Whilst the points about Libya not being in the EU & the Commonwealth are correct, most people will be hugely dismayed that we as a country gave refuge to a family fleeing from Libya, and their son carries out such an atrocity.
Are the family to blame?
Well, if my son ended up in prison for even a minor offence or did something highly discreditable, I’d be disappointed in him, and I’d be disappointed in me.
I’d like to have an open & welcoming culture to refugees, but there are also obligations on the refugee family & community.
Most of the Jewish refugees admitted in the 30s went on to become astonishingly successful in many fields. Most of the Ugandan and Kenyan Asians admitted in the 70s have been similarly successful.
It didn’t used to happen that a second generation member from a refugee family became a bomber. They used to become professors or civic leaders or successful businessmen/women.
There does need to be a searching examination of what is going wrong.
I agree. Also, earlier immigrants embraced our society and the second generation were generally more integrated than the first wave. The self imposed isolation of these (muslim) communities needs to be addressed in some way. This has been said many times but nothing happens. The mosques need to be under much greater scrutiny especially when it's been shown that they can hide fund raising for terrorist groups and/or radicalisation.
If the community/mosque alerted the authorities as soon as there was a behaviour change in someone I think a lot of these atrocities could be prevented.
It is entirely legitimate to ask of a candidate for PM whether his previously expressed views and actions and failures to act - especially for someone whose USP is meant to be his consistently held principles - show him to have the right character and judgment for PM, especially with regard to security issues.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
And middle class kids going to University who clearly need to be subsidised by those who don't. And the parents of kids who can afford to feed their own children properly rather than concentrating on those genuinely struggling. And public sector workers with final salary pension schemes worth nearly half their salary who are still allegedly underpaid. I am not entirely sure which way up the policy on benefits ended up but I think that they were considered less worthy.
Labour is a sad parody of itself. A party of self interested middle class virtue signallers who claim to care about the poor but are focussed on as many middle class privileges and advantages as they can glean from the system, whatever the cost.
To take your first sentence , you and I were subsidised by 'those who didn't' attend university back in the 1960s , 70s and 80s. If it is wrong to suggest that the fotunate 35% - 40% should be supported by the 60% - 65% who do not receive the benefit of such an education , it was surely much more obscene for the 5% - 10% elite to be financed by the 90% - 95% in our own years as students.I have previously suggested that those of us who graduated over 25 years ago should be obliged to make a contribution in recognition of the benefits conferred upon us - a reduced Personal Allowance perhaps - but none of the parties shows any sign of running with such a proposal.
You could make a bequest in your will to a university to provide bursaries or you could make regular donations while you are still alive. Many graduates already do this voluntarily.
THE SNP has not declared a significant cash donation from a member of the public in six months, making it increasingly reliant on state funding to operate.
New Electoral Commission figures show the SNP had the lowest donations of any major party in the first quarter of 2017, at £3300, and this came was from one of its own MPs.
At the same time, the SNP was second only to Labour in the amount it received in public funds, banking £298,635 in “Short money” from the House of Commons.
Mr. PB, sounds reminiscent of when Newsnight responded to the Sachs-Brand/Ross nonsense by getting three comedians all of whom had worked with/for the BBC and all of whom thought the Daily Mail was overdoing it.
So, in amongst the typically revolting attempts by the PB Tories to politicise an atrocity, is it a good time to reflect that the Tory government's support of violent islamic extremist jihadis in Libya and Syria probably hasn't helped keep us safe? I wonder who voted against the actions that turned Libya into a failed state and a hotbed and safe space for extremists to spread their poison abroad? Who recently went on bended knee to the biggest sponsors of global islamic fundamentalist violence? Interesting questions.
I do wish posters who had these amazing flights of fancy occasionally posted a betting tip or two
Don't ask him for a forecast – you'll be accused of bullying by ThreeQuidder!!
As I predicted last night, I see the cult members are all over twitter and Facebook claiming the decision of an independent body is all to ensure may scares the public and fixing the GE.
THE SNP has not declared a significant cash donation from a member of the public in six months, making it increasingly reliant on state funding to operate.
New Electoral Commission figures show the SNP had the lowest donations of any major party in the first quarter of 2017, at £3300, and this came was from one of its own MPs.
At the same time, the SNP was second only to Labour in the amount it received in public funds, banking £298,635 in “Short money” from the House of Commons.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
And yet it is the Corbynistas who are crying foul on security being raised to 'severe' - it's almost as if they think their team isn't that strong on security matters and trust on that crucial issue.... why is that I wonder?
Your party cut 20k police when threat level was severe did you support it?
My question was rhetorical. I've no interest in debating you.
It is entirely legitimate to ask of a candidate for PM whether his previously expressed views and actions and failures to act - especially for someone whose USP is meant to be his consistently held principles - show him to have the right character and judgment for PM, especially with regard to security issues.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
And middle class kids going to University who clearly need to be subsidised by those who don't. And the parents of kids who can afford to feed their own children properly rather than concentrating on those genuinely struggling. And public sector workers with final salary pension schemes worth nearly half their salary who are still allegedly underpaid. I am not entirely sure which way up the policy on benefits ended up but I think that they were considered less worthy.
Labour is a sad parody of itself. A party of self interested middle class virtue signallers who claim to care about the poor but are focussed on as many middle class privileges and advantages as they can glean from the system, whatever the cost.
To take your first sentence , you and I were subsidised by 'those who didn't' attend university back in the 1960s , 70s and 80s. If it is wrong to suggest that the fotunate 35% - 40% should be supported by the 60% - 65% who do not receive the benefit of such an education , it was surely much more obscene for the 5% - 10% elite to be financed by the 90% - 95% in our own years as students.I have previously suggested that those of us who graduated over 25 years ago should be obliged to make a contribution in recognition of the benefits conferred upon us - a reduced Personal Allowance perhaps - but none of the parties shows any sign of running with such a proposal.
You could make a bequest in your will to a university to provide bursaries or you could make regular donations while you are still alive. Many graduates already do this voluntarily.
