since the 80's have been the 'nasty party' and the country only vote them in when they're desperate. All Labour have to do is wait......
Last nine elections:
5 Tory wins 1 Tory-led coalition 3 wins by a Labour leader most of their membership now regards as a Tory.
"I doubt that the Chancellor realised any of this when he set out to reform tax credits. I suspect he is having one of his omnishambles moments, when the implications of his proposals are evident only after their publication. He kept this a secret during the campaign, and is now paying the price – because it meant very little proper analysis has been done. As Osborne found out during the Omnishambles Budget, the Treasury isn’t very good at working out unintended consequences of its actions.
In tearing tax credits away from people – rather than phasing them out, which is the obvious thing to do – Osborne now risks inflicting grave damage to his party’s reputation. Doing it his way will save just £3.5 billion, not much for a government that spends north of £600 billion. There are many, many other ways to find this saving. Economically, it is just not necessary. Politically, this could be an epic act of self-harm."
The Tory media cheerleaders, who made Osborne think he could walk on water and had impeccable judgement, really did him no favours atall. It was the hubris that led to this unforced error.
"I doubt that the Chancellor realised any of this when he set out to reform tax credits. I suspect he is having one of his omnishambles moments, when the implications of his proposals are evident only after their publication. He kept this a secret during the campaign, and is now paying the price – because it meant very little proper analysis has been done. As Osborne found out during the Omnishambles Budget, the Treasury isn’t very good at working out unintended consequences of its actions.
In tearing tax credits away from people – rather than phasing them out, which is the obvious thing to do – Osborne now risks inflicting grave damage to his party’s reputation. Doing it his way will save just £3.5 billion, not much for a government that spends north of £600 billion. There are many, many other ways to find this saving. Economically, it is just not necessary. Politically, this could be an epic act of self-harm."
This reminds me of the Brown budget of 2007, which abolished the 10p tax rate to pay for a cut in the basic rate. It was wrong economically, wrong socially, wrong fiscally - wrong in just about every possible way. All it was designed to do was guarantee that Brown would replace Blair as PM, which was going to happen anyway. It was the most epic and unnecessary act of political self-harm since Poland connived at the break-up of Czechoslovakia in 1938-39.
And of course, in the end it proved wrong politically - it caused chaos in the Labour party and wrecked Brown's lingering reputation for competence and fairness.
Really? I would have thought as long as he pays taxes on it in Greece they should be delighted! After all, they could do with a few bob coming in right now.
If he's declaring it in Northern Cyprus or something, that would be different.
Really? I would have thought as long as he pays taxes on it in Greece they should be delighted! After all, they could do with a few bob coming in right now.
If he's declaring it in Northern Cyprus or something, that would be different.
Really? I would have thought as long as he pays taxes on it in Greece they should be delighted! After all, they could do with a few bob coming in right now.
If he's declaring it in Northern Cyprus or something, that would be different.
I've no idea. If it is, that's the only sort of haven it would be. In fact, if he's declaring it in Oman where he runs the real risk of losing it all due to the security situation, he deserves all the opprobrium that can be heaped on him.
"Rami Ktifan made a snap decision to come out. A fellow Syrian had spotted a rainbow flag lying near the 23-year-old university student’s belongings inside a packed refugee center. The curious man, Ktifan recalled, picked it up before casually asking, “What is this?”
“I decided to tell the truth, that it is the flag for gay people like me,” Ktifan said. “I thought, I am in Europe now. In Germany, I should not have to hide anymore.”
What followed over the next several weeks, though, was abuse — both verbal and physical — from other refugees, including an attempt to burn Ktifan’s feet in the middle of the night. The harassment ultimately became so severe that he and two other openly gay asylum seekers were removed from the refugee center with the aid of a local gay activist group and placed in separate accommodations across town."
Wonderful. As Germans I know have said, they are leaving their shithole countries and turning the countries they are entering in to the same kind of shit holes.
Well, what a surprise. There have been similar reports of fights between different religious and ethnic groups and that Christians have been attacked.
