Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?

1235»

Comments

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,830

    Terminator 2 was better than the original.

    Aliens; Godfather PII; Toy Story 2...
    Not all sequels are rubbish.
  • Nigelb said:

    Aliens; Godfather PII; Toy Story 2...
    Not all sequels are rubbish.
    The Wrath of Khan is another.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,767
    edited October 2017
    Have we all agreed that her top is cut far too low?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,643

    The Wrath of Khan is another.
    LOTR II....
  • TOPPING said:

    Have we all agreed that her top is cut far too low?

    I always get distracted by the size of her pearls.

    I'm sure some of them are classed as planets by NASA.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141

    No. It effects people on working class tax credit and child tax credit. How many people is that?
    Tax credits and benefits work on the principle that the more you earn the fewer benefits and credits you get, a socialist principle.

    Universal Credit works on the principle that if you earn more you do not straight away lose all your benefits, thus incentivising work, a Tory principle
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,830
    HYUFD said:

    The poll tax not everyone and especially annoyed the middle class unless they were very wealthy hence the Tory poll rating nosedive as a result, UC only affects the poor and unemployed who tend to vote Labour and longer term it will benefit them by getting more of them into employment as is already starting to occur
    Some huge assumptions there.
    For example, getting families to budget is not necessarily a bad idea - but forcing them to do so without help invites disaster for a large number... and that assumes a system working without problems, which is hardly the case.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,957
    TOPPING said:

    Have we all agreed that her top is cut far too low?

    Am listening on radio. Adds a new and somewhat unwelcome angle to my imagination of the scene.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Was there a question from Cable?
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,643
    HYUFD said:

    The people most affected by UC are DE voters who voted for Corbyn and who longer term UC will help to enter the workplace rather than be solely reliant on benefits thus making them more likely to vote Tory than they were previously.

    I don't disagree in the short term the delays in benefit payments under UC need to be tackled, which Gauke already is making progress on as he told the Tory conference but longer term UC will be a net positive
    It affects one third of the working age population. Almost 8m households.
    Write off the political impact at your peril.
  • kle4 said:

    Not for a movie which cost as much as it did. It's not a flop like valerian, lone ranger or John Carter, but it was still below modest predictions.

    Though I've seen an argument that's good. It will probably break even with international markets giving it a profit even with what must be a large marketing budget, but if it made oodles of money there'd probably be quick sequels, loads planned, which is rarely good for quality.

    As it is it is good, it will be well received, and they'll not rush sequels.
    Perfect result really. I was one of those who really, really didn't want this sequel and now we have it can't imagine ever not having it because it is a damn near perfect film.

    But that doesn't mean I want another sequel.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    The Wrath of Khan is another.

    Star Trek, into Darkness is the Radiohead of sequels
  • @HYUFD Your profound ignorance of who UC is paid to, how the migration to UC will impact millions ( plural ) of in work households and refusal to engage with the politics of the impending chaos is your most stupid contribution since last week when you assumed Last Vegas was Islamic State.
  • Tsk, it should be Dear Prime Minister

    https://twitter.com/ChiOnwurah/status/918080048414035968
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,830

    Hannibal's defeat in the Second Punic War ultimately led to the wipe out of Carthage, Julius Caesar never inflicted that on his people did he?
    Perhaps only as they had the foresight to deal with him expeditiously ?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 10,034
    TGOHF said:


    Change ? Change ? We can't have change ? I don't like change....

    Like your new icon. You do realise that all we can make out is the text? ;-)
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,540
    Nigelb said:

    Aliens; Godfather PII; Toy Story 2...
    Not all sequels are rubbish.
    Bad Boys 2 and Lethal Weapon 2 are better than the first movies.
  • Scott_P said:

    Star Trek, into Darkness is the Radiohead of sequels
    Behave, another awesome sequel is S.P.E.C.T.R.E.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,577

    Like your new icon. You do realise that all we can make out is the text? ;-)
    I don't have an issue with UC per se. I have an issue with the clusterf**** of its implementation and the way it is being used to try and slip cuts under the public's radar.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 5,077

    If Charles chose Philip as his Regal name, would he be Philip I or Philip II?

