1. Gives him a source of investment to direct. 2. Stops companies pissing about with their employee's pension savings (and - sometimes - directors pissing off, having spent their employee's pension savings).
Look, I can see why you, Mortimer, glw and others might hate this. But expropriation is the wrong word to describe it.
What on Earth makes you think McDonnell would make good investment decisions?
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Expropriation is surely the wrong word to describe nationalisation of pension funds.
An indivudual's pension pot would not be lost to them, simply managed by (and potentially for the benefit of) the state.
Now, I appreciate that there will be genuine concerns about future performance (although privately run pension schemes have often performed very poorly tbf) but that's not the same as expropriation.
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you have £100k pension pot in XYZ plc pension scheme and that scheme were to be nationalised, you still have £100k in your pension pot the next day. The only difference is that it's become more secure since it it backed by the state not subject to the continued viability of XYZ plc.
Having McDonnell look after my pension savings would be like McDonalds looking after the well being of my cow.
Hell would freeze over before I trusted a government run by Corbyn with my cash.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
The reality would be lots of little deals. Noises off today about this to keep planes flying etc.
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
It's an interesting point in terms of financial planning, though. The way I look at it is that a Corbyn/McDonnell government would undoubtedly be confiscatory, but also be fairly short-lived. Therefore for planning purposes, one needs to think about the ranking of targets they would go for, in the hope of escaping the worst effects before reality catches up and they are booted out. I don't think existing pension assets would be early targets, although pension allowances for everyone other than public-sector workers (already treated disproportionately favourably compared with most of the rest of us) certainly would*.
If I were a hard-left Chancellor wanting to raid assets, I'd go for ISAs before pensions. But before that, income tax, inheritance tax, Corporation tax, and property taxes.
* For that matter, Spreadsheet Phil might get there first. As always, if you're a higher-rate taxpayer planning a pension contribution, best get it in before the budget, 29th October this year. Nothing to lose if you can do it!
Good points.
I’m still nowhere near convinced that McMao will ever get anywhere near the treasury. But if things change, I’m going to think long and hard about my financial affairs. I don’t have any assets other than the company I founded and control entirely.
Well he has confirmed the triple lock for us oldies.
But then all his promises are going to cost hundreds of billions and when reality and the markets hit him he will fail millions with his santa claus gifts
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Expropriation is ion.
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you have £100k pension pot in XYZ plc pension scheme and that scheme were to be nationalised, you still have £100k in your pension pot the next day. The only difference is that it's become more secure since it it backed by the state not subject to the continued viability of XYZ plc.
Having McDonnell look after my pension savings would be like McDonalds looking after the well being of my cow.
Hell would freeze over before I trusted a government run by Corbyn with my cash.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Not necessarily, I know a number of wealthy people who are planning to move to the Caymans, Florida, Bermuda, Singapore, Monaco etc for as long as a Corbyn government remained in power if Corbyn became PM after the next general election
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.
I say again, the 'lifeboat' of a new vote may be May's only option in the end.
I cannot see TM agreeing. It would have to a remain successor
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Or, more to the point, NHS and teachers' very generous pension schemes?
Not as generous as they used to be. Back last millennium you could retire once you hit fifty...
True, but still extremely generous compared with everyone else, especially at the top end. The biggest money-purchase pot you can accumulate before punitive taxation kicks in is £1.03m, which sounds a lot but only buys you something like a £31K index-linked pension. Because the tax rules for final-salary schemes are based on a 20-times multiplier, someone highly paid in a final-salary scheme can accumulate entitlement to a £50K index-linked pension before hitting the tax charge. It's a massive advantage for highly-paid public sector employees.
Or indeed for highly-paid private sector workers who have the good fortune still to be in a final-salary scheme.
TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Expropriation is surely the wrong word to describe nationalisation of pension funds.
An indivudual's pension pot would not be lost to them, simply managed by (and potentially for the benefit of) the state.
Now, I appreciate that there will be genuine concerns about future performance (although privately run pension schemes have often performed very poorly tbf) but that's not the same as expropriation.
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you have £100k pension pot in XYZ plc pension scheme and that scheme were to be nationalised, you still have £100k in your pension pot the next day. The only difference is that it's become more secure since it it backed by the state not subject to the continued viability of XYZ plc.
Having McDonnell look after my pension savings would be like McDonalds looking after the well being of my cow.
Hell would freeze over before I trusted a government run by Corbyn with my cash.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Funny to laugh about people’s honest savings for their old age is it? Idiot.
So, if someone has shares in a utility company and it really did look like a Jezza government was imminent it might be an idea to "Sell, Sell, Sell" then?
Yes and anyone who has any significant assets and wealth would be well advised to shove as much of it over to Monaco or the Caymans as they can before the next general election just in case Corbyn does get in
The moment that exit poll shows a Labour Govt., the buttons get pushed and hundreds of billions leaves the country.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the opposition
1. Gives him a source of investment to direct. 2. Stops companies pissing about with their employee's pension savings (and - sometimes - directors pissing off, having spent their employee's pension savings).
Look, I can see why you, Mortimer, glw and others might hate this. But expropriation is the wrong word to describe it.
Well, firstly you have to distinguish between money-purchase and final salary schemes.
If a hard-left Labour government grabs the former, what are they going to promise in return? Some nominal rate of return?
If the latter, then either they are going to renege on the existing scheme promises, or they are going to honour them. If they are going to honour them, unless they can miraculously do better than the trustees in investing (the chances of which are pretty much zero, given the political interference in investment decisions), then the only purpose for grabbing the assets is to spend them now, which is expropriation since it would leave the promises to be fulfilled by some future government with no assets to back them.
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the opposition
Indeed that would be sheer genius if it was planned. However, it seems unlikely.
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Or, more to the point, NHS and teachers' very generous pension schemes?
Not as generous as they used to be. Back last millennium you could retire once you hit fifty...