Only a fool (or Angela Merkel) would suppose that because someone has magically crossed a border they shed their previous views and become "German" or "French" or whatever. This takes time, effort - on both sides - and, above all, a willingness to change on the part of the immigrant/asylum seeker/refugee.
Different groups of asylum seekers are already fighting each other in the centre. God knows why we think they'll get along with the native population once they're out in the general population.
We have also seen that groups have been complained about the jobs they've been offered, their location being too remote, their housing quality etc. No doubt a large group of them will be fed up with Germany not being the promised land and start looking for somewhere new when they get EU citizenship.
"I admire your optimism Roger. Don't you think however that a party led by Jeremy Corbyn, a man linked admittedly in some cases rather tenuously with unabashed support for the IRA, the Islington paedophile scandal, Holocaust denial, threats to rape female opponents and Tom Watson is going to struggle somewhat to portray its opponents as 'the nasty party'?"
"......threats to rape female opponents" That's a new one! Are we talking Theresa May or one of the more nubile Tory spokewomen?
And what has how nubile they are got anything to do with threats to rape?
@Roger I was thinking of those Labour supporting activists at Manchester that Corbyn said were doing a fine job, and who shouted at female Tories that they would be raped come the revolution.
I do not think any actual member of the Labour party would say that, because in my experience with a few dishonourable exceptions they are decent and sensible people. But the fact is, they said those things and the Labour leader praised them for being there. In the public mind, there is a link. And it's not a pretty one.
I would very much hope that no actual member of the Labour party would say that. But we don't know whether the people saying it are or are not members. All we know is that political opponents of the Tories thought it OK to shout about the threat of rape. It's pretty horrible as it is.
I think there is quite enough in what Corbyn has said and done to criticise him for - and quite severely, without over-egging it in the way NPXMP has described. Personally I couldn't care less about his dress and other trivia, though it bothers others. But a leader of a party should be alert to the fact that supporters or so-called supporters may, by their words/actions, sully the reputation of the party they claim to support. All parties can have this problem. It is not going to help Labour if they are seen - by those who just see a few minutes on the news (and however unfair it may be) - as the party of yobbos shouting abuse at women.
Perceptions matter in politics - as Osborne may be about to find out.
The closest the EU polling has been in years coinciding with Farage recording his highest ever ratings...
Farage is the only politician I trust right now when it comes to immigration and the EU,the other lot just give you bull.
Why would anyone trust him on immigration, given that he's indicated we'd stay in the EEA if we left the EU, which would mean no change on immigration?
"I admire your optimism Roger. Don't you think however that a party led by Jeremy Corbyn, a man linked admittedly in some cases rather tenuously with unabashed support for the IRA, the Islington paedophile scandal, Holocaust denial, threats to rape female opponents and Tom Watson is going to struggle somewhat to portray its opponents as 'the nasty party'?"
"......threats to rape female opponents" That's a new one! Are we talking Theresa May or one of the more nubile Tory spokewomen?
And what has how nubile they are got anything to do with threats to rape?
@Roger I was thinking of those Labour supporting activists at Manchester that Corbyn said were doing a fine job, and who shouted at female Tories that they would be raped come the revolution.
I do not think any actual member of the Labour party would say that, because in my experience with a few dishonourable exceptions they are decent and sensible people. But the fact is, they said those things and the Labour leader praised them for being there. In the public mind, there is a link. And it's not a pretty one.
I would very much hope that no actual member of the Labour party would say that. But we don't know whether the people saying it are or are not members. All we know is that political opponents of the Tories thought it OK to shout about the threat of rape. It's pretty horrible as it is.
I think there is quite enough in what Corbyn has said and done to criticise him for - and quite severely, without over-egging it in the way NPXMP has described. Personally I couldn't care less about his dress and other trivia, though it bothers others. But a leader of a party should be alert to the fact that supporters or so-called supporters may, by their words/actions, sully the reputation of the party they claim to support. All parties can have this problem. It is not going to help Labour if they are seen - by those who just see a few minutes on the news (and however unfair it may be) - as the party of yobbos shouting abuse at women.