Voluntary action will only ever raise peanuts, as you know full well.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
She was implementing Osborne's austerity which Hammond has slowed
Exactly. We need to start holding family/community to account when it is known that someone has become radicalised.
Internment camps, or bulldozing the families' homes perhaps?
Of course, many of the Jewish refugees in the late 30s were held in internment camps until their bona fides were established.
I remember talking to one such individual (a famous scientist, now dead).
He said it was correct that the UK interned all German emigrees until they could be sure they were anti-Nazis.
Even though he had been interned.
I was astonished at his forgiveness, though he was looking back from the bounty of a subsequent hugely successful career.
But that was (authentically) during war time, and in any case I don't think anyone can look back with immense pride on people being rounded up because they had Stein at the end of their name, or made & sold frothy coffee.
To change the mood a little - no, I've not been posing down the pub - a quick report from the election backwater that is East Ham. The suspension of political activity here hasn't changed much or indeed anything.
We've had the election address from Stephen Timms but last Saturday as Mrs Stodge and I were heading into the tube station, my attention was drawn to a man handing out free newspapers. None of the usual freebie papers publish on a Saturday and as I approached, the man offered me not the paper but the glossy leaflet he was giving out with the paper.
The paper was the "Bangla Post" but the leaflet was for the Friends Party candidate, one Afzal Choudhry. Folded A3 leaflet, double sided with a lot of bright yellow and green.
What then are the policies of the Friends Party ?
*Renationalise Transport System *Ring Fence the Health Service *Abolish Student Fees *Better Housing *No More Sale of Council Properties *More Parks and Play Grounds *A Fair and Just Immigration Policy *More Global Trade
Not a mention of Brexit on the entire leaflet. It'll be interesting to see how Mr Choudhry does.
Sounds expensive down there to me though, especially that "modern living" in the north of Brent.
When you're working an 18 hour day for £50 there's not much time to spend it!
That's below minimum wage for a 16 year old let alone the living wage for 25+
Better than the going rate in Romania/Albania though. Anyway the rent is only £70pw as long as you don't mind sharing a 4 bed house with two dozen other blokes
Whilst the points about Libya not being in the EU & the Commonwealth are correct, most people will be hugely dismayed that we as a country gave refuge to a family fleeing from Libya, and their son carries out such an atrocity.
Are the family to blame?
Well, if my son ended up in prison for even a minor offence or did something highly discreditable, I’d be disappointed in him, and I’d be disappointed in me.
I’d like to have an open & welcoming culture to refugees, but there are also obligations on the refugee family & community.
Most of the Jewish refugees admitted in the 30s went on to become astonishingly successful in many fields. Most of the Ugandan and Kenyan Asians admitted in the 70s have been similarly successful.
It didn’t used to happen that a second generation member from a refugee family became a bomber. They used to become professors or civic leaders or successful businessmen/women.
There does need to be a searching examination of what is going wrong.
I agree. Also, earlier immigrants embraced our society and the second generation were generally more integrated than the first wave. The self imposed isolation of these (muslim) communities needs to be addressed in some way. This has been said many times but nothing happens. The mosques need to be under much greater scrutiny especially when it's been shown that they can hide fund raising for terrorist groups and/or radicalisation.
If the community/mosque alerted the authorities as soon as there was a behaviour change in someone I think a lot of these atrocities could be prevented.
He had come to the attention of our security services, and it is quite possible that this was due to family or mosque. We do not know.
Exactly. We need to start holding family/community to account when it is known that someone has become radicalised.
Internment camps, or bulldozing the families' homes perhaps?
Of course, many of the Jewish refugees in the late 30s were held in internment camps until their bona fides were established.
I remember talking to one such individual (a famous scientist, now dead).
He said it was correct that the UK interned all German emigrees until they could be sure they were anti-Nazis.
Even though he had been interned.
I was astonished at his forgiveness, though he was looking back from the bounty of a subsequent hugely successful career.
But that was (authentically) during war time, and in any case I don't think anyone can look back with immense pride on people being rounded up because they had Stein at the end of their name, or made & sold frothy coffee.
I'm a politically correct liberal type; but seriously, in getting together a group of 'ordinary Mancunians' the BBC has found three Muslims, a black woman, a gay white man, and a second generation Spanish immigrant....
It depends how you define "Manchester". There are parts of the city where that sort of mix is representative. If you did the same selection in Sale you would probably get four white people, one asian and an east european barista...
It is not a very homogeneous city as far as the suburbs go but most people here seem to rub along ok and it is, in general, a very tolerant city.
As I predicted last night, I see the cult members are all over twitter and Facebook claiming the decision of an independent body is all to ensure may scares the public and fixing the GE.
Some people are shall we say just special.... Sadly they have an equal say to everyone else in this election....
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
And yet it is the Corbynistas who are crying foul on security being raised to 'severe' - it's almost as if they think their team isn't that strong on security matters and trust on that crucial issue.... why is that I wonder?
We have armed policemen already – why can't we deploy extra on to the streets instead of having tommies all over the place? It's bad enough seeing coppers with big f-off machine guns every bloody morning at Liverpool St Station, but at least these guys are trained to deal with the public. Not sure I fancy a load of soldiers manning the platforms on my morning commute.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
... and do not forget that London benefits too. It gets workers, electricty, water, food, etc from the rest of the country. It does not live in a vacuum.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
And yet it is the Corbynistas who are crying foul on security being raised to 'severe' - it's almost as if they think their team isn't that strong on security matters and trust on that crucial issue.... why is that I wonder?
We have armed policemen already – why can't we deploy extra on to the streets instead of having tommies all over the place? It's bad enough seeing coppers with big f-off machine guns every bloody morning at Liverpool St Station, but at least these guys are trained to deal with the public. Not sure I fancy a load of soldiers manning the platforms on my morning commute.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..
So you supported 20000 fewer police when threat level was severe?
It's a fair point. I'd rather have coppers on the streets than tommies. Not a fan of armed personnel anywhere – I absolutely hate guns. But I can see why it is necessary. At least policemen are trained to deal with the public.
That enables Strling Tories to pose as the only alternative to the SNP
Labour jump into bed with SNP, but suspend Aberdeen Lab Councillors for cohabiting with Tories. How is Dugdale going to spin that, after all those GE loses in 2015?
