Does anyone in CCHQ have any idea what they are doing?
No
S U R E L Y, there can't have been nobody in Sunak's team that looked at the speech and said: 'considering the top story about you at the moment is that you left D-Day early and - literally - failed to stand with our allies, we should drop this line'.
Yep. What a pointless twat. They think they are the last heroes fighting the coming nightfall. Totally self unaware like all violent zealots You beat Farage with your words, only ever your words.
Also this stuff is gold dust for Farage. It makes him look like the ordinary man they are trying to silence, the voice of the people they want to kill, it gets him more media attention and more public sympathy
The nightmare for Farage is being ignored. Now he will be one of the main news stories of the day, again. Because some utter bell-end hurled a rock at him
In answer to @TimS’s question, yes there was a goat-like politician. Dr Rhodes Boyson
One for the PB kids, there
Interviewed by Ali G
And on Brass Eye from memory.
Brass Eyes greatest moment was getting Phil Collins to say 'I'm talking nonce sense' in the Pedogeddon special
Mad Frankie Fraser's "Madometer"
Or Neil Fox : Genetically, pedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than they do with you and me. Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it's scientific fact
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
I'm very sorry you haven't got a DB pension Barty but you do appreciate they were part of the package which some people chose to accept, others opted for different packages at different employers.
You have not paid a penny of my DB pension, unless you contributed to the profits of those companies I worked for, and then presumably you did so because you chose to.
They were a part of the package yes.
But they were never paid for at the time. The bill was passed on.
We're still paying today for DB schemes. Every taxpayer is.
Instead of NI being a higher rate of tax on employment, a higher rate of tax on DB pensions to reflect the way they were unfunded and still need paying for would make more sense.
Alternatively we could tax everyone the same.
But that's how finances work. If you have a mortgage you aren't setting aside a fund out of which to make future payments, you are relying on the prospect of future wages. People tend to start costing the NHS once they hit 50. Do you want to deny them treatment because nobody set aside a fund in 1974 to pay for their future ailments?
Throwing a rock at someone’s head could conceivably be “attempted murder”? You are deliberately doing something violent to someone in the full knowledge it might kill them, and for no other reason than to hurt them
IANAL but that feels qualitatively different to the milkshakes
Throwing a rock at someone’s head could conceivably be “attempted murder”? You are deliberately doing something violent to someone in the full knowledge it might kill them, and for no other reason than to hurt them
IANAL but that feels qualitatively different to the milkshakes
“Yes, in English law, throwing a rock at someone’s head with the intent to cause serious injury or death could potentially be prosecuted as “attempted murder.” For a charge of attempted murder, the prosecution must prove that the defendant had the intent to kill the victim and took a direct action towards that end. If the act of throwing the rock is seen as a direct action with the intent to kill, then it could meet the criteria for attempted murder.
However, the specific charge would depend on the circumstances and the intent behind the action. If the intent was to cause serious harm but not necessarily to kill, it might instead be prosecuted under different charges, such as grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent, which is also a serious offense under English law.”
Sounds like the latter. GBH with intent
And:
In English law, the offense of grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent, which is charged under Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, is considered very serious. The maximum sentence for GBH with intent is life imprisonment.
The actual sentence imposed will depend on various factors, including the severity of the injuries inflicted, the circumstances of the offense, the intent and premeditation involved, the defendant's criminal history, and any mitigating or aggravating factors. Sentencing guidelines help judges determine the appropriate sentence within the range up to the maximum of life imprisonment.
Anyone else think the Micheal Moseley story doesn't make any sense? As someone who studied medicine why would he not take loads of water with him?
Knowledge ≠ common sense
67 year old bloke in 40c heat starts to stagger about a bit. Wanders off in the wrong direction then sits down and dies.
My wife and I went from Adelaide to Alice Springs on the Ghan and of course we were in an air conditioned compartment throughout, but alighting off the train in Alice Springs it was in excess of 40c and the heat just took your breath away and walking to the air conditioned station was an effort
It is a disabling heat and very sad Dr Mosley was overcome by it, but I can understand it though the coroner's report will be interesting
Yes I think people forget that temperatures approaching that level aren’t just “very hot/uncomfortable to be out in” and are actively energy sapping/dangerous to be out in for extended periods.
A short walk to a shop or a restaurant, maybe. A hike uphill with no shade and limited/no water? Becoming very very dangerous, quickly.
In answer to @TimS’s question, yes there was a goat-like politician. Dr Rhodes Boyson
One for the PB kids, there
Interviewed by Ali G
And on Brass Eye from memory.
Brass Eyes greatest moment was getting Phil Collins to say 'I'm talking nonce sense' in the Pedogeddon special
Mad Frankie Fraser's "Madometer"
Or Neil Fox : Genetically, pedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than they do with you and me. Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it's scientific fact
John Redwood introducing a track from "DJ Bob Hoskins going mental in a dustbin" !!!!!
Throwing a rock at someone’s head could conceivably be “attempted murder”? You are deliberately doing something violent to someone in the full knowledge it might kill them, and for no other reason than to hurt them
IANAL but that feels qualitatively different to the milkshakes
No one's disagreeing with you.