True, but still extremely generous compared with everyone else, especially at the top end. The biggest money-purchase pot you can accumulate before punitive taxation kicks in is £1.03m, which sounds a lot but only buys you something like a £31K index-linked pension. Because the tax rules for final-salary schemes are based on a 20-times multiplier, someone highly paid in a final-salary scheme can accumulate entitlement to a £50K index-linked pension before hitting the tax charge. It's a massive advantage for highly-paid public sector employees.
Or indeed for highly-paid private sector workers who have the good fortune still to be in a final-salary scheme.
True, but there are very few of those now, thanks partly to the last Labour Chancellor.
It’s ironic that Big G is now touting for a Hard Brexit (having got his knickers in a knot over Salzburg), and HYUFD conceding Remain is preferred to No Deal?
Only 6 months away, and we still don’t know anything.
I know people who have started stockpiling food. Indeed, there was an article in the FT this morning about importers stockpiling goods.
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Expropriation is ion.
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you have £100k pension pot in XYZ plc pension scheme and that scheme were to be nationalised, you still have £100k in your pension pot the next day. The only difference is that it's become more secure since it it backed by the state not subject to the continued viability of XYZ plc.
Having McDonnell look after my pension savings would be like McDonalds looking after the well being of my cow.
Hell would freeze over before I trusted a government run by Corbyn with my cash.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Not necessarily, I know a number of wealthy people who are planning to move to the Caymans, Florida, Bermuda, Singapore, Monaco etc for as long as a Corbyn government remained in power if Corbyn became PM after the next general election
Quite: in my own modest way I’ve been shifting it out of the country too. And will continue to do so as fast as I can as long as Corbyn and his loons are where they are.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Not necessarily, I know a number of wealthy people who are planning to move to the Caymans, Florida, Bermuda, Singapore, Monaco etc for as long as a Corbyn government remained in power if Corbyn became PM after the next general election
@H All bark and no bite with your chums....I live here and I despise this government....and I could live anywhere in the world.....
At the end of the day, you cannot beat going to the boozer for a spot of Sky Sports, a pack of cheese and onion crisps, some banter, and popping into the local takeaway en route back....
Home is home comrade...and that's that. If Corbyn wins I bet your chums pay the taxes, moan but stay put
William is convinced that more denials mean a #peoplesbetrayal / #peoplesvote is more likely....
I can’t wait for us to leave - the explanation of how this will hasten our joining the Euro will be unspoofable.
We've already had that - if we leave it means disaster, which therefore means a hasty rejoining surge and thus Euro membership. Staying in on the same terms might not mean that.
To join thriving Eurozone economies like Greece with 20% unemployment, Spain with 16% unemployment and Italy with 10% unemployment you mean?
It's not my theory
Not reality either, rejoining the EU means losing the rebate, not joining the Eurozone
While it is not my theory and I would hope we would not find ourselves in such a pass, if we did leave and then tried to rejoin I would absolutely support joining the eurozone. If we're out then in again, it should be all the way in.
Absolutely not, if the Eurozone is forced on us even I would consider No Deal, we would lose our economic policy independence for ever, Germany runs the Eurozone in all but name.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the opposition
The reason that cannot be the case is that no one is that competent, able to engineer seeming incompetence over such a lengthy period including relying on an opponent being better than most people expected to deny herself a majority. And that's just one part of it.
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
It's an interesting point in terms of financial planning, though. The way I look at it is that a Corbyn/McDonnell government would undoubtedly be confiscatory, but also be fairly short-lived. Therefore for planning purposes, one needs to think about the ranking of targets they would go for, in the hope of escaping the worst effects before reality catches up and they are booted out. I don't think existing pension assets would be early targets, although pension allowances for everyone other than public-sector workers (already treated disproportionately favourably compared with most of the rest of us) certainly would*.
If I were a hard-left Chancellor wanting to raid assets, I'd go for ISAs before pensions. But before that, income tax, inheritance tax, Corporation tax, and property taxes.
* For that matter, Spreadsheet Phil might get there first. As always, if you're a higher-rate taxpayer planning a pension contribution, best get it in before the budget, 29th October this year. Nothing to lose if you can do it!
Genuine question Richard: how would you see a Chancellor raiding ISAs? What would that look like?
Oh another Remainer trying to overturn the first referendum.
She'll be history at the next election anyway...
Yes, One of a couple of dozen Labour gains.
Got to admit I was wavering about voting Labour at the next election tonight after seeing what Jezza has planned... But then I see Amber Rudd in that clip and it makes me think the number one priority at the next election has got to be to punish Con... By voting Labour.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
The reality would be lots of little deals. Noises off today about this to keep planes flying etc.
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
That is the difference between agreed No Deal, and Hostile No Deal.
To keep the wheels turning No Deal requires many deals.
William is convinced that more denials mean a #peoplesbetrayal / #peoplesvote is more likely....
I can’t wait for us to leave - the explanation of how this will hasten our joining the Euro will be unspoofable.
We've already had that - if we leave it means disaster, which therefore means a hasty rejoining surge and thus Euro membership. Staying in on the same terms might not mean that.
To join thriving Eurozone economies like Greece with 20% unemployment, Spain with 16% unemployment and Italy with 10% unemployment you mean?
It's not my theory
Not reality either, rejoining the EU means losing the rebate, not joining the Eurozone
While it is not my theory and I would hope we would not find ourselves in such a pass, if we did leave and then tried to rejoin I would absolutely support joining the eurozone. If we're out then in again, it should be all the way in.
Absolutely not, if the Eurozone is forced on us even I would consider No Deal, we would lose our economic policy independence for ever, Germany runs the Eurozone in all but name.
Otherwise I would vote Remain over No Deal
This is a hypothesis in the event of already having left and then totally collapsing to the point that rejoin surges ahead in short order - it's already implausible as a scenario, but as a hypothetical if things go so bad that we very quickly went overwhelmingly for rejoin, then of course things we oppose now would be on the table.
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Expropriation is surely the wrong word to describe nationalisation of pension funds.