Mr. kle4, Lord Flashheart offers firm and fruity opposition.
Mr. Woolie, ancient religion was more a matter of ritual. Morality was left for philosophy. An altogether healthier arrangement. Longish video, but this recent one raised an interesting point I hadn't considered regarding ancient theistic scepticism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9X44PSwc9s
Mr. PB, Yorkshire isn't a province. Also, I can't recall 'slagging off' London.
Mr. kle4 (2), indeed, and that's why carving England up into shitty little region assemblies would be the death knell for it. It'd take a short length of time before demagogues arose in each bit, whining that spending per head was higher in London, or that more of London's money should be kept for the city itself.
As I predicted last night, I see the cult members are all over twitter and Facebook claiming the decision of an independent body is all to ensure may scares the public and fixing the GE.
Never judge the entirety of a group by its worst examples of course, but it's notable with the more, er, excitable examples, to consider what motivates their fear. Either they fear merely a 'rally round the leader' effect, or they believe their side is vulnerable on the issue, or both.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..
So you supported 20000 fewer police when threat level was severe?
It's a fair point. I'd rather have coppers on the streets than tommies. Not a fan of armed personnel anywhere – I absolutely hate guns. But I can see why it is necessary. At least policemen are trained to deal with the public.
No sign of armed police in my village this morning
Faith seems to be used as a blanket for either evil or weakness. What bloody use is it to anybody? It serves no purpose but to divide, excuse, enflame and subjugate.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
... and do not forget that London benefits too. It gets workers, electricty, water, food, etc from the rest of the country. It does not live in a vacuum.
Indeed so, for which we are grateful. My point was that several millions of pixels are expended on here slagging off our nation's capital, despite the fact that we are all in this together. You'd think London was the enemy to read much of the bile on here at times.
Mr. Woolie, it offers some comfort, community, reassurance. I'd argue it's an illusion, and you're right that when 'god' is on your side it can be used to justify anything. And is.
Edited extra bit: should clarify that obviously the former group is orders of magnitude larger than the latter.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..
So you supported 20000 fewer police when threat level was severe?
It's a fair point. I'd rather have coppers on the streets than tommies. Not a fan of armed personnel anywhere – I absolutely hate guns. But I can see why it is necessary. At least policemen are trained to deal with the public.
No sign of armed police in my village this morning
In fairness, I've not gone into town today. Be interesting to see what it's like tomorrow when I'm back in the office.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
... and do not forget that London benefits too. It gets workers, electricty, water, food, etc from the rest of the country. It does not live in a vacuum.
Indeed so, for which we are grateful. My point was that several millions of pixels are expended on here slagging off our nation's capital, despite the fact that we are all in this together. You'd think London was the enemy to read much of the bile on here at times.
Oh come on. You dish out a fair amount of bile yourself.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
And middle class kids going to University who clearly need to be subsidised by those who don't. And the parents of kids who can afford to feed their own children properly rather than concentrating on those genuinely struggling. And public sector workers with final salary pension schemes worth nearly half their salary who are still allegedly underpaid. I am not entirely sure which way up the policy on benefits ended up but I think that they were considered less worthy.
Labour is a sad parody of itself. A party of self interested middle class virtue signallers who claim to care about the poor but are focussed on as many middle class privileges and advantages as they can glean from the system, whatever the cost.
To take your first sentence , you and I were subsidised by 'those who didn't' attend university back in the 1960s , 70s and 80s. If it is wrong to suggest that the fotunate 35% - 40% should be supported by the 60% - 65% who do not receive the benefit of such an education , it was surely much more obscene for the 5% - 10% elite to be financed by the 90% - 95% in our own years as students.I have previously suggested that those of us who graduated over 25 years ago should be obliged to make a contribution in recognition of the benefits conferred upon us - a reduced Personal Allowance perhaps - but none of the parties shows any sign of running with such a proposal.
You could make a bequest in your will to a university to provide bursaries or you could make regular donations while you are still alive. Many graduates already do this voluntarily.
Indeed - but that would simply be a voluntary contribution. I am suggesting something much more obligatory. At the end of the day I really don't believe that those of us who benefiited from free Higher Education in the past can seriously object to the young people of today being treated likewise. Moreover, in our own day a degree had much more value than is the case now - today's undergraduates are being charged heavily for a product greatly undermined by rapid grade inflation and the sheer volume of students emerging from universities.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..
So you supported 20000 fewer police when threat level was severe?
It's a fair point. I'd rather have coppers on the streets than tommies. Not a fan of armed personnel anywhere – I absolutely hate guns. But I can see why it is necessary. At least policemen are trained to deal with the public.
The Prime Minister appears to have launched a low level of Operation Temperer in which the armed forces help out, rather than take over the role of police firearms officers.
Mr. Woolie, it offers some comfort, community, reassurance. I'd argue it's an illusion, and you're right that when 'god' is on your side it can be used to justify anything. And is.
Edited extra bit: should clarify that obviously the former group is orders of magnitude larger than the latter.
Part of me wonders, if we are to have armed police here, there and everywhere, whether they could stake a more assertive role in stopping fare dodgers at tube and rail stations.
Imagine tailgating someone through the barrier and then facing a soldier with a sub-machine gun calmly asking to see your Oyster card.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
I'm sure there is an Aesop fable, or similar, about the other bits of the body conspiring to overthrow the head by cutting it off at the neck, and/or vice versa. It's an argument that can only end in MAD.
Sounds expensive down there to me though, especially that "modern living" in the north of Brent.
When you're working an 18 hour day for £50 there's not much time to spend it!
That's below minimum wage for a 16 year old let alone the living wage for 25+
Better than the going rate in Romania/Albania though. Anyway the rent is only £70pw as long as you don't mind sharing a 4 bed house with two dozen other blokes
Yes but this isn't Romania/Albania.
As someone running a legitimate business who pays all taxes, getting undercut by competitors paying cash in hand below minimum wage and without taxes is not funny or an acceptable way to do over the tax man. It is illegal and we should have zero tolerance of it.
