politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Putin on a show: finding value in March’s Russian election
Comments
-
The USA does spend more as a percentage of GDP on health, roughly double what we do.Alistair said:
I'm more entertained by the people who think the NHS is a failed wasteful mess and want us to copy models from countries who spend vastly more on healthcare than we do to somehow save money.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
It is a highly successful system, when you class it as a business rather than public health one. The point of private healthcare is to extract the most money out of clients that the market can bear, like any other business. Quality has an influence on sales, as in any capitalist system, but the fundamental organisational objective is profit. The same is true to a lesser degree in hybrid systems, including our own model (Virgin Care for example) and our Continental neighbours.
Some of these have advantages, but cutting costs is not one of them.0 -
I've got a spare ticket, if you want to come?AlastairMeeks said:
Go off and enjoy your Churchill film and wallow in nostalgic fantasies about how Britain stood alone nearly 80 years ago. Meanwhile the rest of us have to live in the 21st century, a century that is going to be substantially worse for Britain because of the course that you among others have advocated, befuddled by out of date dreams of a Britain that never was.Casino_Royale said:
I presume you think the same of anyone else who supports Trident then, including David Cameron, George Osborne and Tony Blair, and the vast majority of the House of Commons.AlastairMeeks said:
Idiots like you who think that "defence" requires Britain being able to nuke the four corners of the globe bring out the worst in anyone with two brain cells.Casino_Royale said:
Oh dear: an AM "I see" post.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
You at your worst.
I'm saving this one for the next time you accuse others of making personal attacks on you, but never the other way round.
What a shame.0 -
No, depleted Uranium radioactivity and extrajudicial deathsquads and drones are mostly targetted at shithole countries.CarlottaVance said:
Yes - but these could be classified as “military” operations and don’t involve leaving trails of radioactivity across Europe or the streets and hotels of London.Foxy said:
Trump, and Obama before him, routinely do this, via the US 800 military bases in 70 countries across the world. Drones, Special Forces.CarlottaVance said:
You think he’d arrange assassinations on the streets of foreign capitals?SouthamObserver said:
I think that if Trump had the tools Putin has he’d use them in exactly the same wayDavidL said:
So you think there is a moral equivalence? Wow.SouthamObserver said:
Just out of interest, how can you be occasionally racist? You either are or you’re aren’t, aren’t you? Given Trump has given white supremacists senior positions in his administration, endorsed them for office, failed to condemn their violence and terrorism, and made any number of racist remarks, it’s pretty clear where he stands. And white supremacists kill a lot of people in the US. But I guess Trump’s not an uppity African, so you can understand why Boris would be so indignant about any criticism he might get.DavidL said:Trump is an egocentric buffoon. Putin is a serial murderer. One is obnoxious and occasionally racist. One kills journalists and anyone else who crosses him. People really need to get a better sense of priorities.
0 -
Why, oh why, are the Jockanese clowns claiming victim-hood? Is the Manx parliament (non-EU) creating fluxes within their skirts over Scallops a reflection of their European rampage for rule-for-one but not t'other...?0
-
The EU is a 1950s throwback, having its origins in the 1951 Treaty of Paris.AlastairMeeks said:
Go off and enjoy your Churchill film and wallow in nostalgic fantasies about how Britain stood alone nearly 80 years ago. Meanwhile the rest of us have to live in the 21st century, a century that is going to be substantially worse for Britain because of the course that you among others have advocated, befuddled by out of date dreams of a Britain that never was.Casino_Royale said:
I presume you think the same of anyone else who supports Trident then, including David Cameron, George Osborne and Tony Blair, and the vast majority of the House of Commons.AlastairMeeks said:
Idiots like you who think that "defence" requires Britain being able to nuke the four corners of the globe bring out the worst in anyone with two brain cells.Casino_Royale said:
Oh dear: an AM "I see" post.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
You at your worst.
I'm saving this one for the next time you accuse others of making personal attacks on you, but never the other way round.
What a shame.0 -
I'm pretty sure that Trump would love to have Putin's power, and would use it similarly.CarlottaVance said:
Yes - but these could be classified as “military” operations and don’t involve leaving trails of radioactivity across Europe or the streets and hotels of London.Foxy said:
Trump, and Obama before him, routinely do this, via the US 800 military bases in 70 countries across the world. Drones, Special Forces.CarlottaVance said:
You think he’d arrange assassinations on the streets of foreign capitals?SouthamObserver said:
I think that if Trump had the tools Putin has he’d use them in exactly the same wayDavidL said:
So you think there is a moral equivalence? Wow.SouthamObserver said:
Just out of interest, how can you be occasionally racist? You either are or you’re aren’t, aren’t you? Given Trump has given white supremacists senior positions in his administration, endorsed them for office, failed to condemn their violence and terrorism, and made any number of racist remarks, it’s pretty clear where he stands. And white supremacists kill a lot of people in the US. But I guess Trump’s not an uppity African, so you can understand why Boris would be so indignant about any criticism he might get.DavidL said:Trump is an egocentric buffoon. Putin is a serial murderer. One is obnoxious and occasionally racist. One kills journalists and anyone else who crosses him. People really need to get a better sense of priorities.
0 -
Only 3 people voted AGAINST remaining British Overseas Territory in the Falklands referendum of 2013:HYUFD said:
The people of the Falklands and Gibraltar both overwhelmingly want to stay British, in fact Gibraltar voted over 90% to stay British in a referendum over a decade ago compared to Scotland's 55%.malcolmg said:
Time we got rid of them and all our tax havens, but highly unlikely whilst the Tories and their chums are filling their boots with lolly.HYUFD said:
We are not, not even Rees Mogg is saying we should refound the British Empire and since WW2 and Suez it is the USA not the UK and France which has led western intervention abroad. It is therefore the US which needs to ensure it has a bigger and more powerful military than China and Russia rather than us.AlastairMeeks said:
Britain's armed forces have the wrong aims. Britain should not be pretending to be a world power any more.Foxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Nonetheless we do need to ensure we have a bigger military than Argentina and Spain to ensure we can defend the Falklands and Gibraltar if need be in the unlikely event they are attacked and also to ensure we can play a full part in UN and NATO authorised missions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands_sovereignty_referendum,_20130 -
I regard recruitment and retention similarly as the biggest longterm threat to British health care.Dura_Ace said:
My officer training course at BRNC was unusual in that an unusually high proportion of the course (present company excepted) went on to flag ranks. So, through these old shipmates, I have some insight into the mood of the RN at a senior level. Despite the manifold deficiencies in equipment, training and structure the problems that agitates them all is recruitment.Casino_Royale said:
Interesting. I always welcome your posts on the subject.Dura_Ace said:
We could achieve that without putting taxes up if we a) didn't replace Trident and b) resisted the siren call of tiny production runs of autochthonous designs. We could have had Flight IIIa Arleigh Burke for half the price of the T45s and they would still work when the sun comes out.Casino_Royale said:
We need a core critical mass of trained capability that can credibly work with our allies to deter aggression, protect international trade, and protect and project our values.
Btw, check out The Times on Monday. My client (who is an ex-director of British army recruiting) has written a letter on army recruitment and the "marketing" debate.