An indivudual's pension pot would not be lost to them, simply managed by (and potentially for the benefit of) the state.
Now, I appreciate that there will be genuine concerns about future performance (although privately run pension schemes have often performed very poorly tbf) but that's not the same as expropriation.
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you have £100k pension pot in XYZ plc pension scheme and that scheme were to be nationalised, you still have £100k in your pension pot the next day. The only difference is that it's become more secure since it it backed by the state not subject to the continued viability of XYZ plc.
Having McDonnell look after my pension savings would be like McDonalds looking after the well being of my cow.
Hell would freeze over before I trusted a government run by Corbyn with my cash.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Have you heard of other jurisdictions?
How do you suggest WelshOwl liberates his pension pot tax-free to another juristiction?
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Expropriation is ion.
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you h plc.
Having McDonnell look after my pension savings would be like McDonalds looking after the well being of my cow.
Hell would freeze over before I trusted a government run by Corbyn with my cash.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Not necessarily, I know a number of wealthy people who are planning to move to the Caymans, Florida, Bermuda, Singapore, Monaco etc for as long as a Corbyn government remained in power if Corbyn became PM after the next general election
Quite: in my own modest way I’ve been shifting it out of the country too. And will continue to do so as fast as I can as long as Corbyn and his loons are where they are.
It will be a new brain drain in all likelihood, much as we had during the Labour government of the 1970s
TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
The reality would be lots of little deals. Noises off today about this to keep planes flying etc.
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
That is the difference between agreed No Deal, and Hostile No Deal.
To keep the wheels turning No Deal requires many deals.
Good article in today’s Times about this. Plans for side deals are already being made.
Practically, this was always going to happen. Europe is not going to blockade the UK for having the temerity to Leave.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
The reality would be lots of little deals. Noises off today about this to keep planes flying etc.
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
Those deals take time to do, in the meantime it is crash out Brexit and serious economic damage and quite possibly Scotland voting for independence in a second independence referendum shortly after too and serious tensions in Ireland as well
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Expropriation is ion.
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you h plc.
Having McDonnell look after my pension savings would be like McDonalds looking after the well being of my cow.
Hell would freeze over before I trusted a government run by Corbyn with my cash.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Not necessarily, I know a number of wealthy people who are planning to move to the Caymans, Florida, Bermuda, Singapore, Monaco etc for as long as a Corbyn government remained in power if Corbyn became PM after the next general election
Quite: in my own modest way I’ve been shifting it out of the country too. And will continue to do so as fast as I can as long as Corbyn and his loons are where they are.
It will be a new brain drain in all likelihood, much as we had during the Labour government of the 1970s
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
The reality would be lots of little deals. Noises off today about this to keep planes flying etc.
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
That is the difference between agreed No Deal, and Hostile No Deal.
To keep the wheels turning No Deal requires many deals.
Good article in today’s Times about this. Plans for side deals are already being made.
Practically, this was always going to happen. Europe is not going to blockade the UK for having the temerity to Leave.
Yes, I see these being done as part of Blind Brexit.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
Indeed. I cannot see how Parliament agrees to No Deal without a second EU referendum
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Have you seen the last few polls on this. Remain look odds on to lose with Canada and no deal at 50% remain at 25%
Oh another Remainer trying to overturn the first referendum.
She'll be history at the next election anyway...
Until then, she has a vote in the commons that she can use for a people’s vote and has nothing to lose.
Yes but her political evisceration on election night will be a highlight.... Unless of course she also tries overturn the decision of the voters of Hastings & Rye as I guess she'll think they "got it wrong" when they boot her out...
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
snip
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you have £100k pension pot in XYZ plc pension scheme and that scheme were to be nationalised, you still have £100k in your pension pot the next day. The only difference is that it's become more secure since it it backed by the state not subject to the continued viability of XYZ plc.
I would rather mine was nationalised for that exact reason. However, when I tried to move my private pension into my now-compulsory state stakeholder one (i.e. consolidate) it proved utterly impossible in practice despite being perfectly possibly in theory. The problem was not with the private firm, but the halfwits running the government scheme.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Not necessarily, I know a number of wealthy people who are planning to move to the Caymans, Florida, Bermuda, Singapore, Monaco etc for as long as a Corbyn government remained in power if Corbyn became PM after the next general election
@H All bark and no bite with your chums....I live here and I despise this government....and I could live anywhere in the world.....
At the end of the day, you cannot beat going to the boozer for a spot of Sky Sports, a pack of cheese and onion crisps, some banter, and popping into the local takeaway en route back....
Home is home comrade...and that's that. If Corbyn wins I bet your chums pay the taxes, moan but stay put
You spent most of the Cameron administration in Italy I believe?
It’s ironic that Big G is now touting for a Hard Brexit (having got his knickers in a knot over Salzburg), and HYUFD conceding Remain is preferred to No Deal?
Only 6 months away, and we still don’t know anything.
I know people who have started stockpiling food. Indeed, there was an article in the FT this morning about importers stockpiling goods.
Still, blue passports...
Interestingly reading, the French press, the very uncertainty is beginning to generate a few twitchy articles too. I read a fascinating one today ( can’t for the life of me recall where!! Le Monde?) where the essential thrust was the EU have been all technocratic about the Irish border and wanting to get into all the knotty detail about shipping flows via Belfast or Dublin etc, which is reasonable per se, whereas here the debate is more existentially political about sovereignty, which they didn’t see coming with such vehemence, and maybe they’ve made a bit of a boob, because both sides are in a corner as a result.
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Or, more to the point, NHS and teachers' very generous pension schemes?
Not as generous as they used to be. Back last millennium you could retire once you hit fifty...
True, but still extremely generous compared with everyone else, especially at the top end. The biggest money-purchase pot you can accumulate before punitive taxation kicks in is £1.03m, which sounds a lot but only buys you something like a £31K index-linked pension. Because the tax rules for final-salary schemes are based on a 20-times multiplier, someone highly paid in a final-salary scheme can accumulate entitlement to a £50K index-linked pension before hitting the tax charge. It's a massive advantage for highly-paid public sector employees.