Perceptions matter in politics - as Osborne may be about to find out.
It also occurs to me, before heading off to see a man about a garage door, that it is slightly telling that Roger only considered that one to be 'new'. Any of those other things, which he didn't feel able to dispute, would finish any ordinary politician - and Corbyn's got them all!
The closest the EU polling has been in years coinciding with Farage recording his highest ever ratings...
Farage is the only politician I trust right now when it comes to immigration and the EU,the other lot just give you bull.
Why would anyone trust him on immigration, given that he's indicated we'd stay in the EEA if we left the EU, which would mean no change on immigration?
I never understand this line of argument from you. Farage or any of the other "Out" leaders are not going to be the ones in charge of what happens after a Brexit, so I don't understand why you keep saying the onus is on them to give a "vision".
The closest the EU polling has been in years coinciding with Farage recording his highest ever ratings...
Farage is the only politician I trust right now when it comes to immigration and the EU,the other lot just give you bull.
Why would anyone trust him on immigration, given that he's indicated we'd stay in the EEA if we left the EU, which would mean no change on immigration?
What's that you say,Cameron and the Tories promised us that immigration will be down to the tens of thousands - bullsh!t.
In the area I Live,never seen nothing like it the mass immigration of low skilled poor migration,all this under Cameron's governments.
I never understand this line of argument from you. Farage or any of the other "Out" leaders are not going to be the ones in charge of what happens after a Brexit, so I don't understand why you keep saying the onus is on them to give a "vision".
Because they are being dishonest. They say, or imply, that if we were to leave the EU we'd have 'control of our borders'. When challenged about the economic risks, they say it's OK because we could stay in the EEA. One of those might be true, but they can't both be.
It's called 'trying to have your cake and eat it', is it not? I'm not suggesting Farage would be in charge, I'm asking him to be honest about which of the above two contradictory positions he personally is taking.
I never understand this line of argument from you. Farage or any of the other "Out" leaders are not going to be the ones in charge of what happens after a Brexit, so I don't understand why you keep saying the onus is on them to give a "vision".
Because they are being dishonest. They say, or imply, that if we were to leave the EU we'd have 'control of our borders'. When challenged about the economic risks, they say it's OK because we could stay in the EEA. One of those might be true, but they can't both be.
But they're not the ones who will decide what happens in the event of Brexit.
Personally, as a potential "Out" voter, I wouldn't want to stay in the EEA: from what I know of how that would work, it would keep most of what I consider to be the disadvantages of the EU, without any of the advantages.
The closest the EU polling has been in years coinciding with Farage recording his highest ever ratings...
Farage is the only politician I trust right now when it comes to immigration and the EU,the other lot just give you bull.
Why would anyone trust him on immigration, given that he's indicated we'd stay in the EEA if we left the EU, which would mean no change on immigration?
Actually, as you are probably fully aware, he said he imagined we would be in the EEA while we negotiate the new deal were we to leave
But they're not the ones who will decide what happens in the event of Brexit.
Personally, as a potential "Out" voter, I wouldn't want to stay in the EEA: from what I know of how that would work, it would keep most of what I consider to be the disadvantages of the EU, without any of the advantages.
I agree with you, if the alternative is the EEA I'm unquestionably going to vote to stay in. Others might reasonably argue that the benefits of the EEA over the EU (which include things like a slightly lower cost, not having to follow the Common Agricultural Policy, possible improvements for our fishing industry, and more control on some social law and justice areas) outweigh the loss of influence. That's absolutely fair enough as a position; what is not fair enough is to pretend that control over immigration would be one of the advantages.
Torsten Bell at the Resolution Foundation says that raising the national insurance threshold would not be a good way of mitigating the impact of the tax credit cuts.
"Tax credit recipients will start to lose out as soon as their household earns just £3,850. So many affected by tax credit cuts do not pay National Insurance in the first place. For some context it’s worth noting that 43 per cent of households receiving tax credits had earnings of below £10,000. And the winners would include those on higher incomes – including higher and additional rate payers – but exclude everyone over the state pension age because they do not pay NI anyway. The latter fact might be a good thing from fairness perspective, but is not when looking at a straight question of tax credit compensation."