Of course, we could fix this at stroke by opening recruitment to EU nationals and allowing lateral transfers from EU armed forces in the way that we currently do for (some) Commonwealth nations.0 -
They also serve who only stand and do PowerPoint as Milton said.Casino_Royale said:
But, I think there's a lot more they could do to flexibly pull upon part-time civilian expertise, including my own, in procurement and contract management
0 -
'More children having teeth out in hospital in England'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-42662425
I wonder if the Donald would consider this a characteristic of a shithole country? Judging by his (I'm sure naturally) pristine gnashers, probably.0 -
A slight distraction from your post, but:Foxy said:
No, depleted Uranium radioactivity and extrajudicial deathsquads and drones are mostly targetted at shithole countries.CarlottaVance said:
Yes - but these could be classified as “military” operations and don’t involve leaving trails of radioactivity across Europe or the streets and hotels of London.Foxy said:
Trump, and Obama before him, routinely do this, via the US 800 military bases in 70 countries across the world. Drones, Special Forces.CarlottaVance said:
You think he’d arrange assassinations on the streets of foreign capitals?SouthamObserver said:
I think that if Trump had the tools Putin has he’d use them in exactly the same wayDavidL said:
So you think there is a moral equivalence? Wow.SouthamObserver said:
Just out of interest, how can you be occasionally racist? You either are or you’re aren’t, aren’t you? Given Trump has given white supremacists senior positions in his administration, endorsed them for office, failed to condemn their violence and terrorism, and made any number of racist remarks, it’s pretty clear where he stands. And white supremacists kill a lot of people in the US. But I guess Trump’s not an uppity African, so you can understand why Boris would be so indignant about any criticism he might get.DavidL said:Trump is an egocentric buffoon. Putin is a serial murderer. One is obnoxious and occasionally racist. One kills journalists and anyone else who crosses him. People really need to get a better sense of priorities.
"depleted Uranium radioactivity"
Is that right? I thought that DU and its decay products are not overly radioactive; in fact less so than natural uranium. The problems it causes are mainly due to chemical toxicity, not radiological damage.0 -
Mr. Jessop, I thought the uranium turned into plutonium upon explosive contact, and that was the problem.0
-
Surely it goes back to Germany's urge to dominate Europe - or at least the continent of Europe.Sunil_Prasannan said:
The EU is a 1950s throwback, having its origins in the 1951 Treaty of Paris.AlastairMeeks said:
Go off and enjoy your Churchill film and wallow in nostalgic fantasies about how Britain stood alone nearly 80 years ago. Meanwhile the rest of us have to live in the 21st century, a century that is going to be substantially worse for Britain because of the course that you among others have advocated, befuddled by out of date dreams of a Britain that never was.Casino_Royale said:
I presume you think the same of anyone else who supports Trident then, including David Cameron, George Osborne and Tony Blair, and the vast majority of the House of Commons.AlastairMeeks said:
Idiots like you who think that "defence" requires Britain being able to nuke the four corners of the globe bring out the worst in anyone with two brain cells.Casino_Royale said:
Oh dear: an AM "I see" post.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
You at your worst.
I'm saving this one for the next time you accuse others of making personal attacks on you, but never the other way round.
What a shame.0 -
I'm NOT seeing The Darkest Hour today...
Just thought I'd drop that into the conversation.
0 -
Do you have equivilant death-rates for El-Salvador and the NHS (including abortions) during your correlation == causation analysis a few threads ago. I would also like you to explain why your son - whom is not here to defend himself - is responsible for the incumbent murder-rate?Foxy said:
I regard recruitment and retention similarly as the biggest longterm threat to British health care.Dura_Ace said:
My officer training course at BRNC was unusual in that an unusually high proportion of the course (present company excepted) went on to flag ranks. So, through these old shipmates, I have some insight into the mood of the RN at a senior level. Despite the manifold deficiencies in equipment, training and structure the problems that agitates them all is recruitment.Casino_Royale said:
Interesting. I always welcome your posts on the subject.Dura_Ace said:
We could achieve that without putting taxes up if we a) didn't replace Trident and b) resisted the siren call of tiny production runs of autochthonous designs. We could have had Flight IIIa Arleigh Burke for half the price of the T45s and they would still work when the sun comes out.Casino_Royale said:
We need a core critical mass of trained capability that can credibly work with our allies to deter aggression, protect international trade, and protect and project our values.
Btw, check out The Times on Monday. My client (who is an ex-director of British army recruiting) has written a letter on army recruitment and the "marketing" debate.
Of course, we could fix this at stroke by opening recruitment to EU nationals and allowing lateral transfers from EU armed forces in the way that we currently do for (some) Commonwealth nations.0 -
I would be *very* surprised if that was the case, but IANAE. You'd need a source of neutrons to start converting the U into Pu, and the DU is very low radioactivity.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jessop, I thought the uranium turned into plutonium upon explosive contact, and that was the problem.
Having said that, nuclear decay chains are odd things, but I doubt you'd be able to go *up* in weight through normal decay ...0 -
AlastairMeeks said:
Go off and enjoy your Churchill film and wallow in nostalgic fantasies about how Britain stood alone nearly 80 years ago. Meanwhile the rest of us have to live in the 21st century, a century that is going to be substantially worse for Britain because of the course that you among others have advocated, befuddled by out of date dreams of a Britain that never was.Casino_Royale said:
I presume you think the same of anyone else who supports Trident then, including David Cameron, George Osborne and Tony Blair, and the vast majority of the House of Commons.AlastairMeeks said:
Idiots like you who think that "defence" requires Britain being able to nuke the four corners of the globe bring out the worst in anyone with two brain cells.Casino_Royale said:
Oh dear: an AM "I see" post.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
You at your worst.
I'm saving this one for the next time you accuse others of making personal attacks on you, but never the other way round.
What a shame.
The Curchill film is not a nationalistic fest. It is more subtle and complex about the dilemas facing a nation threatened by a greater (but evil) power. Do you fight regardless of the sacrifice you know will need to be made or do you sign up to a peace treaty which the dominent party is unlikely to honour?
Plus the Conservative party MPs had to balance the personal deficiencies in Churchill against his undoubted talents. The film claims Churchill's rhetoric won them over to his way of thinking. Who knows?
0 -
As a U.N. P5 power and NATO over we also have a duty to maintain a military to be able to meet those commitmentsCasino_Royale said:
We need to assess our strategic defence and security threats, work out how we can prepare ourselves to meet them, in conjunction with our allies, and then fund our contributions properly.HYUFD said:
We are not, not even Rees Mogg is saying we should refound the British Empire and since WW2 and Suez it is the USA not the UK and France which has led western intervention abroad. It is therefore the US which needs to ensure it has a bigger and more powerful military than China and Russia rather than us.AlastairMeeks said:
Britain's armed forces have the wrong aims. Britain should not be pretending to be a world power any more.Foxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Nonetheless we do need to ensure we have a bigger military than Argentina and Spain to ensure we can defend the Falklands and Gibraltar if need be in the unlikely event they are attacked and also to ensure we can play a full part in UN and NATO authorised missions
Anything else is irresponsible. The world is a very large place, of which Britain has <1% of its population, and with which we are very interconnected.
To protect our living standards and way of life, the UK must engage at a global level and exercise its soft and hard influence as much as it can. Either we help shape the world, or it will shape us.