Or indeed for highly-paid private sector workers who have the good fortune still to be in a final-salary scheme.
True, but there are very few of those now, thanks partly to the last Labour Chancellor.
I think you mean the last but one Labour Chancellor
George Osborne was the sole cause of the ridiculously low £1m LTA limit though.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the opposition
Indeed that would be sheer genius if it was planned. However, it seems unlikely.
TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade deal
The devil is always in the detail.
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Or, more to the point, NHS and teachers' very generous pension schemes?
Not as generous as they used to be. Back last millennium you could retire once you hit fifty...
True, but still extremely generous compared with everyone else, especially at the top end. The biggest money-purchase pot you can accumulate before punitive taxation kicks in is £1.03m, which sounds a lot but only buys you something like a £31K index-linked pension. Because the tax rules for final-salary schemes are based on a 20-times multiplier, someone highly paid in a final-salary scheme can accumulate entitlement to a £50K index-linked pension before hitting the tax charge. It's a massive advantage for highly-paid public sector employees.
The pension and holidays are both good. I can’t think why most teachers leave after five years...
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Have you seen the last few polls on this. Remain look odds on to lose with Canada and no deal at 50% remain at 25%
Remain beats Brexit, by increasing margins.
Support for “Canada” is meaningless. Replace it with, say, “Turkey”, and see what happens.
So, if someone has shares in a utility company and it really did look like a Jezza government was imminent it might be an idea to "Sell, Sell, Sell" then?
Yes and anyone who has any significant assets and wealth would be well advised to shove as much of it over to Monaco or the Caymans as they can before the next general election just in case Corbyn does get in
The moment that exit poll shows a Labour Govt., the buttons get pushed and hundreds of billions leaves the country.
Marquee Mark's Maxim: money flees taxation.
The airports will be jam packed the week after a Corbyn government is elected
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Or, more to the point, NHS and teachers' very generous pension schemes?
Not as generous as they used to be. Back last millennium you could retire once you hit fifty...
True, but still extremely generous compared with everyone else, especially at the top end. The biggest money-purchase pot you can accumulate before punitive taxation kicks in is £1.03m, which sounds a lot but only buys you something like a £31K index-linked pension. Because the tax rules for final-salary schemes are based on a 20-times multiplier, someone highly paid in a final-salary scheme can accumulate entitlement to a £50K index-linked pension before hitting the tax charge. It's a massive advantage for highly-paid public sector employees.
The pension and holidays are both good. I can’t think why most teachers leave after five years...
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Have you seen the last few polls on this. Remain look odds on to lose with Canada and no deal at 50% remain at 25%
Remain beats Brexit, by increasing margins.
Support for “Canada” is meaningless. Replace it with, say, “Turkey”, and see what happens.
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
If No Deal a second referendum certainly means Remain
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent polls
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
It's an interesting point in terms of financial planning, though. The way I look at it is that a Corbyn/McDonnell government would undoubtedly be confiscatory, but also be fairly short-lived. Therefore for planning purposes, one needs to think about the ranking of targets they would go for, in the hope of escaping the worst effects before reality catches up and they are booted out. I don't think existing pension assets would be early targets, although pension allowances for everyone other than public-sector workers (already treated disproportionately favourably compared with most of the rest of us) certainly would*.
If I were a hard-left Chancellor wanting to raid assets, I'd go for ISAs before pensions. But before that, income tax, inheritance tax, Corporation tax, and property taxes.
* For that matter, Spreadsheet Phil might get there first. As always, if you're a higher-rate taxpayer planning a pension contribution, best get it in before the budget, 29th October this year. Nothing to lose if you can do it!
Genuine question Richard: how would you see a Chancellor raiding ISAs? What would that look like?
That's a very good question. I've given some thought to it.
The first thing I would say is that I think ISAs have been extraordinarily generous. A couple who have been reasonably well-paid over the last 20 years or so can easily have built-up an ISA pot of £1m or so, and are still able to add to it at the rate of £40K a year. OK, that's out of taxed income, so not generous at the contribution stage, but being able to shelter a million quid from tax perfectly legally strikes me as unnecessarily generous. It's great encouraging savings and investment, but the principal beneficiaries of this have been the well-off. A lifetime limit would have been sensible from the taxman's point of view. However, retrofitting a lifetime limit is very awkward, because records won't always have been kept. At a minimum I'd be surprised if there isn't some limit going forward, at least for new contributions.
As for existing assets, the simplest raid would be to declare that any dividend and interest income, and any capital gains, over a certain figure are no longer tax-free. It would be administratively quite difficult though.
Whatever the mechanism, it must be a tempting target: £608bn at the end of the last tax year.
So, if someone has shares in a utility company and it really did look like a Jezza government was imminent it might be an idea to "Sell, Sell, Sell" then?
Yes and anyone who has any significant assets and wealth would be well advised to shove as much of it over to Monaco or the Caymans as they can before the next general election just in case Corbyn does get in
The moment that exit poll shows a Labour Govt., the buttons get pushed and hundreds of billions leaves the country.
Marquee Mark's Maxim: money flees taxation.
The airports will be jam packed the week after a Corbyn government is elected
TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade deal
I am sure they do - until they see what it entails, which is doing what Donald Trump tells us.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
The reality would be lots of little deals. Noises off today about this to keep planes flying etc.
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
Although not so much for the 7,000 or so air hostesses he employs...
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
Indeed. I cannot see how Parliament agrees to No Deal without a second EU referendum
To be fair, it is sexist, demeaning both make and female. It is however quite funny by means of highlighting such sexism and much humour is based on transgression of social norms.
It’s art. And in art surely a difference between sexist (unfair) and realist (fair enough it’s real)
Ever since I saw it I have so loved that photograph. It is soooooo enigmatic. So much of the Human Condition is right there. It works. It’s believable. As the first model walking to camera is unaware what’s unfolding, she has a natural innocence. For me the second girl invokes a sympathy, she is in a game she can’t win, she is the limping miner in Galaxy Quest.