-----------------
I didn't realise 43% earned less than £10k. So, even if they worked, changes to tax thresholds will mean nothing to them.
O/T Oxford's new Parkway station opened yesterday for services towards Bicester, High Wycombe and London Marylebone - haven't been on there yet, though!
Torsten Bell at the Resolution Foundation says that raising the national insurance threshold would not be a good way of mitigating the impact of the tax credit cuts.
"Tax credit recipients will start to lose out as soon as their household earns just £3,850. So many affected by tax credit cuts do not pay National Insurance in the first place. For some context it’s worth noting that 43 per cent of households receiving tax credits had earnings of below £10,000. And the winners would include those on higher incomes – including higher and additional rate payers – but exclude everyone over the state pension age because they do not pay NI anyway. The latter fact might be a good thing from fairness perspective, but is not when looking at a straight question of tax credit compensation."
-----------------
I didn't realise 43% earned less than £10k. So, even if they worked, changes to tax thresholds will mean nothing to them.
Apart even delaying the Tax Credits bill is "unconstitutional". WTF do we have that place ?
I would indeed like Cameron to create a 100 peers and the Queen to assent to that !
World average for all bicameral parliaments = Upper House 44% the size of Lower House.
A gradual solution could be [ a typical British one ] to elect, say , 100 Upper House members every 4 years on PR basis until we reach 300 members and the current voting Lords remain in situ until they die or resign. No further appointments.
Torsten Bell at the Resolution Foundation says that raising the national insurance threshold would not be a good way of mitigating the impact of the tax credit cuts.
"Tax credit recipients will start to lose out as soon as their household earns just £3,850. So many affected by tax credit cuts do not pay National Insurance in the first place. For some context it’s worth noting that 43 per cent of households receiving tax credits had earnings of below £10,000. And the winners would include those on higher incomes – including higher and additional rate payers – but exclude everyone over the state pension age because they do not pay NI anyway. The latter fact might be a good thing from fairness perspective, but is not when looking at a straight question of tax credit compensation."
-----------------
I didn't realise 43% earned less than £10k. So, even if they worked, changes to tax thresholds will mean nothing to them.
But many of those 43% earn zero, so are unaffected.
Apart even delaying the Tax Credits bill is "unconstitutional". WTF do we have that place ?
I would indeed like Cameron to create a 100 peers and the Queen to assent to that !
World average for all bicameral parliaments = Upper House 44% the size of Lower House.
A gradual solution could be [ a typical British one ] to elect, say , 100 Upper House members every 4 years on PR basis until we reach 300 members and the current voting Lords remain in situ until they die or resign. No further appointments.
Again, why elect? Why are you and others obsessed with an elected upper house when it is far from clear that would enable it to do its job better?
Perhaps it is just coincidence but every time I switch on the radio or TV, there is a "single mother" talking about how tax credit cuts are going to make her worse off. Why are they never asked where the father is and is he supporting his children. One woman interviewed had six children
Are there no "single fathers?" This is Harriet Harman's real legacy.
I heard "lefty" Tom Swarbrick on LBC, ask if this is the return of the "nasty party?" This lazy soundbite is so bloody predictable but once again shows how poor the tories are at PR.
Torsten Bell at the Resolution Foundation says that raising the national insurance threshold would not be a good way of mitigating the impact of the tax credit cuts.
"Tax credit recipients will start to lose out as soon as their household earns just £3,850. So many affected by tax credit cuts do not pay National Insurance in the first place. For some context it’s worth noting that 43 per cent of households receiving tax credits had earnings of below £10,000. And the winners would include those on higher incomes – including higher and additional rate payers – but exclude everyone over the state pension age because they do not pay NI anyway. The latter fact might be a good thing from fairness perspective, but is not when looking at a straight question of tax credit compensation."
-----------------
I didn't realise 43% earned less than £10k. So, even if they worked, changes to tax thresholds will mean nothing to them.