    The numbers follow the King/Queen of *England*. Example the current UK Monarch is Queen Elizabeth the second of England but the first of Scotland. No one outside of Edinburgh Castle refers to her as QE I.

    To your question: when was there ever a King Philip of England?
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981

    Tsk, it should be Dear Prime Minister

    htts://twitter.com/ChiOnwurah/status/918080048414035968

    Labour piling in on a bloke with the surname Weinstein. How astonishing.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,957
    rkrkrk said:

    It affects one third of the working age population. Almost 8m households.
    Write off the political impact at your peril.
    One of them is me.
    My wife has her own business. We are both graduates with post-Graduate professional qualifications. She is studying part-time for a Masters level qualification. We are firmly in the AB camp. We ought to be targets for Tory votes. UC may have most impact at the bottom of society.
    But far from exclusively.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Behave, another awesome sequel is S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    PB should instigate a concussion protocol for people who have obviously taken a blow to the head...
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    eristdoof said:

    The numbers follow the King/Queen of *England*. Example the current UK Monarch is Queen Elizabeth the second of England but the first of Scotland. No one outside of Edinburgh Castle refers to her as QE I.

    To your question: when was there ever a King Philip of England?
    Philip of Spain, who married Mary Tudor.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,487
    Mr. Doof, didn't Churchill establish the principle that the higher regnal number, whether it be Scottish or English, would be adopted?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,577
    HYUFD said:

    No denial from you I see to that point
    As I keep saying I don't have a problem with the concept, I have a problem with the cack-handed implementation. Of course there is an issue with cliff edge marginal tax rates for benefits and work.

    Really, some of us our just trying to flag up a major problem that is going to cost the Tories dearly.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,957
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Labour piling in on a bloke with the surname Weinstein. How astonishing.
    Cos he's called Weinstein? Or cos he's accused of serial sex assaults?
  • OchEyeOchEye Posts: 1,469
    HYUFD said:

    The poll tax not everyone and especially annoyed the middle class unless they were very wealthy hence the Tory poll rating nosedive as a result, UC only affects the poor and unemployed who tend to vote Labour and longer term it will benefit them by getting more of them into employment as is already starting to occur
    I'm given to understand that around 75% of UC benefit payments go to those who are employed to bring their income to minimum standards of civil society. 2 points here, the first being that taxpayers are subsidising employers, most of whom are major companies paying out large bonuses to the senior layers of management and to shareholders, while in the meantime, not paying corporation and other taxes to the UK exchequer, (eg: Richard Branson through his Virgin Health operation who is seemingly getting sweetheart deals on buying up NHS trusts and services). The second, quite simply, if people, who are already having difficulty in budgeting, are unable to pay their rents and are evicted, who already have to decide who eats in the family or starves, because the government, who collects the taxes and decides how they are dispersed is incompetent - is this the sort of society we wish for, in the 4th. largest richest/economy in the world?
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    rkrkrk said:

    It affects one third of the working age population. Almost 8m households.
    Write off the political impact at your peril.
    If there is a recession and interest rates rise , there could also be more house re possessions due to the new changes attached to UC .Homeowners who lose their jobs applying for UC will have to wait 39 weeks (used to be 13 weeks ) for any interest payment towards their loan.Also the payment of the interest capped at 2.9% is now added to the mortgage previously it was not.In essence anyone with a mortgage and loses their jobs to sickness or redundancy, is in a worse situation than housing benefits claimants.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Yup, her new album is scheduled to be released next year.
    Haven't heard anything since White Flag. Did always like Mary's in India
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141
    Nigelb said:

    Some huge assumptions there.
    For example, getting families to budget is not necessarily a bad idea - but forcing them to do so without help invites disaster for a large number... and that assumes a system working without problems, which is hardly the case.
    They will not be doing so without help
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141
    rkrkrk said:

    It affects one third of the working age population. Almost 8m households.
    Write off the political impact at your peril.
    Most of whom will be better off longer term from UC
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,577
    Ishmael_Z said:

    The tories are fecked, the country is fecked, we are all fecked. We really are.
    Hard to argue with this piercing analysis of the current situation.
  • NEW THREAD

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,577
    Yorkcity said:

    If there is a recession and interest rates rise , there could also be more house re possessions due to the new changes attached to UC .Homeowners who lose their jobs applying for UC will have to wait 39 weeks (used to be 13 weeks ) for any interest payment towards their loan.Also the payment of the interest capped at 2.9% is now added to the mortgage previously it was not.In essence anyone with a mortgage and loses their jobs to sickness or redundancy, is in a worse situation than housing benefits claimants.