As well as funny, the whole thing together is kinda sexy.
Is it just me, or when they try it with the gender roles reversed, it’s just not the same? Straight away the laughter stops. A cloud passes the sun. Instead of warm, it is cold.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the opposition
The reason that cannot be the case is that no one is that competent, able to engineer seeming incompetence over such a lengthy period including relying on an opponent being better than most people expected to deny herself a majority. And that's just one part of it.
Maybe she engineered losing her majority....with THAT Manifesto.
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Have you seen the last few polls on this. Remain look odds on to lose with Canada and no deal at 50% remain at 25%
Remain beats Brexit, by increasing margins.
Support for “Canada” is meaningless. Replace it with, say, “Turkey”, and see what happens.
You are looking at in - out but on multiple choice remain loses
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
They lose all their money.
And Labour's supporters go wild with enthusiasm until they realise the owners in question were their pension funds.
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief. Really? That sounds like an absolute recipe for long term economic disaster....
I'd nationalise pension schemes....they only seem to be an effective means to make rich people richer as far as I can see...
we save approx 6k a month now we are both back in the UK and working...I'd rather pay my fair share of tax rather than find some way of avoiding it. People with money hate paying taxes....
I suspect you are conflating two things
There’s an argument on restricting or eliminating incentives to save for the wealthy (although others argue saving is intrinsically a good thing)
But are you suggesting expropriation of assets people have saved in the past? And why should that include only pension funds and not, for example, portfolios of buy to let properties?
Or, more to the point, NHS and teachers' very generous pension schemes?
Not as generous as they used to be. Back last millennium you could retire once you hit fifty...
True, but still extremely generous compared with everyone else, especially at the top end. The biggest money-purchase pot you can accumulate before punitive taxation kicks in is £1.03m, which sounds a lot but only buys you something like a £31K index-linked pension. Because the tax rules for final-salary schemes are based on a 20-times multiplier, someone highly paid in a final-salary scheme can accumulate entitlement to a £50K index-linked pension before hitting the tax charge. It's a massive advantage for highly-paid public sector employees.
The pension and holidays are both good. I can’t think why most teachers leave after five years...
The kids....
With my serious hat on, if you stop teaching because of the kids you probably shouldn’t have stated. Workload and overly prescriptive senior management (if the two can be separated) are more likely to be a factor.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent polls
Trust me. Remain wins big. Leave don’t have the magic money tree this time round.
TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade deal
The devil is always in the detail.
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good idea
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
You imply that there's a strong cohort effect favouring Remain (which caused a bit of an argument on here the other night).
What is the sense of effecting a policy – Leave – whose proponents are, by your own implication, dying out? This is not a question about the democratic rights and wrongs of it, merely the sense in doing so with such a strong cohort effect running against it.
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
It's an interesting point in terms of financial planning, though. The way I look at it is that a Corbyn/McDonnell government would undoubtedly be confiscatory, but also be fairly short-lived. Therefore for planning purposes, one needs to think about the ranking of targets they would go for, in the hope of escaping the worst effects before reality catches up and they are booted out. I don't think existing pension assets would be early targets, although pension allowances for everyone other than public-sector workers (already treated disproportionately favourably compared with most of the rest of us) certainly would*.
If I were a hard-left Chancellor wanting to raid assets, I'd go for ISAs before pensions. But before that, income tax, inheritance tax, Corporation tax, and property taxes.
* For that matter, Spreadsheet Phil might get there first. As always, if you're a higher-rate taxpayer planning a pension contribution, best get it in before the budget, 29th October this year. Nothing to lose if you can do it!
Genuine question Richard: how would you see a Chancellor raiding ISAs? What would that look like?
That's a very good question. I've given some thought to it.
The first thing I would say is that I think ISAs have been extraordinarily generous. A couple who have been reasonably well-paid over the last 20 years or so can easily have built-up an ISA pot of £1m or so, and are still able to add to it at the rate of £40K a year. OK, that's out of taxed income, so not generous at the contribution stage, but being able to shelter a million quid from tax perfectly legally strikes me as unnecessarily generous. It's great encouraging savings and investment, but the principal beneficiaries of this have been the well-off. A lifetime limit would have been sensible from the taxman's point of view. However, retrofitting a lifetime limit is very awkward, because records won't always have been kept. At a minimum I'd be surprised if there isn't some limit going forward, at least for new contributions.
As for existing assets, the simplest raid would be to declare that any dividend and interest income, and any capital gains, over a certain figure are no longer tax-free. It would be administratively quite difficult though.
Whatever the mechanism, it must be a tempting target: £608bn at the end of the last tax year.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the opposition
The reason that cannot be the case is that no one is that competent, able to engineer seeming incompetence over such a lengthy period including relying on an opponent being better than most people expected to deny herself a majority. And that's just one part of it.
Maybe she engineered losing her majority....with THAT Manifesto.
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Have you seen the last few polls on this. Remain look odds on to lose with Canada and no deal at 50% remain at 25%
Remain beats Brexit, by increasing margins.
Support for “Canada” is meaningless. Replace it with, say, “Turkey”, and see what happens.
Turkey has an entirely different relationship.
Yes but the point is a good one. If you asked people to choose between a South Korea deal and a Norway deal you’ll get a different answer to Canada or Norway even though they’re essentially the same question.
TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade deal
The devil is always in the detail.
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good idea
It might involve chlorinated chicken and other culinary wonders.
What happens to the share holders of British Gas for example if Jezza decides to take it back into public control?
I expect a Corbyn government would nationalise pension funds too. This has been done in both Poland and Hungary already and could prove a very nice earner.
Good grief?
Expropriation is surely the wrong word to describe nationalisation of pension funds.
An indivudual's pension pot would not be lost to them, simply managed by (and potentially for the benefit of) the state.