Prior to this, Torsten was Director of Policy for the Labour Party.
My attempts to flog a reasonably risk free (99.5+% chance of landing) £50 for a £500 bet on Ratesetter not going bust in the next month are failing miserably. Are people just naturally cautious or does noone have £500 to spare in their account these days ;p.
"Democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the others that have been tried from time to time." - W. Churchill.
We will still have a democracy - the HoC remains the place which decides on laws. There's no reason why the revising chamber needs to be elected, and plenty of reasons why it should not.
My attempts to flog a reasonably risk free (99.5+% chance of landing) £50 for a £500 bet on Ratesetter not going bust in the next month are failing miserably. Are people just naturally cautious or does noone have £500 to spare in their account these days ;p.
They think: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true?
"Democracy is the worst form of government, apart from all the others that have been tried from time to time." - W. Churchill.
We will still have a democracy - the HoC remains the place which decides on laws. There's no reason why the revising chamber needs to be elected, and plenty of reasons why it should not.
"At the bottom of all the tributes paid to democracy is the little man, walking into the little booth, with a little pencil, making a little cross on a little bit of paper—no amount of rhetoric or voluminous discussion can possibly diminish the overwhelming importance of that point." - W. Churchill.
I never understand this line of argument from you. Farage or any of the other "Out" leaders are not going to be the ones in charge of what happens after a Brexit, so I don't understand why you keep saying the onus is on them to give a "vision".
Because they are being dishonest. They say, or imply, that if we were to leave the EU we'd have 'control of our borders'. When challenged about the economic risks, they say it's OK because we could stay in the EEA. One of those might be true, but they can't both be.
It's called 'trying to have your cake and eat it', is it not? I'm not suggesting Farage would be in charge, I'm asking him to be honest about which of the above two contradictory positions he personally is taking.
That does seem like a contradictory position. Perhaps their position is "well first we'd leave to the EEA, and then once we had signed trade deals outside it, we could then feel confident to leave the EEA too and control our borders"?
I haven't heard them be explicit about that though. What I'd really like from the Leave campaign is a clear picture of what Brexit could look like: what sort of trade agreements, how could money be reassigned, what regulations could be removed and which ones should be replaced at the UK level, what a skills-based immigration policy could look like. It would be good to have one consolidated picture so a future is presented with trade-offs accepted. I know that wouldn't be the only future available, but it would be nice to see one coherent idea of what it could look like.
My attempts to flog a reasonably risk free (99.5+% chance of landing) £50 for a £500 bet on Ratesetter not going bust in the next month are failing miserably. Are people just naturally cautious or does noone have £500 to spare in their account these days ;p.
They think: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true?
It's an introductory marketing offer ^^; like the £150 First Direct or TSB pay out when you switch bank accounts. (Or Corals 5-1 £5 Man U corner thingy)
I've got a whole bunch more if people want them, but those really do involve some level of time, effort and risk. So I'm not going to bother anyone here with them.
Mr. Taffys, if the man who thought an engraved slab of limestone would get Ed Miliband elected is the Conservatives' deadliest enemy, they're going to enjoy a prolonged period of dominance before imploding spectacularly [in the absence of an external threat a group will fall to civil war sooner or later].
What is your explanation, then, for only 39% feeling dissatisfied after all that?
Because only 58% of Tories are dissatisfied with him.
Of the other 42%, how many do you think are not dissatisfied because they want him as PM, rather than being not dissatisfied because they are delighted with Labour's crappy choice?
Mr. Taffys, if the man who thought an engraved slab of limestone would get Ed Miliband elected is the Conservatives' deadliest enemy, they're going to enjoy a prolonged period of dominance before imploding spectacularly [in the absence of an external threat a group will fall to civil war sooner or later].
Mr Dancer, would that be rather like a certain Phoenician-descended city-state of yore in North Africa?
There are hardly any households on £20,000 a year or more who get working tax credit, but quite a lot do get child tax credit.
The structural issue is that there are a substantial number of people that are just hitting the 16 hour threshold. Around 55% (573,000) of lone parent tax credit claims are just above the 16 hour threshold. If extra childcare enables them to take extra hours, then they gain considerably.