Even paying minimum wage is £7.50 per hour for an adult, throw in employers NI and that is £8.54 an hour. Meaning I need to make a margin of £8.54 per hour just to break even. If we go for a rule of thumb that a business in that style of industry pays one third Cost of Goods Sold, one third Labour and one third margin for overheads then that one adult needs to contribute to marginal sales of £25.61 just to break even. But then there's VAT on top, so even on the minimum living wage an employee needs to generate sales of £30.73 per hour to the employer just to cover their own wages. Of which £6.16 is tax - and this is before business rates, corporation tax etc are even considered.
If its a cash in hand business paying £2.78 per hour then there's no employers NI either since its cash in hand. If again it runs on a rule of thumb third for labour etc then that is £8.34 per hour that the business needs to generate to cover its costs. But its a dodgy cash in hand business so no VAT on top.
TL;DR a legitimate business needs to charge its customers £30.73 per hour worked for its employees, a dodgy cash business £8.34 per hour worked for its employees.
If we tolerate this kind of illegal behaviour it will drive legitimate businesses out of business. It is illegal and should not be allowed. We need to operate on a level playing field.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..
So you supported 20000 fewer police when threat level was severe?
It's a fair point. I'd rather have coppers on the streets than tommies. Not a fan of armed personnel anywhere – I absolutely hate guns. But I can see why it is necessary. At least policemen are trained to deal with the public.
The Prime Minister appears to have launched a low level of Operation Temperer in which the armed forces help out, rather than take over the role of police firearms officers.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
I'm sure there is an Aesop fable, or similar, about the other bits of the body conspiring to overthrow the head by cutting it off at the neck, and/or vice versa. It's an argument that can only end in MAD.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
I'm sure there is an Aesop fable, or similar, about the other bits of the body conspiring to overthrow the head by cutting it off at the neck, and/or vice versa. It's an argument that can only end in MAD.
Sounds expensive down there to me though, especially that "modern living" in the north of Brent.
When you're working an 18 hour day for £50 there's not much time to spend it!
That's below minimum wage for a 16 year old let alone the living wage for 25+
Better than the going rate in Romania/Albania though. Anyway the rent is only £70pw as long as you don't mind sharing a 4 bed house with two dozen other blokes
Yes but this isn't Romania/Albania.
As someone running a legitimate business who pays all taxes, getting undercut by competitors paying cash in hand below minimum wage and without taxes is not funny or an acceptable way to do over the tax man. It is illegal and we should have zero tolerance of it.
Even paying minimum wage is £7.50 per hour for an adult, throw in employers NI and that is £8.54 an hour. Meaning I need to make a margin of £8.54 per hour just to break even. If we go for a rule of thumb that a business in that style of industry pays one third Cost of Goods Sold, one third Labour and one third margin for overheads then that one adult needs to contribute to marginal sales of £25.61 just to break even. But then there's VAT on top, so even on the minimum living wage an employee needs to generate sales of £30.73 per hour to the employer just to cover their own wages. Of which £6.16 is tax - and this is before business rates, corporation tax etc are even considered.
If its a cash in hand business paying £2.78 per hour then there's no employers NI either since its cash in hand. If again it runs on a rule of thumb third for labour etc then that is £8.34 per hour that the business needs to generate to cover its costs. But its a dodgy cash in hand business so no VAT on top.
TL;DR a legitimate business needs to charge its customers £30.73 per hour worked for its employees, a dodgy cash business £8.34 per hour worked for its employees.
If we tolerate this kind of illegal behaviour it will drive legitimate businesses out of business. It is illegal and should not be allowed. We need to operate on a level playing field.
Haha sorry I was only joking in the first place! I am sure there is plenty of it going on though, esp where 24 people live in a house
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
And middle class kids going to University who clearly need to be subsidised by those who don't. And the parents of kids who can afford to feed their own children properly rather than concentrating on those genuinely struggling. And public sector workers with final salary pension schemes worth nearly half their salary who are still allegedly underpaid. I am not entirely sure which way up the policy on benefits ended up but I think that they were considered less worthy.
Labour is a sad parody of itself. A party of self interested middle class virtue signallers who claim to care about the poor but are focussed on as many middle class privileges and advantages as they can glean from the system, whatever the cost.
To take your first sentence , you and I were subsidised by 'those who didn't' attend university back in the 1960s , 70s and 80s. If it is wrong to suggest that the fotunate 35% - 40% should be supported by the 60% - 65% who do not receive the benefit of such an education , it was surely much more obscene for the 5% - 10% elite to be financed by the 90% - 95% in our own years as students.I have previously suggested that those of us who graduated over 25 years ago should be obliged to make a contribution in recognition of the benefits conferred upon us - a reduced Personal Allowance perhaps - but none of the parties shows any sign of running with such a proposal.
You could make a bequest in your will to a university to provide bursaries or you could make regular donations while you are still alive. Many graduates already do this voluntarily.
Voluntary action will only ever raise peanuts, as you know full well.
Indeed.
I'm in favour of the govt backdating £27k tuition fees to 2012 @ current interest rates (6.1%) for all living graduates.
If it's not fair for non-graduates to subsidise graduates, it's monumentally unfair to wallop new graduates and let existing ones off the hook.
The tories have ripped up the generational covenant.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..
So you supported 20000 fewer police when threat level was severe?
It's a fair point. I'd rather have coppers on the streets than tommies. Not a fan of armed personnel anywhere – I absolutely hate guns. But I can see why it is necessary. At least policemen are trained to deal with the public.
No sign of armed police in my village this morning
In fairness, I've not gone into town today. Be interesting to see what it's like tomorrow when I'm back in the office.
Birmingham has a good number of unarmed police; I saw no soldiers or armed officers as I walked through town this morning.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
And middle class kids going to University who clearly need to be subsidised by those who don't. And the parents of kids who can afford to feed their own children properly rather than concentrating on those genuinely struggling. And public sector workers with final salary pension schemes worth nearly half their salary who are still allegedly underpaid. I am not entirely sure which way up the policy on benefits ended up but I think that they were considered less worthy.