Referencing back to the British Empire is just a lazy tool of present-day pacifists to wish away defence spending in preference for spending on something else, and what they think would be a quiet life.</p>0 -
DU is almost all U-238 which has a half life of 4 billion years. Its adverse effects are from its toxicity. We've fired 300 tons of it into Iraq so far.Morris_Dancer said:Mr. Jessop, I thought the uranium turned into plutonium upon explosive contact, and that was the problem.
0 -
When are you seeing it?GIN1138 said:I'm NOT seeing The Darkest Hour today...
Just thought I'd drop that into the conversation.0 -
Exactly, we have a duty to protect the Falklands and Gibraltar just as France protects its overseas territoriesSunil_Prasannan said:
Only 3 people voted AGAINST remaining British Overseas Territory in the Falklands referendum of 2013:HYUFD said:
The people of the Falklands and Gibraltar both overwhelmingly want to stay British, in fact Gibraltar voted over 90% to stay British in a referendum over a decade ago compared to Scotland's 55%.malcolmg said:
Time we got rid of them and all our tax havens, but highly unlikely whilst the Tories and their chums are filling their boots with lolly.HYUFD said:
We are not, not even Rees Mogg is saying we should refound the British Empire and since WW2 and Suez it is the USA not the UK and France which has led western intervention abroad. It is therefore the US which needs to ensure it has a bigger and more powerful military than China and Russia rather than us.AlastairMeeks said:
Britain's armed forces have the wrong aims. Britain should not be pretending to be a world power any more.Foxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Nonetheless we do need to ensure we have a bigger military than Argentina and Spain to ensure we can defend the Falklands and Gibraltar if need be in the unlikely event they are attacked and also to ensure we can play a full part in UN and NATO authorised missions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands_sovereignty_referendum,_20130 -
Theuniondivvie said:
'More children having teeth out in hospital in England'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-42662425
I wonder if the Donald would consider this a characteristic of a shithole country? Judging by his (I'm sure naturally) pristine gnashers, probably.
We never had sugar in the war. The Germans were sinking the ships bringing sugar to the UK and thus improving the health of our children's teeth.
0 -
I see the Meekoid is turning into the Mysteroid.
Sad!0 -
... and you're turning into the Trumpette?Rebourne_Fluffy said:I see the Meekoid is turning into the Mysteroid.
Sad!0 -
HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
0 -
Anyone suggest cure for Alastair ?AlastairMeeks said:
Go off and enjoy your Churchill film and wallow in nostalgic fantasies about how Britain stood alone nearly 80 years ago. Meanwhile the rest of us have to live in the 21st century, a century that is going to be substantially worse for Britain because of the course that you among others have advocated, befuddled by out of date dreams of a Britain that never was.Casino_Royale said:
I presume you think the same of anyone else who supports Trident then, including David Cameron, George Osborne and Tony Blair, and the vast majority of the House of Commons.AlastairMeeks said:
Idiots like you who think that "defence" requires Britain being able to nuke the four corners of the globe bring out the worst in anyone with two brain cells.Casino_Royale said:
Oh dear: an AM "I see" post.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
You at your worst.
I'm saving this one for the next time you accuse others of making personal attacks on you, but never the other way round.
What a shame.
I fear he will still be wailing about horrid billboards on his deathbed.0 -
If you're Leicester City Council, holding a list of vulnerable adults and children, what do you do?
That's right! You email the details of those people to taxi firms ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-426674510 -
Three Billboards outside Epping?TGOHF said:
Banyone suggest cure for Alastair ?AlastairMeeks said:
Go off and enjoy your Churchill film and wallow in nostalgic fantasies about how Britain stood alone nearly 80 years ago. Meanwhile the rest of us have to live in the 21st century, a century that is going to be substantially worse for Britain because of the course that you among others have advocated, befuddled by out of date dreams of a Britain that never was.Casino_Royale said:
I presume you think the same of anyone else who supports Trident then, including David Cameron, George Osborne and Tony Blair, and the vast majority of the House of Commons.AlastairMeeks said:
Idiots like you who think that "defence" requires Britain being able to nuke the four corners of the globe bring out the worst in anyone with two brain cells.Casino_Royale said:
Oh dear: an AM "I see" post.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
You at your worst.
I'm saving this one for the next time you accuse others of making personal attacks on you, but never the other way round.
What a shame.
I fear he will still be wailing about horrid billboards on his deathbed.
0 -
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/taxi-driver-accused-kidnapping-raping-402540JosiasJessop said:If you're Leicester City Council, holding a list of vulnerable adults and children, what do you do?
That's right! You email the details of those people to taxi firms ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-42667451
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/schoolgirl-who-was-sexually-abused-now-scared-of-everything/story-29914133-detail/story.html0 -
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.0 -
Mr. Ace/Mr. Jessop, fair enough. Can't remember where I heard that, and chemistry isn't my strong suit, so I stand corrected.
Mr. HYUFD, as someone not overflowing with monies, I can assure you there is not support from me for higher rates of National Insurance.0 -
Yes, taxi firms don't have the best reputation. It's the sot of mistake that could have drastic consequences for many people (even through fear if they discover their details leaked), and as such should have severe consequences for the idiots who made the mistake.David_Evershed said:
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/taxi-driver-accused-kidnapping-raping-402540JosiasJessop said:If you're Leicester City Council, holding a list of vulnerable adults and children, what do you do?
That's right! You email the details of those people to taxi firms ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leicestershire-42667451
http://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/schoolgirl-who-was-sexually-abused-now-scared-of-everything/story-29914133-detail/story.html
The story you linked to is amazing - it's a massive heap of wrongness, but the cherry on the top is the fact that much of the journey was recorded. If you are sick enough to do something like this, surely you ensure there is no camera in the cab, or it isn't working? Trying to hide the camera in your home isn't an ideal solution ...0 -
The only firm conclusion you can draw from that article is who the Guardian wants to win - and it's not Zeman!NickPalmer said:Czech Presidential election (first round) today. Background:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/11/czech-voters-to-give-verdict-on-presidents-anti-immigrant-populism
And a thin market:
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.128255728
I've no idea about it beyond the article, so not betting myself.
The polls are all over the place - two first round polls this week had Zeman on 42 and 29 per cent and Drahos on 29 and 14 per cent. One had another candidate in the run off with Zeman.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Czech_presidential_election,_2018
If it was a single round election Zeman would win by a landslide on first past the post. In the second round run off its too close to call. We will see which pollsters are accurate tomorrow.
I can't say any electoral system which gives you a President who got potentially as few as 14 per cent of voters first choices amongst all candidates is exactly ideal. But that is what could happen.0 -
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."0 -
Well given only 53% supported even higher National Insurance (compared to just 42% who supported a higher basic rate of income tax) to pay for more funds for the NHS there was still significant opposition even to that tooMorris_Dancer said:Mr. Ace/Mr. Jessop, fair enough. Can't remember where I heard that, and chemistry isn't my strong suit, so I stand corrected.