Just over 1.6m tax credit households have a full time worker in it.
Of the 1.672m households with a main worker, 972,000 have another adult in the home who is not working.
The current situation enables one person in a two adult family to work 16 hours, while the other stays at home, and they will be entitled to get maximum uncapped benefits without paying any tax or NI, and with a preferable taper rate up to £120 compared to someone who was working 15 hours or less.
Apart even delaying the Tax Credits bill is "unconstitutional". WTF do we have that place ?
I would indeed like Cameron to create a 100 peers and the Queen to assent to that !
World average for all bicameral parliaments = Upper House 44% the size of Lower House.
A gradual solution could be [ a typical British one ] to elect, say , 100 Upper House members every 4 years on PR basis until we reach 300 members and the current voting Lords remain in situ until they die or resign. No further appointments.
300 is still far too many. We could get by quite happily with half that.
A rolling method of introduction / removal of existing peers, on the other hand, has a great deal to commend it. Personally, I'd go for elections for one-third of the House every three years (i.e. a nine-year term), but removing existing peers by natural wastage (perhaps with an 18-year limit), would be sensible.
Dr. Prasannan, well... there was the rivalry between the Barcid and Hanno factions (War and Peace Parties), but it wasn't outright civil war.
The Diadochi would be a better example. If Alexander had had a single clear successor (or if Craterus hadn't been sent west shortly before the King's death) then when the Romans headed east, they might've bitten off more than they could chew.
Dr. Prasannan, well... there was the rivalry between the Barcid and Hanno factions (War and Peace Parties), but it wasn't outright civil war.
The Diadochi would be a better example. If Alexander had had a single clear successor (or if Craterus hadn't been sent west shortly before the King's death) then when the Romans headed east, they might've bitten off more than they could chew.
Mr Dancer, I had this exact phrase in mind: "they're going to enjoy a prolonged period of dominance before imploding spectacularly"
My attempts to flog a reasonably risk free (99.5+% chance of landing) £50 for a £500 bet on Ratesetter not going bust in the next month are failing miserably. Are people just naturally cautious or does noone have £500 to spare in their account these days ;p.
They think: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is too good to be true?
It's an introductory marketing offer ^^; like the £150 First Direct or TSB pay out when you switch bank accounts. (Or Corals 5-1 £5 Man U corner thingy)
I've got a whole bunch more if people want them, but those really do involve some level of time, effort and risk. So I'm not going to bother anyone here with them.
It's not surprising UKIP are doing relatively well at the moment. They're the only party that doesn't have a negative attitude towards social conservatism (although there are still plenty of libertarians in the party), and around 30% of the electorate are socially conservative to some extent IIRC.
Comments
History is certainly repeating itself. First the clergy come out against Tory cruelty then the House of Lords have had enough...next we'll hear whispers that the Queen is unhappy....
The outcome last time was a legacy that still survives...... It survived Iraq and even the worst recession of all time. The Tories since the 80's have been the 'nasty party' and the country only vote them in when they're desperate. All Labour have to do is wait......
"Rami Ktifan made a snap decision to come out. A fellow Syrian had spotted a rainbow flag lying near the 23-year-old university student’s belongings inside a packed refugee center. The curious man, Ktifan recalled, picked it up before casually asking, “What is this?”
“I decided to tell the truth, that it is the flag for gay people like me,” Ktifan said. “I thought, I am in Europe now. In Germany, I should not have to hide anymore.”
What followed over the next several weeks, though, was abuse — both verbal and physical — from other refugees, including an attempt to burn Ktifan’s feet in the middle of the night. The harassment ultimately became so severe that he and two other openly gay asylum seekers were removed from the refugee center with the aid of a local gay activist group and placed in separate accommodations across town."
Wonderful. As Germans I know have said, they are leaving their shithole countries and turning the countries they are entering in to the same kind of shit holes.
Shame people don't vote for UKIP when it actually matters isn't it?
He was on the Daily Politics last Thursday, QT on the same night, as well as being on Sunday Politics and This Week in the last month.