Labour is a sad parody of itself. A party of self interested middle class virtue signallers who claim to care about the poor but are focussed on as many middle class privileges and advantages as they can glean from the system, whatever the cost.
To take your first sentence , you and I were subsidised by 'those who didn't' attend university back in the 1960s , 70s and 80s. If it is wrong to suggest that the fotunate 35% - 40% should be supported by the 60% - 65% who do not receive the benefit of such an education , it was surely much more obscene for the 5% - 10% elite to be financed by the 90% - 95% in our own years as students.I have previously suggested that those of us who graduated over 25 years ago should be obliged to make a contribution in recognition of the benefits conferred upon us - a reduced Personal Allowance perhaps - but none of the parties shows any sign of running with such a proposal.
You could make a bequest in your will to a university to provide bursaries or you could make regular donations while you are still alive. Many graduates already do this voluntarily.
Voluntary action will only ever raise peanuts, as you know full well.
No, I don't know this full well. Universities raise a considerable amount from alumni. How much do you estimate a tax on 5-10% of people attending university in the 60s to early 80s wil raise? I would rather make a contribution to an institution and be able to see where it will be used than pay a tax to the Treasury which will disappear into the ether.
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
TL;DR a legitimate business needs to charge its customers £30.73 per hour worked for its employees, a dodgy cash business £8.34 per hour worked for its employees.
If we tolerate this kind of illegal behaviour it will drive legitimate businesses out of business. It is illegal and should not be allowed. We need to operate on a level playing field.
You omitted pension contributions so up that £31 per hour by another bit please....
Part of me wonders, if we are to have armed police here, there and everywhere, whether they could stake a more assertive role in stopping fare dodgers at tube and rail stations.
Imagine tailgating someone through the barrier and then facing a soldier with a sub-machine gun calmly asking to see your Oyster card.
It's a thought...
Having just commuted in to Leeds this morning - the third busiest railway station outside London and the busiest in the whole of the North of England - I didn't see any evidence of increased security: just the usual BTP outside the station (which is because they have a base there).
I don't know how targetted the security is but I was a little surprised that there wasn't any in evidence given the fetish that Islamist terrorists have shown for hitting transport in the past.
I'm frustrated at the ever increasing use of "community" as in Libyan Community or Muslim Community. I thought we were told to accept diversity and different cultures, it seems certain people don't wish to assimilate at all. These communities, wherever and whoever they are will make themselves increasingly isolated and create greater suspicion. I'm afraid that reprisals are inevitable and as usual its the fault of politicians and their ridiculous social experiments and engineering.
Part of me wonders, if we are to have armed police here, there and everywhere, whether they could stake a more assertive role in stopping fare dodgers at tube and rail stations.
Imagine tailgating someone through the barrier and then facing a soldier with a sub-machine gun calmly asking to see your Oyster card.
I'm in favour of the govt backdating £27k tuition fees to 2012 @ current interest rates (6.1%) for all living graduates.
If it's not fair for non-graduates to subsidise graduates, it's monumentally unfair to wallop new graduates and let existing ones off the hook.
The tories have ripped up the generational covenant.
It would be monumentally unfair to charge people for something they were never told they would be charged for either.
I was amongst the first to go to university paying fees after Tony Blair introduced fees. We felt hard done by, my parents generation had got grants and free university, I got loans and fees. But I've paid my loan repayments and fees over time as due. When I look at what has changed since I now realise I was not hardly done by - but I never agreed to take on debts of £27k fees either and they are not due. I've paid my fees.
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
Come off it - we all know what he is getting at. And shame on you for defending this nasty bilious load of tripe from a cretinous creep.
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
SNIP Labour is a sad parody of itself. A party of self interested middle class virtue signallers who claim to care about the poor but are focussed on as many middle class privileges and advantages as they can glean from the system, whatever the cost.
SNIP
You could make a bequest in your will to a university to provide bursaries or you could make regular donations while you are still alive. Many graduates already do this voluntarily.
Voluntary action will only ever raise peanuts, as you know full well.
No, I don't know this full well. Universities raise a considerable amount from alumni. How much do you estimate a tax on 5-10% of people attending university in the 60s to early 80s wil raise? I would rather make a contribution to an institution and be able to see where it will be used than pay a tax to the Treasury which will disappear into the ether.
I don't back such a tax. I am merely pointing out that calls for unilateral charity in the place of general taxation are the refuge of the mathematically inept. They raise sod all, in the round. Yes, they can be used for special causes (my alma mater wrote to me the other day to ask for a donation to the upgrade of one of its old buildings) but in terms of funding admissions? Nah, drop in the ocean.
The tories have ripped up the generational covenant.
What generational covenant? From where I sit it looks like the Baby Boomers are on a Spend! Spend! Spend! mission whilst heaping the bills and consequences for it on to the Millennials.
TL;DR a legitimate business needs to charge its customers £30.73 per hour worked for its employees, a dodgy cash business £8.34 per hour worked for its employees.
If we tolerate this kind of illegal behaviour it will drive legitimate businesses out of business. It is illegal and should not be allowed. We need to operate on a level playing field.
You omitted pension contributions so up that £31 per hour by another bit please....
You're right of course ... there's probably other things I've missed that legitimate businesses pay and dodgy ones don't like pensions too. I doubt the dodgy one has Employers Liability Insurance for instance.
I'm frustrated at the ever increasing use of "community" as in Libyan Community or Muslim Community. I thought we were told to accept diversity and different cultures, it seems certain people don't wish to assimilate at all. These communities, wherever and whoever they are will make themselves increasingly isolated and create greater suspicion. I'm afraid that reprisals are inevitable and as usual its the fault of politicians and their ridiculous social experiments and engineering.
Don't even get me started on Community Leaders.
We need to address the no go areas and unofficial Sharia courts. There's a whole list of unsavoury activities that go on in these 'communities'
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
It was my view that the weekend was probably peak Labour and they would have started to fall back in the home stretch as minds started to focus. If the attack is helpful to May it could also be helpful to the Corbynites as they now have a ready made excuse for defeat.