Mr. HYUFD, as someone not overflowing with monies, I can assure you there is not support from me for higher rates of National Insurance.0 -
Well said.Casino_Royale said:
We need to assess our strategic defence and security threats, work out how we can prepare ourselves to meet them, in conjunction with our allies, and then fund our contributions properly.HYUFD said:
We are not, not even Rees Mogg is saying we should refound the British Empire and since WW2 and Suez it is the USA not the UK and France which has led western intervention abroad. It is therefore the US which needs to ensure it has a bigger and more powerful military than China and Russia rather than us.AlastairMeeks said:
Britain's armed forces have the wrong aims. Britain should not be pretending to be a world power any more.Foxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Nonetheless we do need to ensure we have a bigger military than Argentina and Spain to ensure we can defend the Falklands and Gibraltar if need be in the unlikely event they are attacked and also to ensure we can play a full part in UN and NATO authorised missions
Anything else is irresponsible. The world is a very large place, of which Britain has <1% of its population, and with which we are very interconnected.
To protect our living standards and way of life, the UK must engage at a global level and exercise its soft and hard influence as much as it can. Either we help shape the world, or it will shape us.
Referencing back to the British Empire is just a lazy tool of present-day pacifists to wish away defence spending in preference for spending on something else, and what they think would be a quiet life.</p>0 -
Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan0 -
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/9513733477823201290 -
Mr. NorthWales, Khan's a bloody fool.
One hopes the Yorkshire mayor has more sense and less PC bullshit.0 -
Those who have reached state retiremnet age will happily vote for an increase in National Insurance because they don't pay it - but continue to pay income tax and would vote against an increase in income tax.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/9513733477823201290 -
And as I have said before they only support a 1% rise when at least a 5% rise is needed to fund the 30 billion annual gap in health spending according to the NHS providers.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
No one is suggesting anything remotely sensible on how this gap is closed but lets hope Jeremy Hunt with his green paper in the spring will shed some light on the problem0 -
That poll is a year old, so as the dementia tax showed, people don't like people who put up their taxes, despite what they tell the pollsters.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/9513733477823201290 -
The final paragraph is a complete non sequitur, unsurprisingly spouted by someone who doesn't begin to undertake the type of exercise suggested in the first paragraph.Sandpit said:
Well said.Casino_Royale said:
We need to assess our strategic defence and security threats, work out how we can prepare ourselves to meet them, in conjunction with our allies, and then fund our contributions properly.HYUFD said:
We are not, not even Rees Mogg is saying we should refound the British Empire and since WW2 and Suez it is the USA not the UK and France which has led western intervention abroad. It is therefore the US which needs to ensure it has a bigger and more powerful military than China and Russia rather than us.AlastairMeeks said:
Britain's armed forces have the wrong aims. Britain should not be pretending to be a world power any more.Foxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Nonetheless we do need to ensure we have a bigger military than Argentina and Spain to ensure we can defend the Falklands and Gibraltar if need be in the unlikely event they are attacked and also to ensure we can play a full part in UN and NATO authorised missions
Anything else is irresponsible. The world is a very large place, of which Britain has <1% of its population, and with which we are very interconnected.
To protect our living standards and way of life, the UK must engage at a global level and exercise its soft and hard influence as much as it can. Either we help shape the world, or it will shape us.
Referencing back to the British Empire is just a lazy tool of present-day pacifists to wish away defence spending in preference for spending on something else, and what they think would be a quiet life.</p>
The irony of Brexiters lapping up the final sentence of the penultimate paragraph is GLORIOUS. Being shaped by others is exactly what you just voted for when you chose to leave Britain's closest and deepest international engagement.0 -
So when Boris Johnson slags off Donald Trump that's ok?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan0 -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DwijJfVbBgBig_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan0 -
Now Trump is POTUS Boris has not flagged him off unlike KhanTheScreamingEagles said:
So when Boris Johnson slags off Donald Trump that's ok?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan0 -
Yes quite clearly people don't like government putting up their taxes but they are a bit more supportive of paying higher National Insurance if the money does go to the NHSTheScreamingEagles said:
That poll is a year old, so as the dementia tax showed, people don't like people who put up their taxes, despite what they tell the pollsters.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/9513733477823201290 -
Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.0 -
Mr. HYUFD, it's the same old story. Everybody is ok with a tax rise that doesn't affect them.
Anyway, time to be off.0 -
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.0 -
Khan comes across very well - cracking jokes about it.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Trump of course calls for such people to be beaten up.0 -
So what, we live in a democracy and a majority of voters do not support paying more income tax even for the NHSDavid_Evershed said:
Those who have reached state retiremnet age will happily vote for an increase in National Insurance because they don't pay it - but continue to pay income tax and would vote against an increase in income tax.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/9513733477823201290 -
Do US types have the right to make citizens arrests over here?rkrkrk said:
Khan comes across very well - cracking jokes about it.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Trump of course calls for such people to be beaten up.
0 -
Well that means the Conservative Government, which will always put its own survival and popularity above the interests of the country, will do nothing because it will be terrified of suggesting anything which, although a good idea, would not be popular.HYUFD said:Well given only 53% supported even higher National Insurance (compared to just 42% who supported a higher basic rate of income tax) to pay for more funds for the NHS there was still significant opposition even to that too
If Labour or other parties were to suggest, as an example, ending the NI holiday for those working and already receiving the State pension, would the Conservatives oppose that ?0 -
Of course they do, given that NI isn’t paid by those who are the largest users of the NHS.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
I think that NI on pension income is going to have to be part of the solution, almost everything else takes money from the young and gives it to the old. There are a lot of people getting very large pensions from the old final salary schemes.0 -
What should be happening is we have properly hypothecated NI to pay for state pensions, the NHS etc.brendan16 said:Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.
Life expectancy is also continuing to rise and Millenials are forecast to get the biggest inheritances of any post-war generation and over half of first time buyers get parental assistance with a deposit0 -
If the NHS was a bit more efficient and those who could afford it required to take out private health insurance like Australia it would not need a 5% riseBig_G_NorthWales said:
And as I have said before they only support a 1% rise when at least a 5% rise is needed to fund the 30 billion annual gap in health spending according to the NHS providers.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable upport for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
No one is suggesting anything remotely sensible on how this gap is closed but lets hope Jeremy Hunt with his green paper in the spring will shed some light on the problem0 -
You are very wrong Mr Dancer. Khan is actually a hero, speaking up on behalf of Londoners. You obviously haven't got a clue on how feelings are in London, do you? Do you live here?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. NorthWales, Khan's a bloody fool.
One hopes the Yorkshire mayor has more sense and less PC bullshit.
Trump is a racist piece of a**-wipe. He is not welcome in my country if he dares to come here...0 -
A blueprint for political suicide for whichever party proposed this.Sandpit said:
Of course they do, given that NI isn’t paid by those who are the largest users of the NHS.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
I think that NI on pension income is going to have to be part of the solution, almost everything else takes money from the young and gives it to the old. There are a lot of people getting very large pensions from the old final salary schemes.0 -
Disagreeing with him is fine and needs to be balanced but Khan does not know how to balance the obvious need to object with the wider interest of London and the UK's economyTheScreamingEagles said:
So when Boris Johnson slags off Donald Trump that's ok?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan0 -
I hate this term speaking out on behalf of Londoners as if all Londoners think the same. Not everyone in London backs remain and not everyone thinks that we should seek to ban the President of a long term ally and our largest single trading partner just because we don't like the democratic choice of its voters.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - prod of him!