Also he has been touring the country doing LEAVE meetings, so his public profile has rarely been higher
Wonderful election strategy.
Only a fool (or Angela Merkel) would suppose that because someone has magically crossed a border they shed their previous views and become "German" or "French" or whatever. This takes time, effort - on both sides - and, above all, a willingness to change on the part of the immigrant/asylum seeker/refugee.
If so, why?
(This isn't a UKIP thing; it's a how-the-heck-can-we-trust-pollsters thing)
So well before those appearances.
5 Tory wins
1 Tory-led coalition
3 wins by a Labour leader most of their membership now regards as a Tory.
Long wait.
Con and Lab tied when all giving a VI are considered.
I know you didn't vote for him, and I am not criticising you personally. But I think you as a party have made the whole country pretty desperate to ensure Labour do not hold office for the foreseeable future.
I didn't think UKIP had lost half their voters since the election.
We're back to a more realistic UKIP figure.
No-one doubts polling is difficult. Perhaps it is too difficult for the pollsters that we have.
I was thinking more of the reasons behind the big rise in Farage's own ratings, which I think were around 30% in May.
Ydoethur, migrant crisis and referendum.
"I admire your optimism Roger. Don't you think however that a party led by Jeremy Corbyn, a man linked admittedly in some cases rather tenuously with unabashed support for the IRA, the Islington paedophile scandal, Holocaust denial, threats to rape female opponents and Tom Watson is going to struggle somewhat to portray its opponents as 'the nasty party'?"
"......threats to rape female opponents" That's a new one! Are we talking Theresa May or one of the more nubile Tory spokewomen?
"I doubt that the Chancellor realised any of this when he set out to reform tax credits. I suspect he is having one of his omnishambles moments, when the implications of his proposals are evident only after their publication. He kept this a secret during the campaign, and is now paying the price – because it meant very little proper analysis has been done. As Osborne found out during the Omnishambles Budget, the Treasury isn’t very good at working out unintended consequences of its actions.
In tearing tax credits away from people – rather than phasing them out, which is the obvious thing to do – Osborne now risks inflicting grave damage to his party’s reputation. Doing it his way will save just £3.5 billion, not much for a government that spends north of £600 billion. There are many, many other ways to find this saving. Economically, it is just not necessary. Politically, this could be an epic act of self-harm."
I was thinking of those Labour supporting activists at Manchester that Corbyn said were doing a fine job, and who shouted at female Tories that they would be raped come the revolution.
I do not think any actual member of the Labour party would say that, because in my experience with a few dishonourable exceptions they are decent and sensible people. But the fact is, they said those things and the Labour leader praised them for being there. In the public mind, there is a link. And it's not a pretty one.
In the last parliament they first went to labour, with Corbyn in charge they'll bypass Labour
And of course, in the end it proved wrong politically - it caused chaos in the Labour party and wrecked Brown's lingering reputation for competence and fairness.
Oh and channeled via Oman... http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/europe/article4596596.ece
It probably got more ratings than any of the politics shows, tbf.
If he's declaring it in Northern Cyprus or something, that would be different.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-34528448
We have also seen that groups have been complained about the jobs they've been offered, their location being too remote, their housing quality etc. No doubt a large group of them will be fed up with Germany not being the promised land and start looking for somewhere new when they get EU citizenship.
I think there is quite enough in what Corbyn has said and done to criticise him for - and quite severely, without over-egging it in the way NPXMP has described. Personally I couldn't care less about his dress and other trivia, though it bothers others. But a leader of a party should be alert to the fact that supporters or so-called supporters may, by their words/actions, sully the reputation of the party they claim to support. All parties can have this problem. It is not going to help Labour if they are seen - by those who just see a few minutes on the news (and however unfair it may be) - as the party of yobbos shouting abuse at women.
Perceptions matter in politics - as Osborne may be about to find out.
Since Jezza's investiture (11 polls) = 7%
Before Jezza's leadership victory, and after the GE (14 polls) = 9%
Given the news flow, with columns of refugees heading for the west, UKIP should really be doing better in the polls and the locals.