I was actually hoping one of PB’s lawyers would provide the skinny but modern tech has done the job
In answer to @TimS’s question, yes there was a goat-like politician. Dr Rhodes Boyson
One for the PB kids, there
Interviewed by Ali G
And on Brass Eye from memory.
Brass Eyes greatest moment was getting Phil Collins to say 'I'm talking nonce sense' in the Pedogeddon special
Mad Frankie Fraser's "Madometer"
Or Neil Fox : Genetically, pedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than they do with you and me. Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it's scientific fact
John Redwood introducing a track from "DJ Bob Hoskins going mental in a dustbin" !!!!!
Anyone else think the Micheal Moseley story doesn't make any sense? As someone who studied medicine why would he not take loads of water with him?
Knowledge ≠ common sense
67 year old bloke in 40c heat starts to stagger about a bit. Wanders off in the wrong direction then sits down and dies.
My wife and I went from Adelaide to Alice Springs on the Ghan and of course we were in an air conditioned compartment throughout, but alighting off the train in Alice Springs it was in excess of 40c and the heat just took your breath away and walking to the air conditioned station was an effort
It is a disabling heat and very sad Dr Mosley was overcome by it, but I can understand it though the coroner's report will be interesting
Yes I think people forget that temperatures approaching that level aren’t just “very hot/uncomfortable to be out in” and are actively energy sapping/dangerous to be out in for extended periods.
A short walk to a shop or a restaurant, maybe. A hike uphill with no shade and limited/no water? Becoming very very dangerous, quickly.
Pim Fortuyn was hit by a cake a few weeks before he was murdered. Normalising physical assaults on politicians is very bad and never just a bit of fun.
Nothing on IHT Sunak doesn't care about the Tory party that much is clear
Why brief for months on IHT?
Just madness.
imho it was the one thing that might get them a listen again in Blue Wall.
And that's why they won't include it. Because they are idiots. #zero seats
I think they will, just a day or two before the postal votes go in.
What? You think they're going to come out with it as an "oh, btw we forgot to mention this in the manifesto..." #desperationstakes
Maybe... Well I didn't think there would be an election till 2025 so. But the Cons have been edging IHT for years and it seems like the last bribe for the wavering home counties faragists.
Throwing a rock at someone’s head could conceivably be “attempted murder”? You are deliberately doing something violent to someone in the full knowledge it might kill them, and for no other reason than to hurt them
IANAL but that feels qualitatively different to the milkshakes
Neither is good, but throwing a projectile could have physical consequences that a beverage doesn’t.
Also if you are opposed to Farage it seems the stupidest thing in the world to do stuff that gets the rest of the political class defending him. The last thing genuine opponents of Farage should be doing is garnering him sympathy, but then Antifa types rarely help themselves in this regard.
In answer to @TimS’s question, yes there was a goat-like politician. Dr Rhodes Boyson
One for the PB kids, there
Interviewed by Ali G
And on Brass Eye from memory.
Brass Eyes greatest moment was getting Phil Collins to say 'I'm talking nonce sense' in the Pedogeddon special
Mad Frankie Fraser's "Madometer"
Or Neil Fox : Genetically, pedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than they do with you and me. Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it's scientific fact
John Redwood introducing a track from "DJ Bob Hoskins going mental in a dustbin" !!!!!
Pim Fortuyn was hit by a cake a few weeks before he was murdered. Normalising physical assaults on politicians is very bad and never just a bit of fun.
Well without any change to Inheritance tax, attacking Labour is all Rishi has to offer...
The £2k lie already seems to be coming up in focus groups as a concern about Labour. Lying works. Ask Boris. It catches up with you eventually, but for the period of an election campaign, it works.
Is it a lie?
As far as I can tell (not having looked very hard) they’ve (a) made some negative assumptions about tax/spending policies; and (b) converted 4x £500 into £2,000 without being clear about time periods
But both of those are stuff that politicians have done for ever (including Gordon Brpwn on spending). Not really a “lie”.
The reality is taxes will go up regardless of who wins. Whether than is £1k or 2k is just a matter of debate
In answer to @TimS’s question, yes there was a goat-like politician. Dr Rhodes Boyson
One for the PB kids, there
Interviewed by Ali G
And on Brass Eye from memory.
Brass Eyes greatest moment was getting Phil Collins to say 'I'm talking nonce sense' in the Pedogeddon special
Mad Frankie Fraser's "Madometer"
Or Neil Fox : Genetically, pedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than they do with you and me. Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it's scientific fact
John Redwood introducing a track from "DJ Bob Hoskins going mental in a dustbin" !!!!!
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
I'm very sorry you haven't got a DB pension Barty but you do appreciate they were part of the package which some people chose to accept, others opted for different packages at different employers.
You have not paid a penny of my DB pension, unless you contributed to the profits of those companies I worked for, and then presumably you did so because you chose to.
They were a part of the package yes.
But they were never paid for at the time. The bill was passed on.