It might surprise people but nearly 400,000 more people voted for Brexit in London than voted for the Mayor - even after second preferences. Yet you would think London was a leave free zone - dont their views count when 'speaking for Londoners'?
Youth homicides are up 70 per cent year on year, acid attacks per capita are reportedly the highest of any major city in the world and despite being promised a fare freeze the tickets most people buy (annual and monthly and weekly season tickets) are stil rising by inflation. Housing delivery is also falling - it's even worse than under Boris.
Foreign affairs is for national politicians - perhaps local politicians should be focusing more on local problems? And London is not short of local problems.0 -
I don’t know about others, but I’m looking forward to Britain once again having seats at the WTO and other trade bodies, rather than keeping ourselves shackled to an organisation that is supposed to represent our interests in world trade but is more worried about protecting French farmers and Italian wineries than supporting global free trade.AlastairMeeks said:
The final paragraph is a complete non sequitur, unsurprisingly spouted by someone who doesn't begin to undertake the type of exercise suggested in the first paragraph.Sandpit said:
Well said.Casino_Royale said:
We need to assess our strategic defence and security threats, work out how we can prepare ourselves to meet them, in conjunction with our allies, and then fund our contributions properly.HYUFD said:
We are not, not even Rees Mogg is saying we should refound the British Empire and since WW2 and Suez it is the USA not the UK and France which has led western intervention abroad. It is therefore the US which needs to ensure it has a bigger and more powerful military than China and Russia rather than us.AlastairMeeks said:
Britain's armed forces have the wrong aims. Britain should not be pretending to be a world power any more.Foxy said:
Nonetheless we do need to ensure we have a bigger military than Argentina and Spain to ensure we can defend the Falklands and Gibraltar if need be in the unlikely event they are attacked and also to ensure we can play a full part in UN and NATO authorised missions
Anything else is irresponsible. The world is a very large place, of which Britain has <1% of its population, and with which we are very interconnected.
To protect our living standards and way of life, the UK must engage at a global level and exercise its soft and hard influence as much as it can. Either we help shape the world, or it will shape us.
Referencing back to the British Empire is just a lazy tool of present-day pacifists to wish away defence spending in preference for spending on something else, and what they think would be a quiet life.</p>
The irony of Brexiters lapping up the final sentence of the penultimate paragraph is GLORIOUS. Being shaped by others is exactly what you just voted for when you chose to leave Britain's closest and deepest international engagement.0 -
Really ?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
All this to make a cheap jibe at Khan who had the temerity to win an election and defeat a Conservative candidate (how very dare he ?).
The London Mayoralty is a hugely political office - it's actually more symbolic than actual power in many respects - and the incumbent is going to be a political figure.
Let's be honest - some people in the UK quite like Trump, some don't. I suspect no one in London will lose any sleep if Trump doesn't visit nor does it "create more division" with the US whose citizens seem quite amenable to visiting Britain by the plane load.
0 -
I do not disagree but it is Khan's tone that is wrong. A good politician knows how to call out but in a balanced way and not threaten billions of investment into London and the UKmurali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.0 -
So when Boris said Trump was “unfit” to lead America and of “playing the game of the terrorists” that was fine?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Disagreeing with him is fine and needs to be balanced but Khan does not know how to balance the obvious need to object with the wider interest of London and the UK's economyTheScreamingEagles said:
So when Boris Johnson slags off Donald Trump that's ok?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan0 -
Current NI brings in £130billion. NHS is currently around £120b. State pension is around £90b.HYUFD said:
What should be happening is we have properly hypothecated NI to pay for state pensions, the NHS etc.brendan16 said:Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.
Life expectancy is also continuing to rise and Millenials are forecast to get the biggest inheritances of any post-war generation and over half of first time buyers get parental assistance with a deposit
Hypothecating NI for health and welfare would mean a big rise in NI. This might be off-set by a decline in income tax (as health is taken out of general taxation into purely into NI).
There would be merry hell though I think, if NI for working people goes up, but pensioners (who use the bulk of health service costs) are still exempt.0 -
Well, SOME Millenials will get windfall inheritances, and may well be able to clear their debts. But for what percentage will it be significant? The rest will fall further behind. A £180 000 Semi in Leicester, split between 3 children is not going to go a long way. That would be more typical outside the SE. Many will inherit only a few personal keepsakes.HYUFD said:
What should be happening is we have properly hypothecated NI to pay for state pensions, the NHS etc.brendan16 said:Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.
Life expectancy is also continuing to rise and Millenials are forecast to get the biggest inheritances of any post-war generation and over half of first time buyers get parental assistance with a deposit
There is no getting away from the fact that the expansion of the population over the next couple of decades is in the over 65's, with a stable working age population even with current levels of immigration. There will be an increased burden on each worker, and personal care is not easy to automate even if desired. The money has to come from somewhere, and ultimately it has to come from those who have assets, as fleecing those without is not very effective.0 -
Indeed so Mike, see the last election for what happened when someone dared to address the huge problems in funding social care. There needs to be a national conversation about health and social care, that doesn’t involve party-political sniping but rather involves everyone working together to agree a pathway forward.MikeSmithson said:
A blueprint for political suicide for whichever party proposed this.Sandpit said:
Of course they do, given that NI isn’t paid by those who are the largest users of the NHS.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:AlastairMeeks said:I
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
I think that NI on pension income is going to have to be part of the solution, almost everything else takes money from the young and gives it to the old. There are a lot of people getting very large pensions from the old final salary schemes.
If the previous Conservative proposals had been brought forward outside the context of a general election, I think they’d have got more of a hearing. Expecting wealthy people to have the State provide for them in old age is completely unsustainable.0 -
You are missing the point. I despise Trump but I also recognise his influence on investments into the UK. Call him out by all means but in a balanced way.rkrkrk said:
Khan comes across very well - cracking jokes about it.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Trump of course calls for such people to be beaten up.
Macron manages it0 -
Indeed. A cross-party agreement via maybe a Royal Commission might work, but as Warner noted in the Telegraph the other day, the NHS is too valuable as a political tool for the Left to agree a cross-party solution.MikeSmithson said:
A blueprint for political suicide for whichever party proposed this.Sandpit said:
Of course they do, given that NI isn’t paid by those who are the largest users of the NHS.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
snipDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
I think that NI on pension income is going to have to be part of the solution, almost everything else takes money from the young and gives it to the old. There are a lot of people getting very large pensions from the old final salary schemes.0 -
You promised me and indeed your good lady to moderate your language. Has she read this postmurali_s said:
You are very wrong Mr Dancer. Khan is actually a hero, speaking up on behalf of Londoners. You obviously haven't got a clue on how feelings are in London, do you? Do you live here?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. NorthWales, Khan's a bloody fool.
One hopes the Yorkshire mayor has more sense and less PC bullshit.
Trump is a racist piece of a**-wipe. He is not welcome in my country if he dares to come here...0 -
Of course if one or both of those elderly parents needs years of social care the inheritance could be a low as £23000 - less than £8k per kid. A long wait until you are 65 to get £8k which is worth nothing in today's housing market.Foxy said:
Well, SOME Millenials will get windfall inheritances, and may well be able to clear their debts. But for what percentage will it be significant? The rest will fall further behind. A £180 000 Semi in Leicester, split between 3 children is not going to go a long way. That would be more typical outside the SE. Many will inherit only a few personal keepsakes.HYUFD said:
What should be happening is we have properly hypothecated NI to pay for state pensions, the NHS etc.brendan16 said:Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.