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
It was my view that the weekend was probably peak Labour and they would have started to fall back in the home stretch as minds started to focus. If the attack is helpful to May it could also be helpful to the Corbynites as they now have a ready made excuse for defeat.
Agreed – no doubt that will be their (attempted) refuge when they get hammered!
When you're working an 18 hour day for £50 there's not much time to spend it!
That's below minimum wage for a 16 year old let alone the living wage for 25+
Better than the going rate in Romania/Albania though. Anyway the rent is only £70pw as long as you don't mind sharing a 4 bed house with two dozen other blokes
Yes but this isn't Romania/Albania.
(snip)
TL;DR a legitimate business needs to charge its customers £30.73 per hour worked for its employees, a dodgy cash business £8.34 per hour worked for its employees.
If we tolerate this kind of illegal behaviour it will drive legitimate businesses out of business. It is illegal and should not be allowed. We need to operate on a level playing field.
Haha sorry I was only joking in the first place! I am sure there is plenty of it going on though, esp where 24 people live in a house
Indeed I'm sure there is - and some people seem to view it as a victimless crime as in "well sure its technically illegal but they're better off and are OK with it". No it's not victimless, it crowds out legitimate businesses and their legitimate employees from the industries they're working in. We should have zero tolerance and employers paying like that should be imprisoned with very severe sentences.
No, I don't know this full well. Universities raise a considerable amount from alumni. How much do you estimate a tax on 5-10% of people attending university in the 60s to early 80s wil raise? I would rather make a contribution to an institution and be able to see where it will be used than pay a tax to the Treasury which will disappear into the ether.
And to make Clown_Car_HQ’s point more emphatic, Princeton University is free to all students whose family income is less than about $100,000 -- no matter where in the world you are.
Harvard’s financial aid programs pay 100 percent of tuition, fees, room, and board for students from families earning less than $65,000 a year. Families with incomes from $65,000 to $150,000 pay between zero and 10 percent of their income.
The (private) US universities are incredibly generous to poor (or even middle-income) families with bright offspring. I imagine we will see Harvard or Princeton abolish fees in our lifetime.
And this has been funded by voluntary giving.
(I’d support Pong’s graduate tax, but it is wrong to dismiss the importance or effectiveness of charitable giving).
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
I find it incomprehensible how those on the left are trying to say that the prime minister is using this for political advantage when people have just lost love ones, children and parents. governments first priority is keeping this country safe and to try and accuse the Prime Minister of playing politics is just sick. Mark Seniors comment yesterday was deplorable. if Labour hadn't picked a leader who is so weak on defending this country and keeping it safe then what is happening at the moment wouldn't be an issue in the general election campaign quite frankly they brought this on themselves by picking such a weak pathetic useless leader who wouldn't even defend this nation or go to war without Russia and Chinas permission at the United Nations. Labour are only reaping what they have sown
I'm in favour of the govt backdating £27k tuition fees to 2012 @ current interest rates (6.1%) for all living graduates.
If it's not fair for non-graduates to subsidise graduates, it's monumentally unfair to wallop new graduates and let existing ones off the hook.
The tories have ripped up the generational covenant.
It would be monumentally unfair to charge people for something they were never told they would be charged for either.
I was amongst the first to go to university paying fees after Tony Blair introduced fees. We felt hard done by, my parents generation had got grants and free university, I got loans and fees. But I've paid my loan repayments and fees over time as due. When I look at what has changed since I now realise I was not hardly done by - but I never agreed to take on debts of £27k fees either and they are not due. I've paid my fees.
We definitely had it easier than the current cohort when it comes to Uni fees/debt though - more like 10 - 20k debt rather than 40 - 50k - and far softer interest rate terms.
Speaking of student loans, when does the debt get updated online - mine is still at 31/03/16...
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
Come off it - we all know what he is getting at. And shame on you for defending this nasty bilious load of tripe from a cretinous creep.
I'm not defending it – merely pointing out he is only saying what many are thinking, and saying. You can look up the threads here, for example, as evidence of that: "Dementia Tax, what Dementia Tax?" (SeanT) etc etc etc. There are loads of people that agree with this guy.
I happen not to. I think it makes sod all difference.
Morning PB. The difficulty in betting now is identifying the fallout of Mondays atrocity. Obviously feelings will be running very high for some time, and the presence of the army and armed police will change perspectives. The country is a very different place now on Wednesday morning than it was on Monday evening. I'm tempted to get out of betting on GE17 entirely, as I really do think that the effects could be very drastic and unreadable, not to mention volatile.
May is a lucky lady. The army out on the streets is going to make voters vote for nurse for fear of something worse. Corbyn and security are an anathema to one another.
I think Army on the street because there aren't enough police (cut by 20000 since 2010) and TM speech where she told the police they were scaremongering and crying wolf in 2015and further cuts were needed wont play well.
Labour offering is more police. Tories??
I know which I will feel safer with
Think again mon ami. Corbyn is not trusted with the security of the nation. his back history on terrorism is there for all to see. that's the real point..
So you supported 20000 fewer police when threat level was severe?
It's a fair point. I'd rather have coppers on the streets than tommies. Not a fan of armed personnel anywhere – I absolutely hate guns. But I can see why it is necessary. At least policemen are trained to deal with the public.
The Prime Minister appears to have launched a low level of Operation Temperer in which the armed forces help out, rather than take over the role of police firearms officers.
Indeed. My point is that it would be better to staff up with armed police rather than bring soldiers into a domain in which they are not trained for.
Tory police cuts is a valid point, but May for the moment has the luck on her side. A poll tother day found 54% awareness of the Abbott/Ferrari meltdown. 54% awareness of someone, not a party leader, making an arithmetical error on a radio program, not a TV debate, is extraordinary and makes the subject very difficult for the party.
I'm frustrated at the ever increasing use of "community" as in Libyan Community or Muslim Community. I thought we were told to accept diversity and different cultures, it seems certain people don't wish to assimilate at all. These communities, wherever and whoever they are will make themselves increasingly isolated and create greater suspicion. I'm afraid that reprisals are inevitable and as usual its the fault of politicians and their ridiculous social experiments and engineering.
Don't even get me started on Community Leaders.