Now, I appreciate that there will be genuine concerns about future performance (although privately run pension schemes have often performed very poorly tbf) but that's not the same as expropriation.
Expropriation might be slightly too generous.
It would be theft.
How so?!
Because pensions belong to the individual. If the state ‘takes them over’, then they are stealing.
You do post some rubbish sometimes. If you have £100k pension pot in XYZ plc pension scheme and that scheme were to be nationalised, you still have £100k in your pension pot the next day. The only difference is that it's become more secure since it it backed by the state not subject to the continued viability of XYZ plc.
Having McDonnell look after my pension savings would be like McDonalds looking after the well being of my cow.
Hell would freeze over before I trusted a government run by Corbyn with my cash.
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Have you heard of other jurisdictions?
How do you suggest WelshOwl liberates his pension pot tax-free to another juristiction?
It is actually quite easy, but do your own research. About the only place you can't get it to is the USA. Do it yourself, if you use some of the "specialised" companies, they can charge a high fee, and you could get still clobbered by HMRC.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
The reality would be lots of little deals. Noises off today about this to keep planes flying etc.
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
Although not so much for the 7,000 or so air hostesses he employs...
True, and that wouldn’t be good. But O’Leary get up my nose.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent polls
It is in the event of No Deal which all the polls show would see Remain win by at least 10%.
The only viable prospects for Brexit now are a Canada Deal or taking the Norway option given the EU have rejected Chequers
It’s ironic that Big G is now touting for a Hard Brexit (having got his knickers in a knot over Salzburg), and HYUFD conceding Remain is preferred to No Deal?
Only 6 months away, and we still don’t know anything.
I know people who have started stockpiling food. Indeed, there was an article in the FT this morning about importers stockpiling goods.
Still, blue passports...
Interestingly reading, the French press, the very uncertainty is beginning to generate a few twitchy articles too. I read a fascinating one today ( can’t for the life of me recall where!! Le Monde?) where the essential thrust was the EU have been all technocratic about the Irish border and wanting to get into all the knotty detail about shipping flows via Belfast or Dublin etc, which is reasonable per se, whereas here the debate is more existentially political about sovereignty, which they didn’t see coming with such vehemence, and maybe they’ve made a bit of a boob, because both sides are in a corner as a result.
I have not sought a hard Brexit if you have followed my posts. I have been consistent that TM deal is for me, however I want out and could not countemance us crawling back to the EU.
TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade deal
The devil is always in the detail.
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good idea
We do have other US trade deals to consider. The US dictates terms and the other party agrees or no deal is done.
Just watched Jezza on news at 10, speech highlights.
He really is a terrible speaker. Rant, shouty, almost snarling at times as he bangs out the lines.
A bit like Trump, again.
I feel a whole lot better...
To be fair to Corbyn I doubt that he will ever deliver the sort of nonsensical gibberish that Trump is coming out with right now at his press conference.
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Have you seen the last few polls on this. Remain look odds on to lose with Canada and no deal at 50% remain at 25%
Remain beats Brexit, by increasing margins.
Support for “Canada” is meaningless. Replace it with, say, “Turkey”, and see what happens.
Turkey is in the Customs Union.
Canada does its own trade deals, including the one it has with the EU, has no free movement from the EU, and is free from ECJ jurisdiction and the regulations and directives of the EU
The old standby, never believe anything until it has been officially denied.
Though I don't know if it necessarily applies here, because a second referendum has been consistently denied, and I'm not sure it being said louder automatically counts toward anything.
I will put it down to William's desperation. A second referendum is not going to happen. Majority in HOC against anyway. Last night Carwyn Jones, Wales First Minister, and Stephen Kinnock both publically ruled it out adding to the many labour voices
If No Deal I think a second referendum is highly likely, provided a deal, or at least a withdrawal agreement and transition period in which a FTA deal can be negotiated, I think a second referendum will be avoided
A 2nd ref means remain. And certainly all the momentum seems to be in favour of 2nd vote.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Have you seen the last few polls on this. Remain look odds on to lose with Canada and no deal at 50% remain at 25%
Remain beats Brexit, by increasing margins.
Support for “Canada” is meaningless. Replace it with, say, “Turkey”, and see what happens.
Turkey is in the Customs Union.
Canada does its own trade deals, including the one it has with the EU, has no free movement from the EU, and is free from ECJ jurisdiction and the regulations and directives of the EU
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Agreed. In the event of what looks like no deal, previously unpalatable options may well open up.
Perhaps as William Glenn has told us this was May's plan all along as a former Remainer, exhaust options until No Deal becomes most likely then ultimately agree, supposedly reluctantly, to a second EU referendum which Remain wins comfortably. RIP Brexit, she can say it was the voters who reversed it, not her, then she can go back to being PM with the Brexit burden lifted from her shoulders and Corbyn still leader of the opposition
Indeed that would be sheer genius if it was planned. However, it seems unlikely.
Seems too clever by half even for May
Yes, I think so. However, I do think she is deliberately running down the clock as she knows that the nearer she gets to d-day the easier it will be to extract concessions from the hardliners on both sides.
This is why I ultimately think she will get a deal – but not this side of Christmas.
To be fair, it is sexist, demeaning both make and female. It is however quite funny by means of highlighting such sexism and much humour is based on transgression of social norms.
It’s art. And in art surely a difference between sexist (unfair) and realist (fair enough it’s real)
Ever since I saw it I have so loved that photograph. It is soooooo enigmatic. So much of the Human Condition is right there. It works. It’s believable. As the first model walking to camera is unaware what’s unfolding, she has a natural innocence. For me the second girl invokes a sympathy, she is in a game she can’t win, she is the limping miner in Galaxy Quest.
As well as funny, the whole thing together is kinda sexy.
Is it just me, or when they try it with the gender roles reversed, it’s just not the same? Straight away the laughter stops. A cloud passes the sun. Instead of warm, it is cold.