    It just gets better by the minute.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    I didn’t write any changes. I referred to major changes. There’s a difference.

    But, taking the point would I say that nationalisation of the railways was a major change? No

    Would I say that declaring that the next Monarch will be William V, not Charles IV was major? Yes.
    Our next king is George VII
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141
    edited October 2017

    @HYUFD Your profound ignorance of who UC is paid to, how the migration to UC will impact millions ( plural ) of in work households and refusal to engage with the politics of the impending chaos is your most stupid contribution since last week when you assumed Last Vegas was Islamic State.

    Your profound socialism and commitment to disincentivising paid work and earning more is no surprise but longer term UC will benefit recipients by ensuring those who get paid work do not lose all their benefits as a result
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,487
    Dr. Foxinsox, we also came very close to having King Alfonso. He was the eldest son of Edward I, and died at the unusual age of ten (mortality was far higher in infancy but by that age sudden death was quite unexpected). This had the significantly negative effect of giving us Edward II.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,577
    HYUFD said:

    Most of whom will be better off longer term from UC
    In the long run we are all dead as Keynes famously said.

    Meantime, Tories poll numbers will be hit hard by this continued roll-out imho.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,643
    Yorkcity said:

    If there is a recession and interest rates rise , there could also be more house re possessions due to the new changes attached to UC .Homeowners who lose their jobs applying for UC will have to wait 39 weeks (used to be 13 weeks ) for any interest payment towards their loan.Also the payment of the interest capped at 2.9% is now added to the mortgage previously it was not.In essence anyone with a mortgage and loses their jobs to sickness or redundancy, is in a worse situation than housing benefits claimants.

    Interest rates will rise at some point (indeed that could spark the recession).
    There will be a recession at some point.

    I don't know the detail - but if what you say is correct... that sounds bad.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141
    edited October 2017

    As I keep saying I don't have a problem with the concept, I have a problem with the cack-handed implementation. Of course there is an issue with cliff edge marginal tax rates for benefits and work.

    Really, some of us our just trying to flag up a major problem that is going to cost the Tories dearly.
    It won't cost the Tories longer term it will benefit them by ending the current benefits system which Brown geared towards socialism
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,830
    HYUFD said:

    They will not be doing so without help
    Are you IDS incognito (or a wig) ?
  • I don't have a problem with the principles of UC. I have a problem with its practice. The government appear to have had a brainstorming session with the objective of "How can we Destroy Lives", and having schemed up the very stupidest "encouragements" to work like no money for 6 weeks then had their proposal sent back as not twatty enough hence things like 55p a minute phone line.

    The Tory party is quickly regathering its perception as a bunch of amoral sociopaths not just ignorant of how people live but genuinely uncaring once the evidence is presented.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141
    OchEye said:

    I'm given to understand that around 75% of UC benefit payments go to those who are employed to bring their income to minimum standards of civil society. 2 points here, the first being that taxpayers are subsidising employers, most of whom are major companies paying out large bonuses to the senior layers of management and to shareholders, while in the meantime, not paying corporation and other taxes to the UK exchequer, (eg: Richard Branson through his Virgin Health operation who is seemingly getting sweetheart deals on buying up NHS trusts and services). The second, quite simply, if people, who are already having difficulty in budgeting, are unable to pay their rents and are evicted, who already have to decide who eats in the family or starves, because the government, who collects the taxes and decides how they are dispersed is incompetent - is this the sort of society we wish for, in the 4th. largest richest/economy in the world?
    Of course it was the Coalition who took the lowest earners put of tax unlike Brown who removed the 10p starting rate
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 76,830
    tlg86 said:

    Bad Boys 2 and Lethal Weapon 2 are better than the first movies.

    Low bar...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141

    In the long run we are all dead as Keynes famously said.