Life expectancy is also continuing to rise and Millenials are forecast to get the biggest inheritances of any post-war generation and over half of first time buyers get parental assistance with a deposit
There is no getting away from the fact that the expansion of the population over the next couple of decades is in the over 65's, with a stable working age population even with current levels of immigration. There will be an increased burden on each worker, and personal care is not easy to automate even if desired. The money has to come from somewhere, and ultimately it has to come from those who have assets, as fleecing those without is not very effective.
May wanted to increase that to £100k - or £33k per kid. But people didn't like it as they thought their kids would get a lower inheritance. Bizarre!0 -
For residential care wealthy people already have to pay for their own care bar £23k, including their homes being liable but the home being included for personal at home care is now clearly deadSandpit said:
Indeed so Mike, see the last election for what happened when someone dared to address the huge problems in funding social care. There needs to be a national conversation about health and social care, that doesn’t involve party-political sniping but rather involves everyone working together to agree a pathway forward.MikeSmithson said:
A blueprint for political suicide for whichever party proposed this.Sandpit said:
Of course they do, given that NI isn’t paid by those who are the largest users of the NHS.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for igher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:AlastairMeeks said:I
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
I think that NI on pension income is going to have to be part of the solution, almost everything else takes money from the young and gives it to the old. There are a lot of people getting very large pensions from the old final salary schemes.
If the previous Conservative proposals had been brought forward outside the context of a general election, I think they’d have got more of a hearing. Expecting wealthy people to have the State provide for them in old age is completely unsustainable.0 -
Let's not conflate people and institutions because therein lies the potential for all manner of double standards. Trump may be a deplorable man, but we respect the offlice of the POTUS.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.0 -
You might lose sleep when Trump decides to back France and divert billions away from Londonstodge said:
Really ?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
All this to make a cheap jibe at Khan who had the temerity to win an election and defeat a Conservative candidate (how very dare he ?).
The London Mayoralty is a hugely political office - it's actually more symbolic than actual power in many respects - and the incumbent is going to be a political figure.
Let's be honest - some people in the UK quite like Trump, some don't. I suspect no one in London will lose any sleep if Trump doesn't visit nor does it "create more division" with the US whose citizens seem quite amenable to visiting Britain by the plane load.0 -
Wfa, NI free old age income, free bus passes and the universal state pension are clearly going to be gone come 2045 or so. Might as well get on with it.Sandpit said:
Indeed so Mike, see the last election for what happened when someone dared to address the huge problems in funding social care. There needs to be a national conversation about health and social care, that doesn’t involve party-political sniping but rather involves everyone working together to agree a pathway forward.MikeSmithson said:
A blueprint for political suicide for whichever party proposed this.Sandpit said:
Of course they do, given that NI isn’t paid by those who are the largest users of the NHS.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
Everyone in work as an employee from the age of 16 is liable for National Insurance and as the retirement age increases as we live longer so more of the older population will still be liable for it. What is clear is there is support for higher National Insurance (an increase ideally hypothecated for the NHS and social care) but there is not support for a higher basic rate of income taxDavid_Evershed said:HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:AlastairMeeks said:I
Not everyone is liable for National Insurance. For example the elderly are exempt.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
I think that NI on pension income is going to have to be part of the solution, almost everything else takes money from the young and gives it to the old. There are a lot of people getting very large pensions from the old final salary schemes.
If the previous Conservative proposals had been brought forward outside the context of a general election, I think they’d have got more of a hearing. Expecting wealthy people to have the State provide for them in old age is completely unsustainable.0 -
I was one of the few here in favour of the Dementia Tax, back in the Spring FWIW.brendan16 said:
Of course if one or both of those elderly parents needs years of social care the inheritance could be a low as £23000 - less than £8k per kid. A long wait until you are 65 to get £8k which is worth nothing in today's housing market.Foxy said:
Well, SOME Millenials will get windfall inheritances, and may well be able to clear their debts. But for what percentage will it be significant? The rest will fall further behind. A £180 000 Semi in Leicester, split between 3 children is not going to go a long way. That would be more typical outside the SE. Many will inherit only a few personal keepsakes.HYUFD said:
What should be happening is we have properly hypothecated NI to pay for state pensions, the NHS etc.brendan16 said:Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.
Life expectancy is also continuing to rise and Millenials are forecast to get the biggest inheritances of any post-war generation and over half of first time buyers get parental assistance with a deposit
There is no getting away from the fact that the expansion of the population over the next couple of decades is in the over 65's, with a stable working age population even with current levels of immigration. There will be an increased burden on each worker, and personal care is not easy to automate even if desired. The money has to come from somewhere, and ultimately it has to come from those who have assets, as fleecing those without is not very effective.
May wanted to increase that to £100k - or £33k per kid. But people didn't like it as they thought their kids would get a lower inheritance. Bizarre!0 -
Are they? Are you seriously pretending that the Labour party puts the national interest first. You need to have a chat with the marines.stodge said:
Well that means the Conservative Government, which will always put its own survival and popularity above the interests of the country, will do nothing because it will be terrified of suggesting anything which, although a good idea, would not be popular.HYUFD said:Well given only 53% supported even higher National Insurance (compared to just 42% who supported a higher basic rate of income tax) to pay for more funds for the NHS there was still significant opposition even to that too
If Labour or other parties were to suggest, as an example, ending the NI holiday for those working and already receiving the State pension, would the Conservatives oppose that ?0 -
The Chinese - who are actively persecuting their Muslim minority let alone their other human rights abuses - and Malaysia - where being gay is illegal and corruption is high - are both involved in huge development agreements with the Mayor to fund major infrastructure and regeneration projects worth billions. Is it ok to take their money and forget about the morality? Just seems slight double standards to me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are missing the point. I despise Trump but I also recognise his influence on investments into the UK. Call him out by all means but in a balanced way.rkrkrk said:
Khan comes across very well - cracking jokes about it.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Trump of course calls for such people to be beaten up.
Macron manages it0 -
NI was originally set up in the first place to pay for healthcare, state pensions and unemployment insurance so would be returning to first principles. Pensioners of course will have paid NI throughout their working livesrottenborough said:
Current NI brings in £130billion. NHS is currently around £120b. State pension is around £90b.HYUFD said:
What should be happening is we have properly hypothecated NI to pay for state pensions, the NHS etc.brendan16 said:Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.
Life expectancy is also continuing to rise and Millenials are forecast to get the biggest inheritances of any post-war generation and over half of first time buyers get parental assistance with a deposit
Hypothecating NI for health and welfare would mean a big rise in NI. This might be off-set by a decline in income tax (as health is taken out of general taxation into purely into NI).
There would be merry hell though I think, if NI for working people goes up, but pensioners (who use the bulk of health service costs) are still exempt.0 -
Judging by your language you could easily be Trump's dimmer cousin.murali_s said:
You are very wrong Mr Dancer. Khan is actually a hero, speaking up on behalf of Londoners. You obviously haven't got a clue on how feelings are in London, do you? Do you live here?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. NorthWales, Khan's a bloody fool.