It’s ironic that Big G is now touting for a Hard Brexit (having got his knickers in a knot over Salzburg), and HYUFD conceding Remain is preferred to No Deal?
Only 6 months away, and we still don’t know anything.
I know people who have started stockpiling food. Indeed, there was an article in the FT this morning about importers stockpiling goods.
Still, blue passports...
Interestingly reading, the French press, the very uncertainty is beginning to generate a few twitchy articles too. I read a fascinating one today ( can’t for the life of me recall where!! Le Monde?) where the essential thrust was the EU have been all technocratic about the Irish border and wanting to get into all the knotty detail about shipping flows via Belfast or Dublin etc, which is reasonable per se, whereas here the debate is more existentially political about sovereignty, which they didn’t see coming with such vehemence, and maybe they’ve made a bit of a boob, because both sides are in a corner as a result.
I have not sought a hard Brexit if you have followed my posts. I have been consistent that TM deal is for me, however I want out and could not countemance us crawling back to the EU.
And there is no need for your words in brackets
Sadly, “crawling back to the EU” is the right thing for the country and our children.
It pains me to see the country humbled, and of course part of me would love us to tell the EU to stick it up their junta, but there it is.
I have to say I agree with Rudd on that, I do not think we can go to No Deal with all the potential damage to the economy and the Union without a second EU referendum providing a mandate for it.
The 52% who voted Leave were certainly not all voting for No Deal Brexit
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
The problem is all around the questions and it is no means certain remain would win, judging by recent polls
It is in the event of No Deal which all the polls show would see Remain win by at least 10%.
The only viable prospects for Brexit now are a Canada Deal or taking the Norway option given the EU have rejected Chequers
Then Norway it is - no problem for me. Canada died tonight with the DUP statement
The British General Election of 2017', by respected professors Philip Cowley and Dennis Kavanagh reveals those involved in writing Labour’s big spend and nationalising plans “believe that it would have been possible for the Conservatives to credibly claim there was £1 trillion of spending commitments.”
One aide told the authors: “It just kept thinking, they’ll tear us apart on this. It was obvious to anyone looked in any detail. But the attack never came.”
And the book reports that "one internal email highlighted some of the problems with Labour's cost estimates, including the lack of detail on capital spending, as well as some individual costings that were implausible or entirely absent."
TM met Trump tonight and they have announced a trade deal is on the agenda.
Interesting another report, and I cannot recall whether it was the Guardian or Sky, states that individual EU nation states are so concerned of a no deal impact that they intend doing bi lateral deals with the UK over the heads of the commission
Reality hits politics
We’ll get the trade deal the US wants to give us.
Recent poll - 66% want a US trade deal
The devil is always in the detail.
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
That is the lefts answer to everything US. You are expressing a hope but neither of us have the deal to consider, open minds are quite a good idea
I am not anti-American, and did live there for 5 years, albeit some time ago.
But what is it that 66% of the population want out of a US Trade deal that they do not have already?
It’s ironic that Big G is now touting for a Hard Brexit (having got his knickers in a knot over Salzburg), and HYUFD conceding Remain is preferred to No Deal?
Only 6 months away, and we still don’t know anything.
I know people who have started stockpiling food. Indeed, there was an article in the FT this morning about importers stockpiling goods.
Still, blue passports...
Interestingly reading, the French press, the very uncertainty is beginning to generate a few twitchy articles too. I read a fascinating one today ( can’t for the life of me recall where!! Le Monde?) where the essential thrust was the EU have been all technocratic about the Irish border and wanting to get into all the knotty detail about shipping flows via Belfast or Dublin etc, which is reasonable per se, whereas here the debate is more existentially political about sovereignty, which they didn’t see coming with such vehemence, and maybe they’ve made a bit of a boob, because both sides are in a corner as a result.
I have not sought a hard Brexit if you have followed my posts. I have been consistent that TM deal is for me, however I want out and could not countemance us crawling back to the EU.
And there is no need for your words in brackets
I’d agree, deal is best. I’d prefer Canada but I’m happy to be flexible as long as we are out. However, our position as a nation is being undermined by the like of Rudd because it’s giving the EU hope that we would stay. If that happens I hate to think of what follows for years and years to come.
Another thought occurred to me today, which is probably rubbish, but is it nailed on the SNP votes against no deal rather than find excuses to abstain?
If they reallly think no deal equals chaos in the U.K., we’ll surely that’s good for them? Furthermore do they want precedents set of two stage referendums where they win by say 52-48 ( to pick a number!) and it’s overturned by three years of moaning?
Comments
What on Earth makes you think McDonnell would make good investment decisions?
It’s just not credible that Spain is going to want to cut itself off from U.K. flights full of tourists, or Ireland is going to say no overflights of UK planes(look at the map Leo - gives you a bit of a reciprocal issue- though Ryan Air going bust would add to the gaiety of the nation if only for the look on O’Leary’s face).
But then all his promises are going to cost hundreds of billions and when reality and the markets hit him he will fail millions with his santa claus gifts
Oh another Remainer trying to overturn the first referendum.
She'll be history at the next election anyway...
He really is a terrible speaker. Rant, shouty, almost snarling at times as he bangs out the lines.
No idea why the faithful were roaring him on as if one of the RSC's finest.
Marquee Mark's Maxim: money flees taxation.
If a hard-left Labour government grabs the former, what are they going to promise in return? Some nominal rate of return?
If the latter, then either they are going to renege on the existing scheme promises, or they are going to honour them. If they are going to honour them, unless they can miraculously do better than the trustees in investing (the chances of which are pretty much zero, given the political interference in investment decisions), then the only purpose for grabbing the assets is to spend them now, which is expropriation since it would leave the promises to be fulfilled by some future government with no assets to back them.
Why is anyone 100% sure we will Brexit? Despite the out vote have you not had a part of you thinking it’s not going to happen?