    Meantime, Tories poll numbers will be hit hard by this continued roll-out imho.
    Absolutely wrong, the latest poll has the Tories and Labour tied despite weeks of Labour whinging on UC. Longer term it will get more people into work and early figures show more in work due to UC
  • HYUFD said:



    Absolutely wrong, the latest poll has the Tories and Labour tied despite weeks of Labour whinging on UC. Longer term it will get more people into work and early figures show more in work due to UC

    Forget about the polls, answer me this. Lets assume for a moment you are right about the long term benefits of UC. Is there any reason why in the short term it has to have such a catastrophic effect on people's lives?

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141
    edited October 2017

    Forget about the polls, answer me this. Lets assume for a moment you are right about the long term benefits of UC. Is there any reason why in the short term it has to have such a catastrophic effect on people's lives?

    As Gauke said already the average delay in payment has fallen from 6 weeks to a few days
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    HYUFD said:

    Absolutely wrong, the latest poll has the Tories and Labour tied despite weeks of Labour whinging on UC. Longer term it will get more people into work and early figures show more in work due to UC
    We've heard how ABC1s now often vote Labour and C2DEs vote Tory, in a reversal of past patterns. How can UC be irrelevant to these Tory voters?

    I've also heard the Poll Tax comment. Does it happen at about the same time as the Brex-sh-it hits the fan?

    It particularly affects the new army of 'self-employed' I gather. Their entitlement to a) housing benefit, b) council tax rebate and c) working tax credit is badly affected.

    A riot in Tunbridge Wells in 2019? 29 years since the last one.
  • I don't have a problem with the principles of UC. I have a problem with its practice. The government appear to have had a brainstorming session with the objective of "How can we Destroy Lives", and having schemed up the very stupidest "encouragements" to work like no money for 6 weeks then had their proposal sent back as not twatty enough hence things like 55p a minute phone line.

    The Tory party is quickly regathering its perception as a bunch of amoral sociopaths not just ignorant of how people live but genuinely uncaring once the evidence is presented.

    I am outside my comfort zone on this as I do not know enough about it but my understanding was that many people feel the basic ideas of UC are good but the whole thing was sabotaged by Osborne who saw it as a perfect opportunity for a big cut in costs/payments when IDS was saying that in the immediate term there would be a small increase in costs due to implementation.

    Is this correct?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 127,141

    We've heard how ABC1s now often vote Labour and C2DEs vote Tory, in a reversal of past patterns. How can UC be irrelevant to these Tory voters?

    I've also heard the Poll Tax comment. Does it happen at about the same time as the Brex-sh-it hits the fan?

    It particularly affects the new army of 'self-employed' I gather. Their entitlement to a) housing benefit, b) council tax rebate and c) working tax credit is badly affected.

    A riot in Tunbridge Wells in 2019? 29 years since the last one.
    C2s vote Tory DEs vote Labour.

    Yet again socialists like you are defending a system which pays less the more you earn, farcical. UC ensures if you earn more you do not lose all your benefits
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 2,038
    [text deleted, thread too long]

    We've heard how ABC1s now often vote Labour and C2DEs vote Tory, in a reversal of past patterns. How can UC be irrelevant to these Tory voters?

    I've also heard the Poll Tax comment. Does it happen at about the same time as the Brex-sh-it hits the fan?

    It particularly affects the new army of 'self-employed' I gather. Their entitlement to a) housing benefit, b) council tax rebate and c) working tax credit is badly affected.

    A riot in Tunbridge Wells in 2019? 29 years since the last one.

    **********

    C2s vote Tory DEs vote Labour.

    Yet again socialists like you are defending a system which pays less the more you earn, farcical. UC ensures if you earn more you do not lose all your benefits

    ***********

    If you regard 'socialist' as a blanket term of abuse, you're condemning in the process the way the NHS and systems like it are funded:

    from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

    Anyway you rather missed your target if you're taking pot shots at assumed Labour members or voters. In the last 35 years I've only voted Lib.Dem or Green.

    Long ago that well-known 'socialist' Geoffrey Howe suggested a negative income tax below the tax threshold, a threshold the Lib.Dems successfully raised to £11k/y. That would address the problem that a) work doesn't pay b) the poor pay an effective marginal tax rate of up to 90% (a rate that was cut for top income tax payers 40 years ago).

    A basic income could do the same.
This discussion has been closed.