One hopes the Yorkshire mayor has more sense and less PC bullshit.
Trump is a racist piece of a**-wipe. He is not welcome in my country if he dares to come here...0 -
So what? House prices and the cost of living are far lower outside London and the South East.Foxy said:
Well, SOME Millenials will get windfall inheritances, and may well be able to clear their debts. But for what percentage will it be significant? The rest will fall further behind. A £180 000 Semi in Leicester, split between 3 children is not going to go a long way. That would be more typical outside the SE. Many will inherit only a few personal keepsakes.HYUFD said:
What should be happening is we have properly hypothecated NI to pay for state pensions, the NHS etc.brendan16 said:Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.
Life expectancy is also continuing to rise and Millenials are forecast to get the biggest inheritances of any post-war generation and over half of first time buyers get parental assistance with a deposit
There is no getting away from the fact that the expansion of the population over the next couple of decades is in the over 65's, with a stable working age population even with current levels of immigration. There will be an increased burden on each worker, and personal care is not easy to automate even if desired. The money has to come from somewhere, and ultimately it has to come from those who have assets, as fleecing those without is not very effective.
In the North and sometimes the Midlands too you can buy a flat or house without help on your own or with a partner on an average salary, something impossible in the South East.
The money for increased social care will come from NI, especially when those with assets already pay for their own residential care anyway0 -
D'ye think Trump respects the office of POTUS?PeterC said:
Let's not conflate people and institutions because therein lies the potential for all manner of double standards. Trump may be a deplorable man, but we respect the offlice of the POTUS.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.0 -
Sadiq Khan is Mr Double Standards. Also don’t forget the Qataris, who are buying up London at an astonishing rate and are now considered pariahs by their own neighbours.brendan16 said:
The Chinese - who are actively persecuting their Muslim minority let alone their other human rights abuses - and Malaysia - where being gay is illegal and corruption is high - are both involved in huge development agreements with the Mayor to fund major infrastructure and regeneration projects worth billions. Is it ok to take their money and forget about the morality? Just seems slight double standards to me.Big_G_NorthWales said:
You are missing the point. I despise Trump but I also recognise his influence on investments into the UK. Call him out by all means but in a balanced way.rkrkrk said:
Khan comes across very well - cracking jokes about it.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Trump of course calls for such people to be beaten up.
Macron manages it0 -
I really don't know. Either way it doesn't matter. I respect it and do not want arbitrary decisions to be made based on the personality of the person who holds that office at any given time.Theuniondivvie said:
D'ye think Trump respects the office of POTUS?PeterC said:
Let's not conflate people and institutions because therein lies the potential for all manner of double standards. Trump may be a deplorable man, but we respect the offlice of the POTUS.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.0 -
MikeSmithson said:Sandpit said:
We need a Royal Commission on the NHS with all options up for consideration.HYUFD said:
A blueprint for political suicide for whichever party proposed this.David_Evershed said:
Of course they do, given that NI isn’t paid by those who are the largest users of the NHS.HYUFD said:
I have news for you, the retirement age is rising to 67 and only a minority support paying a higher basic rate of income tax for the NHS but a majority support paying higher National Insurance to fund itDavid_Evershed said:
I have news for you. You don't pay national insurance once you reach state pension age - unless you are self employed.HYUFD said:
A yougov poll last week had a majority supporting an increase in national insurance to pay for the NHS but a majority opposing an increase in the basic rate of income tax to pay for itFoxy said:
The truth is that the Armed Services, alongside the NHS and Social Care have all suffered decade long austerity. There is only so much that can be done with slashed equipment budgets, and no jam on the horizon.AlastairMeeks said:I see that today is the day that all the people who strongly counsel that increasing funding for the NHS is unaffordable are going to be confirming that they want to increase Britain's spending on defence.
From @Dura_Ace comments it does sound as if the RN has the same problems of recruitment and retention of the right calibre of personnel as does my own organisation.
I hate debt, so do not advocate increased borrowing. We either put up taxes or decide that there are some things that the State does not provide. Of course, this takes money out of peoples pockets by other means, so little real advantage.
See https://www.gov.uk/tax-national-insurance-after-state-pension-age which states
"You don’t pay National Insurance after you reach State Pension age - unless you’re self-employed and paying Class 4 contributions."
https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/951373347782320129
I think that NI on pension income is going to have to be part of the solution, almost everything else takes money from the young and gives it to the old. There are a lot of people getting very large pensions from the old final salary schemes.0 -
Do you think two wrongs make a right?Theuniondivvie said:
D'ye think Trump respects the office of POTUS?PeterC said:
Let's not conflate people and institutions because therein lies the potential for all manner of double standards. Trump may be a deplorable man, but we respect the offlice of the POTUS.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.
We should respect the office of POTUS despite Trump not because of him.0 -
Yes - has Khan or anyone else criticised the office of the POTUS?PeterC said:
Let's not conflate people and institutions because therein lies the potential for all manner of double standards. Trump may be a deplorable man, but we respect the offlice of the POTUS.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.
Most democratic politicians accept that people will sometimes criticise them. The fact that Trump seems unusually touchy shouldn't mean we all have to shut up. His comments about others are a great deal worse than any comment made by any British politician.
As for investment, investors really pay little attention to politicians squabbling - they look at the fundamentals of the investment prospect.0 -
Expecting the children of anyone and everyone to have £100k to inherit while the rest of us pick up the tab for their parents' or grandparents' care is also wrong.Sandpit said:Indeed so Mike, see the last election for what happened when someone dared to address the huge problems in funding social care. There needs to be a national conversation about health and social care, that doesn’t involve party-political sniping but rather involves everyone working together to agree a pathway forward.
If the previous Conservative proposals had been brought forward outside the context of a general election, I think they’d have got more of a hearing. Expecting wealthy people to have the State provide for them in old age is completely unsustainable.
0 -
That is the kind of argument one expects from a 10 year old spoilt privately educated bra......TheScreamingEagles said:
So when Boris said Trump was “unfit” to lead America and of “playing the game of the terrorists” that was fine?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Disagreeing with him is fine and needs to be balanced but Khan does not know how to balance the obvious need to object with the wider interest of London and the UK's economyTheScreamingEagles said:
So when Boris Johnson slags off Donald Trump that's ok?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan0 -
Do you not see a difference between criticising an individual candidate who currently hasn't been elected yet . . . and actively snubbing a visit of a Foreign Head of State/Government who are visiting in an official capacity related to their being the Head of State?TheScreamingEagles said:
So when Boris said Trump was “unfit” to lead America and of “playing the game of the terrorists” that was fine?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Disagreeing with him is fine and needs to be balanced but Khan does not know how to balance the obvious need to object with the wider interest of London and the UK's economyTheScreamingEagles said:
So when Boris Johnson slags off Donald Trump that's ok?Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Opening the American embassy is official business of the American government. If it was a case of Trump having proposed to visit to open a Trump hotel in London that would be completely different.0 -
That is only if they need residential care which still only affects a minority, if they need personal care at home now the disastrous dementia tax has been scrapped the home stays in the family.brendan16 said:
Of course if one or both of those elderly parents needs years of social care the inheritance could be a low as £23000 - less than £8k per kid. A long wait until you are 65 to get £8k which is worth nothing in today's housing market.Foxy said:
Well, SOME Millenials will get windfall inheritances, and may well be able to clear their debts. But for what percentage will it be significant? The rest will fall further behind. not very effective.HYUFD said:
What should be happening is we have properly hypothecated NI to pay for state pensions, the NHS etc.brendan16 said:Why shouldn't well off pensioners pay NI? It's not as if the money we pay is ring fenced and put into a ring fenced pension pot. It is general taxation with the pretence it is not. I am sure we could find a way to record state pension contributions in other ways if we just merged it with income tax.