For the part of politics that is generational, people getting the vote who have only ever known living in the EU, think of themselves as European, if it don’t happen this time, it never will. For that reason leavers must stand firm, no second doubts if crash out really what I voted for, no thinking winning a second ref seals the deal once and for all, and certainly no thinking 2nd vote is just rerun of first with same result.
Only 6 months away, and we still don’t know anything.
I know people who have started stockpiling food. Indeed, there was an article in the FT this morning about importers stockpiling goods.
Still, blue passports...
Haha - if the electorate voted them in you'll have no choice. It's called Democracy!
Not necessarily, I know a number of wealthy people who are planning to move to the Caymans, Florida, Bermuda, Singapore, Monaco etc for as long as a Corbyn government remained in power if Corbyn became PM after the next general election
@H
All bark and no bite with your chums....I live here and I despise this government....and I could live anywhere in the world.....
At the end of the day, you cannot beat going to the boozer for a spot of Sky Sports, a pack of cheese and onion crisps, some banter, and popping into the local takeaway en route back....
Home is home comrade...and that's that. If Corbyn wins I bet your chums pay the taxes, moan but stay put
Otherwise I would vote Remain over No Deal
Got to admit I was wavering about voting Labour at the next election tonight after seeing what Jezza has planned... But then I see Amber Rudd in that clip and it makes me think the number one priority at the next election has got to be to punish Con... By voting Labour.
To keep the wheels turning No Deal requires many deals.
Yes, Rudd makes a very fair point here. She's not saying anything particularly controversial, I really don't grasp @GIN1138 's objection.
Practically, this was always going to happen. Europe is not going to blockade the UK for having the temerity to Leave.
It’s a toss up between Corbyn and Brexit frankly.
“Hilariously”, we may get both. Brexit probably begets Corbyn.
@H
All bark and no bite with your chums....I live here and I despise this government....and I could live anywhere in the world.....
At the end of the day, you cannot beat going to the boozer for a spot of Sky Sports, a pack of cheese and onion crisps, some banter, and popping into the local takeaway en route back....
Home is home comrade...and that's that. If Corbyn wins I bet your chums pay the taxes, moan but stay put
You spent most of the Cameron administration in Italy I believe?
George Osborne was the sole cause of the ridiculously low £1m LTA limit though.
The question perhaps is what does that deal include that we cannot already do? After all we do quite a lot of US Trade at present.
Once we see the contents, I think that such a deal's popularity would vanish like the morning mist on a summer day
Support for “Canada” is meaningless. Replace it with, say, “Turkey”, and see what happens.
If No Deal a second referendum certainly means Remain
The first thing I would say is that I think ISAs have been extraordinarily generous. A couple who have been reasonably well-paid over the last 20 years or so can easily have built-up an ISA pot of £1m or so, and are still able to add to it at the rate of £40K a year. OK, that's out of taxed income, so not generous at the contribution stage, but being able to shelter a million quid from tax perfectly legally strikes me as unnecessarily generous. It's great encouraging savings and investment, but the principal beneficiaries of this have been the well-off. A lifetime limit would have been sensible from the taxman's point of view. However, retrofitting a lifetime limit is very awkward, because records won't always have been kept. At a minimum I'd be surprised if there isn't some limit going forward, at least for new contributions.
As for existing assets, the simplest raid would be to declare that any dividend and interest income, and any capital gains, over a certain figure are no longer tax-free. It would be administratively quite difficult though.
Whatever the mechanism, it must be a tempting target: £608bn at the end of the last tax year.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/737394/Full_Statistics_Release_August_2018.pdf
Ever since I saw it I have so loved that photograph. It is soooooo enigmatic. So much of the Human Condition is right there. It works. It’s believable. As the first model walking to camera is unaware what’s unfolding, she has a natural innocence. For me the second girl invokes a sympathy, she is in a game she can’t win, she is the limping miner in Galaxy Quest.
As well as funny, the whole thing together is kinda sexy.
Is it just me, or when they try it with the gender roles reversed, it’s just not the same? Straight away the laughter stops. A cloud passes the sun. Instead of warm, it is cold.
https://www.belladasemana.com.br/pt-br/blog/2564/50-delas-mantem-o-famoso-"estepe"
If so, why?
With all due respect, we can’t build the future economy on antiquarian book dealing.
What is the sense of effecting a policy – Leave – whose proponents are, by your own implication, dying out? This is not a question about the democratic rights and wrongs of it, merely the sense in doing so with such a strong cohort effect running against it.
The only viable prospects for Brexit now are a Canada Deal or taking the Norway option given the EU have rejected Chequers
And there is no need for your words in brackets
Canada does its own trade deals, including the one it has with the EU, has no free movement from the EU, and is free from ECJ jurisdiction and the regulations and directives of the EU
This is why I ultimately think she will get a deal – but not this side of Christmas.
I think what makes it is that the two girls are near doubles. The grass is always greener...
It pains me to see the country humbled, and of course part of me would love us to tell the EU to stick it up their junta, but there it is.
One aide told the authors: “It just kept thinking, they’ll tear us apart on this. It was obvious to anyone looked in any detail. But the attack never came.”
And the book reports that "one internal email highlighted some of the problems with Labour's cost estimates, including the lack of detail on capital spending, as well as some individual costings that were implausible or entirely absent."
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7356686/labour-2017-manifesto-1trillion-hidden-spending/
I think there is something in this.
Whatever your views on whether they will work or be bonkers, there is no doubt that Labour have ideas, bold thinking and future plans.
That might catch the public mood.
The Tories need to do something fast, or they will look like the party of the past.
But what is it that 66% of the population want out of a US Trade deal that they do not have already?
It is a simple question.
Perhaps buying Boeings rather than Airbus?
Another thought occurred to me today, which is probably rubbish, but is it nailed on the SNP votes against no deal rather than find excuses to abstain?
If they reallly think no deal equals chaos in the U.K., we’ll surely that’s good for them? Furthermore do they want precedents set of two stage referendums where they win by say 52-48 ( to pick a number!) and it’s overturned by three years of moaning?
With that shooting if the breeze: to bed.