Its a conundrum.
Have a good afternoon.
40% of the unweighted sample are public sector workers.
Lab 35 Con 31 - among part time workers and the unemployed- i.e most likely tax credits claimants and minimum wage beneficaries..
Just for fun - Scotland Subsample - SNP 51 Con 30 Lab 12 Grn 3 LD 2
In the area I Live,never seen nothing like it the mass immigration of low skilled poor migration,all this under Cameron's governments.
It's called 'trying to have your cake and eat it', is it not? I'm not suggesting Farage would be in charge, I'm asking him to be honest about which of the above two contradictory positions he personally is taking.
I would indeed like Cameron to create a 100 peers and the Queen to assent to that !
Personally, as a potential "Out" voter, I wouldn't want to stay in the EEA: from what I know of how that would work, it would keep most of what I consider to be the disadvantages of the EU, without any of the advantages.
"Tax credit recipients will start to lose out as soon as their household earns just £3,850. So many affected by tax credit cuts do not pay National Insurance in the first place. For some context it’s worth noting that 43 per cent of households receiving tax credits had earnings of below £10,000. And the winners would include those on higher incomes – including higher and additional rate payers – but exclude everyone over the state pension age because they do not pay NI anyway. The latter fact might be a good thing from fairness perspective, but is not when looking at a straight question of tax credit compensation."
-----------------
I didn't realise 43% earned less than £10k. So, even if they worked, changes to tax thresholds will mean nothing to them.
had six children
Are there no "single fathers?" This is Harriet Harman's real legacy.
I heard "lefty" Tom Swarbrick on LBC, ask if this is the return of the "nasty party?" This lazy soundbite is so bloody predictable but once again shows how poor the tories are at PR.
(Just for rcs ;-))
Pipes done, apparently. Will try to get the post-race piece done before the evening arrives...
- W. Churchill.
I'm loving the way the tories' deadliest enemies are suggesting ways they can avoid becoming unpopular.
I haven't heard them be explicit about that though. What I'd really like from the Leave campaign is a clear picture of what Brexit could look like: what sort of trade agreements, how could money be reassigned, what regulations could be removed and which ones should be replaced at the UK level, what a skills-based immigration policy could look like. It would be good to have one consolidated picture so a future is presented with trade-offs accepted. I know that wouldn't be the only future available, but it would be nice to see one coherent idea of what it could look like.
I've got a whole bunch more if people want them, but those really do involve some level of time, effort and risk. So I'm not going to bother anyone here with them.
Of the other 42%, how many do you think are not dissatisfied because they want him as PM, rather than being not dissatisfied because they are delighted with Labour's crappy choice?
Latest provisional statistics:
Unemployed: 1,289,000
0.0 -£6420: 753,900
6420-9999: 650,600
That's roughly 2.7m of the 4.5m claims.
£10k-20k: 1,132,000
There are hardly any households on £20,000 a year or more who get working tax credit, but quite a lot do get child tax credit.
The structural issue is that there are a substantial number of people that are just hitting the 16 hour threshold. Around 55% (573,000) of lone parent tax credit claims are just above the 16 hour threshold. If extra childcare enables them to take extra hours, then they gain considerably.
Just over 1.6m tax credit households have a full time worker in it.
Of the 1.672m households with a main worker, 972,000 have another adult in the home who is not working.
The current situation enables one person in a two adult family to work 16 hours, while the other stays at home, and they will be entitled to get maximum uncapped benefits without paying any tax or NI, and with a preferable taper rate up to £120 compared to someone who was working 15 hours or less.
A rolling method of introduction / removal of existing peers, on the other hand, has a great deal to commend it. Personally, I'd go for elections for one-third of the House every three years (i.e. a nine-year term), but removing existing peers by natural wastage (perhaps with an 18-year limit), would be sensible.
The Diadochi would be a better example. If Alexander had had a single clear successor (or if Craterus hadn't been sent west shortly before the King's death) then when the Romans headed east, they might've bitten off more than they could chew.