I expect many of today's young people won't get a state pension - they will die before they get it after a life in c**p rented accommodation on low paid insecure jobs with less social care and NHS support which takes a huge toll on their life expectancy
But that is the idea actuarially - you want more people to die before they get a pension as it saves money. And I fully expect life expectancy to soon start falling.
Of course if we weren't £2 trillion in debt and spending £50bn a year on debt interest we could afford a lot more health spending. More borrowing for the NHS today just means more debt interest and less NHS spending in the future - another problem passed onto our grandkids and their kids.
Life expectancy is also continuing to rise and Millenials are forecast to get the biggest inheritances of any post-war generation and over half of first time buyers get parental assistance with a deposit
May wanted to increase that to £100k - or £33k per kid. But people didn't like it as they thought their kids would get a lower inheritance. Bizarre!
Plus of course 52% of first time buyers now get support from their parents with a deposit and buying their first home in their 20s and 30s ie they get a significant part of their inheritance as a gift well before their parents actually die0 -
The Labour Party wasn't in Government last time I looked. The Conservative Party are the ones with the problem to resolve because they are in Government. They have become incapable of taking the tough decisions because they are paralysed by fear of being unpopular.felix said:
Are they? Are you seriously pretending that the Labour party puts the national interest first. You need to have a chat with the marines.
0 -
Kahn has gone too far, effectively telling Trump to get lost. This disrespects both the man and the office. Trump's sins are largely rhetorical. We have rolled out the red carpet for characters whose laguage may have been more restrained but whose deeds have been far worse.NickPalmer said:
Yes - has Khan or anyone else criticised the office of the POTUS?PeterC said:
Let's not conflate people and institutions because therein lies the potential for all manner of double standards. Trump may be a deplorable man, but we respect the offlice of the POTUS.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.
Most democratic politicians accept that people will sometimes criticise them. The fact that Trump seems unusually touchy shouldn't mean we all have to shut up. His comments about others are a great deal worse than any comment made by any British politician.
As for investment, investors really pay little attention to politicians squabbling - they look at the fundamentals of the investment prospect.0 -
Well, I don't like Mrs May purporting to speak for me (or for "Britain", as though all Brits thought as she does), nor my local MP Jeremy Hunt. But it's a well-established convention that whoever is elected is appointed for the electoral period to speak on behalf of their area as they think fit. If we feel they misuse the opportunity, we vote them out. Shrug.brendan16 said:
I hate this term speaking out on behalf of Londoners as if all Londoners think the same.0 -
Yes. He said the POTUS visiting the American Embassy in London to officially open it shouldn't happen.NickPalmer said:
Yes - has Khan or anyone else criticised the office of the POTUS?PeterC said:
Let's not conflate people and institutions because therein lies the potential for all manner of double standards. Trump may be a deplorable man, but we respect the offlice of the POTUS.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.
That isn't Trump on personal business it is the POTUS opening America's embassy. That goes above what you think of the individual.
The rules of diplomacy apply to embassies etc and supercede what you think of the individual.0 -
In your socialist opinionstodge said:
Expecting the children of anyone and everyone to have £100k to inherit while the rest of us pick up the tab for their parents' or grandparents' care is also wrong.Sandpit said:Indeed so Mike, see the last election for what happened when someone dared to address the huge problems in funding social care. There needs to be a national conversation about health and social care, that doesn’t involve party-political sniping but rather involves everyone working together to agree a pathway forward.
If the previous Conservative proposals had been brought forward outside the context of a general election, I think they’d have got more of a hearing. Expecting wealthy people to have the State provide for them in old age is completely unsustainable.0 -
Or Kerry Smith's.felix said:
Judging by your language you could easily be Trump's dimmer cousin.murali_s said:
You are very wrong Mr Dancer. Khan is actually a hero, speaking up on behalf of Londoners. You obviously haven't got a clue on how feelings are in London, do you? Do you live here?Morris_Dancer said:Mr. NorthWales, Khan's a bloody fool.
One hopes the Yorkshire mayor has more sense and less PC bullshit.
Trump is a racist piece of a**-wipe. He is not welcome in my country if he dares to come here...0 -
.
'For residential care wealthy people already have to pay for their own care bar £23k, including their homes being liable but the home being included for personal at home care is now clearly dead'
My dad had to pay £600 a month for 1.5 hours home care a day - his and my mothers house is worth about £450k but he had cash savings. Someone owning a £3m house with savings below £23k and a modest pension would have got it all for free.
If my parents had used their money to buy a bigger house rather than stupidly saving it in cash my dad would have got his home care for free.
I have no problem with means testing but the current system whereby someone who has £3m in assets (a house) gets free home care but someone with only £100k in assets (a £50k house and £50k in cash) has to pay all their home care until they run down those savings to below £23k is a downright Crazy.
As with residential care there is no need to pay upfront - you place a charge on the property and the estate pays after death.
Why should someone worth £3m get free home care but someone worth £100k have to pay the entire cost - just depending on the asset source?
Not that I expect most people who objected to the dementia tax even knew what they were objecting to - inheritances would have been higher for most people not lower! How many people really understand how it all works until their parents or nan go through it.
And let's not get into the continuing health care funding vs social care funding postcode lottery. The whole thing needs an overhaul but no one has the guts to address the inherent unfairness and arbitrary nature of who gets what and who pays.0 -
'Tis as if the all that bilious squawking after Barry's 'back of the queue' comment had never happened. Still, he was part Kenyan with an ancestral dislike of Britain, so deserved all he got.Philip_Thompson said:
Do you think two wrongs make a right?Theuniondivvie said:
D'ye think Trump respects the office of POTUS?PeterC said:
Let's not conflate people and institutions because therein lies the potential for all manner of double standards. Trump may be a deplorable man, but we respect the offlice of the POTUS.murali_s said:
You are wrong here. Sadiq is speaking on behalf of Londoners - very much in tune with the people.Big_G_NorthWales said:Sky reporting on an attempt by some US/Trump supporters to make a non violent citizens arrest of Sadiq Khan at the opening of a Fabian conference this morning
It does highlight how far Sadiq Khan had gone in creating even more division between the UK and US and all for short term political gain.
It does show Khan as a politician who is too political and not seeing the wider picture.
I despise Trump who is a disaster but we do need to show respect to the US and all this nonsense is in such stark contrast to how Macron and France dealt with Trump.
But Macron is a grown up politician unlike Khan
Racism must be called out and strongly condemned whenever it occurs.
Well done Sadiq - proud of him!
Let's not conflate Trump with the US.
We should respect the office of POTUS despite Trump not because of him.0