Who is your community leader ? I've no idea who mine is . Why do some sections of our equal community have these unelected figureheads ?
One of the interesting things about this campaign is that Corbyn has been industriously ditching some of his principles. He has abandoned opposition to Trident, rowed back on his oft-repeated pacifism, and distanced himself from people he used to call friends. He has also consistently flip-flopped on Europe.
Anyone would think he was a normal politician or something - one who really does want to win. The Marx he currently most resembles is Groucho.
The funniest change has been his support for wealthy pensioners keeping the Winter Fuel Allowance.
SNIP Labour is a sad parody of itself. A party of self interested middle class virtue signallers who claim to care about the poor but are focussed on as many middle class privileges and advantages as they can glean from the system, whatever the cost.
SNIP
You could make a bequest in your will to a university to provide bursaries or you could make regular donations while you are still alive. Many graduates already do this voluntarily.
Voluntary action will only ever raise peanuts, as you know full well.
No, I don't know this full well. Universities raise a considerable amount from alumni. How much do you estimate a tax on 5-10% of people attending university in the 60s to early 80s wil raise? I would rather make a contribution to an institution and be able to see where it will be used than pay a tax to the Treasury which will disappear into the ether.
I don't back such a tax. I am merely pointing out that calls for unilateral charity in the place of general taxation are the refuge of the mathematically inept. They raise sod all, in the round. Yes, they can be used for special causes (my alma mater wrote to me the other day to ask for a donation to the upgrade of one of its old buildings) but in terms of funding admissions? Nah, drop in the ocean.
I'm not mathematically inept, by the way. I was replying to a suggestion for a retrospective tax on 60s-80s graduates to repay their education not to the future funding of tertiary education.
A lot of people have posted to say that they believe that as a result of the terrorist attack voters will flock to the Tories and May will get her landslide.
If that happens, then the attack will have influenced the result of the election.
Therefore, in order to avoid this, we all have a duty to go out and vote Labour.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
I'm sure there is an Aesop fable, or similar, about the other bits of the body conspiring to overthrow the head by cutting it off at the neck, and/or vice versa. It's an argument that can only end in MAD.
A lot of people have posted to say that they believe that as a result of the terrorist attack voters will flock to the Tories and May will get her landslide.
If that happens, then the attack will have influenced the result of the election.
Therefore, in order to avoid this, we all have a duty to go out and vote Labour.
Not so much flocking to her but abhorred by him I think.
He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government
What do you think he meant by 'who's responsible for it will probably remain unclear for many years to come'?
Indeed, he's not open about it, but reading between the lines its clear what line he's peddling.
Forget it. I'm not reading between any lines, merely pointing out that his central point is a widely held POV. I happen to disagree – as I have said over and over again on here, I think the bomb makes no difference and May will/would have won big anyway.
The more important point is that it gives the Corbynistas a ready-made excuse – that is no doubt part of this guy's thinking. The excuse however is invalid – they were always going to get trounced.
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
I'm sure there is an Aesop fable, or similar, about the other bits of the body conspiring to overthrow the head by cutting it off at the neck, and/or vice versa. It's an argument that can only end in MAD.
I'm in favour of the govt backdating £27k tuition fees to 2012 @ current interest rates (6.1%) for all living graduates.
If it's not fair for non-graduates to subsidise graduates, it's monumentally unfair to wallop new graduates and let existing ones off the hook.
The tories have ripped up the generational covenant.
It would be monumentally unfair to charge people for something they were never told they would be charged for either.
I was amongst the first to go to university paying fees after Tony Blair introduced fees. We felt hard done by, my parents generation had got grants and free university, I got loans and fees. But I've paid my loan repayments and fees over time as due. When I look at what has changed since I now realise I was not hardly done by - but I never agreed to take on debts of £27k fees either and they are not due. I've paid my fees.
The tories have already rewritten the terms of post 2012 student loans to massively increase the amount new graduates pay back. With respect - the deal you got on your student loan (sounds similar to mine) isn't remotely comparable to the plan 2 deal.
The kids have been utterly spit-roasted to pay for the triple lock.
The Election literature drought has been broken after 7 days - leaflet from Lib Dems on the NHS (devolved matter) saying Conservatives have cut funding for NHS in Wales - NO it was Labour who cut NHS budget in Wales
I find it incomprehensible how those on the left are trying to say that the prime minister is using this for political advantage when people have just lost love ones, children and parents. governments first priority is keeping this country safe and to try and accuse the Prime Minister of playing politics is just sick. Mark Seniors comment yesterday was deplorable. if Labour hadn't picked a leader who is so weak on defending this country and keeping it safe then what is happening at the moment wouldn't be an issue in the general election campaign quite frankly they brought this on themselves by picking such a weak pathetic useless leader who wouldn't even defend this nation or go to war without Russia and Chinas permission at the United Nations. Labour are only reaping what they have sown
I do think, however, that you are using it for political advantage with your post. Why not follow the example of all our leaders and leave it for a day or two? It's not as though anything we say here is going to affect the outcome.
Comments
If the community/mosque alerted the authorities as soon as there was a behaviour change in someone I think a lot of these atrocities could be prevented.
http://www.sconews.co.uk/news/53123/conservatives-suspend-councillor-after-sco-report-into-bigoted-comments/
To change the mood a little - no, I've not been posing down the pub - a quick report from the election backwater that is East Ham. The suspension of political activity here hasn't changed much or indeed anything.
We've had the election address from Stephen Timms but last Saturday as Mrs Stodge and I were heading into the tube station, my attention was drawn to a man handing out free newspapers. None of the usual freebie papers publish on a Saturday and as I approached, the man offered me not the paper but the glossy leaflet he was giving out with the paper.
The paper was the "Bangla Post" but the leaflet was for the Friends Party candidate, one Afzal Choudhry. Folded A3 leaflet, double sided with a lot of bright yellow and green.
What then are the policies of the Friends Party ?
*Renationalise Transport System
*Ring Fence the Health Service
*Abolish Student Fees
*Better Housing
*No More Sale of Council Properties
*More Parks and Play Grounds
*A Fair and Just Immigration Policy
*More Global Trade
Not a mention of Brexit on the entire leaflet. It'll be interesting to see how Mr Choudhry does.
Doesn't stop the PB Provincials constantly slagging off London, despite the fact it hands much of the wealth it creates to rest of the country.
It is not a very homogeneous city as far as the suburbs go but most people here seem to rub along ok and it is, in general, a very tolerant city.
I was trying to squeeze in length & girth (Matron!) but couldn't quite manage it.
Mr. Woolie, ancient religion was more a matter of ritual. Morality was left for philosophy. An altogether healthier arrangement. Longish video, but this recent one raised an interesting point I hadn't considered regarding ancient theistic scepticism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9X44PSwc9s
Mr. PB, Yorkshire isn't a province. Also, I can't recall 'slagging off' London.
Mr. kle4 (2), indeed, and that's why carving England up into shitty little region assemblies would be the death knell for it. It'd take a short length of time before demagogues arose in each bit, whining that spending per head was higher in London, or that more of London's money should be kept for the city itself.
Edited extra bit: should clarify that obviously the former group is orders of magnitude larger than the latter.
http://news.sky.com/story/operation-temperer-what-can-the-army-do-to-protect-the-uk-from-terror-10890650?dcmp=snt-sf-twitter
Part of me wonders, if we are to have armed police here, there and everywhere, whether they could stake a more assertive role in stopping fare dodgers at tube and rail stations.
Imagine tailgating someone through the barrier and then facing a soldier with a sub-machine gun calmly asking to see your Oyster card.
It's a thought...
Returning to an age of polytheistic ritual is no likelier today than when Julian the Apostate tried it.
As someone running a legitimate business who pays all taxes, getting undercut by competitors paying cash in hand below minimum wage and without taxes is not funny or an acceptable way to do over the tax man. It is illegal and we should have zero tolerance of it.
Even paying minimum wage is £7.50 per hour for an adult, throw in employers NI and that is £8.54 an hour. Meaning I need to make a margin of £8.54 per hour just to break even. If we go for a rule of thumb that a business in that style of industry pays one third Cost of Goods Sold, one third Labour and one third margin for overheads then that one adult needs to contribute to marginal sales of £25.61 just to break even. But then there's VAT on top, so even on the minimum living wage an employee needs to generate sales of £30.73 per hour to the employer just to cover their own wages. Of which £6.16 is tax - and this is before business rates, corporation tax etc are even considered.
If its a cash in hand business paying £2.78 per hour then there's no employers NI either since its cash in hand. If again it runs on a rule of thumb third for labour etc then that is £8.34 per hour that the business needs to generate to cover its costs. But its a dodgy cash in hand business so no VAT on top.
TL;DR a legitimate business needs to charge its customers £30.73 per hour worked for its employees, a dodgy cash business £8.34 per hour worked for its employees.
If we tolerate this kind of illegal behaviour it will drive legitimate businesses out of business. It is illegal and should not be allowed. We need to operate on a level playing field.
MAD?
Extreme socialism is clearly just another religion with crazies on its fringes
I'm in favour of the govt backdating £27k tuition fees to 2012 @ current interest rates (6.1%) for all living graduates.
If it's not fair for non-graduates to subsidise graduates, it's monumentally unfair to wallop new graduates and let existing ones off the hook.
The tories have ripped up the generational covenant.
He is only saying what many on both sides believe to be the truth. He doesn't imply that it was in any way caused by the government, merely that its timing is electorally helpful. Many Conservatives (you included, perhaps?) will no doubt agree with him and think the same way.
I'm rather boring. I think it makes no difference. I thought May would win big before the bomb. I think May will win big now. Had there not been a bomb, I think May would have won big.
I didn't even think the cock-up over the Dementia Tax would make any difference, in the final analysis. Although watching the PB Tory bedwetting over it was as entertaining as ever!
I don't know how targetted the security is but I was a little surprised that there wasn't any in evidence given the fetish that Islamist terrorists have shown for hitting transport in the past.
Don't even get me started on Community Leaders.
I was amongst the first to go to university paying fees after Tony Blair introduced fees. We felt hard done by, my parents generation had got grants and free university, I got loans and fees. But I've paid my loan repayments and fees over time as due. When I look at what has changed since I now realise I was not hardly done by - but I never agreed to take on debts of £27k fees either and they are not due. I've paid my fees.
Voluntary action can raise very significant sums, but not apparently in the UK.
Harvard’s financial aid programs pay 100 percent of tuition, fees, room, and board for students from families earning less than $65,000 a year. Families with incomes from $65,000 to $150,000 pay between zero and 10 percent of their income.
The (private) US universities are incredibly generous to poor (or even middle-income) families with bright offspring. I imagine we will see Harvard or Princeton abolish fees in our lifetime.
And this has been funded by voluntary giving.
(I’d support Pong’s graduate tax, but it is wrong to dismiss the importance or effectiveness of charitable giving).
Speaking of student loans, when does the debt get updated online - mine is still at 31/03/16...
I'm not defending it – merely pointing out he is only saying what many are thinking, and saying. You can look up the threads here, for example, as evidence of that: "Dementia Tax, what Dementia Tax?" (SeanT) etc etc etc. There are loads of people that agree with this guy.
I happen not to. I think it makes sod all difference.
If that happens, then the attack will have influenced the result of the election.
Therefore, in order to avoid this, we all have a duty to go out and vote Labour.
"We would have won if it hadn't been for the bomb.." coming your way.
The more important point is that it gives the Corbynistas a ready-made excuse – that is no doubt part of this guy's thinking. The excuse however is invalid – they were always going to get trounced.
The kids have been utterly spit-roasted to pay for the triple lock.
I do think, however, that you are using it for political advantage with your post. Why not follow the example of all our leaders and leave it for a day or two? It's not as though anything we say here is going to affect the outcome.
Predictable
Salman Abedi killed 22 and injured 64 when he blew himself up at the Manchester Arena on Monday night - 20 people are in critical care.
Police arrested three men in south Manchester on Wednesday.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40023488
The authorities response to this attack is rather different than previous ones.