We're still paying today for DB schemes. Every taxpayer is.
Instead of NI being a higher rate of tax on employment, a higher rate of tax on DB pensions to reflect the way they were unfunded and still need paying for would make more sense.
Alternatively we could tax everyone the same.
You're presumably talking about public service DB pensions. My private sector DB pension was paid for at the time.
And for public sector DB pension recipients, why should they be penalised for the failings of their employer? Had those pensions been paid for at the time we'd still all have been paying for them as taxpayers.
As you know, I have always agreed with you that earned income should be taxed at the same or lower rates as unearned income (be that pensions or dividends).
Many private sector firms have had to top up their DB schemes precisely because they weren't adequately funded but the obligations were still accrued, but that's a private concern, yes. Public sector ones are a much bigger public concern.
Why should today's workers be penalised for the failings of previous workers employers either?
I'd be happy with all income rated at the same rate, but if we were to tax anything higher it should be DB pensions higher than earned incomes.
"How many flights - or people - will leave for Rwanda each month under the prime minister's asylum plan, an Express journalist asks. Sunak says that detail has deliberately not been included for reasons of operational security."
Really.
For reasons of us having no idea would have been a slightly less disingenuous answer.
Macron's decision to call a snap general election may be as disastrous as Sunak's. The first poll from Harris puts RN on the cusp of a majority.
I heard a theory that he's ok with that. Sully the far right with some government so they can't run for president as insurgents who can just moan and push buttons and make wild promises.
It would be far more effective if people turned their backs on Farage or were silent. I agree a) throwing any object at anyone is stupid and needs to be dealt with and b) this is all good publicity for Farage. Were he to be ignored it would be much more negative.
Nothing on IHT Sunak doesn't care about the Tory party that much is clear
Why brief for months on IHT?
Just madness.
imho it was the one thing that might get them a listen again in Blue Wall.
And that's why they won't include it. Because they are idiots. #zero seats
I think they will, just a day or two before the postal votes go in.
What? You think they're going to come out with it as an "oh, btw we forgot to mention this in the manifesto..." #desperationstakes
Maybe... Well I didn't think there would be an election till 2025 so. But the Cons have been edging IHT for years and it seems like the last bribe for the wavering home counties faragists.
We are at the stage at an Eagles concert where they have said thanks and goodnight but they have not yet done Hotel California.
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
I'm very sorry you haven't got a DB pension Barty but you do appreciate they were part of the package which some people chose to accept, others opted for different packages at different employers.
You have not paid a penny of my DB pension, unless you contributed to the profits of those companies I worked for, and then presumably you did so because you chose to.
They were a part of the package yes.
But they were never paid for at the time. The bill was passed on.
We're still paying today for DB schemes. Every taxpayer is.
Instead of NI being a higher rate of tax on employment, a higher rate of tax on DB pensions to reflect the way they were unfunded and still need paying for would make more sense.
Alternatively we could tax everyone the same.
But that's how finances work. If you have a mortgage you aren't setting aside a fund out of which to make future payments, you are relying on the prospect of future wages. People tend to start costing the NHS once they hit 50. Do you want to deny them treatment because nobody set aside a fund in 1974 to pay for their future ailments?
No.
I want today's well off pensioners who are in a privileged position to pay at least the same rate of tax as someone earning the same income via PAYE.
“Yes, in English law, throwing a rock at someone’s head with the intent to cause serious injury or death could potentially be prosecuted as “attempted murder.” For a charge of attempted murder, the prosecution must prove that the defendant had the intent to kill the victim and took a direct action towards that end. If the act of throwing the rock is seen as a direct action with the intent to kill, then it could meet the criteria for attempted murder.
However, the specific charge would depend on the circumstances and the intent behind the action. If the intent was to cause serious harm but not necessarily to kill, it might instead be prosecuted under different charges, such as grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent, which is also a serious offense under English law.”
Sounds like the latter. GBH with intent
And:
In English law, the offense of grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent, which is charged under Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, is considered very serious. The maximum sentence for GBH with intent is life imprisonment.
The actual sentence imposed will depend on various factors, including the severity of the injuries inflicted, the circumstances of the offense, the intent and premeditation involved, the defendant's criminal history, and any mitigating or aggravating factors. Sentencing guidelines help judges determine the appropriate sentence within the range up to the maximum of life imprisonment.
Attempted murder is, notoriously, one of the hardest crimes to prove, as it requires an intent to kill, but also a lack of success. Whereas murder requires success in killing but NOT an intent to kill - only an intent to commit GBH.
Eric Ciotti, the leader of the centre-right Les Républicains party formerly led b.y Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy, will announce tonight that he will cooperate with Marine Le Pen's Rassemblement National.
This will be in the form of local electoral alliances
Pim Fortuyn was hit by a cake a few weeks before he was murdered. Normalising physical assaults on politicians is very bad and never just a bit of fun.
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
I'm very sorry you haven't got a DB pension Barty but you do appreciate they were part of the package which some people chose to accept, others opted for different packages at different employers.
You have not paid a penny of my DB pension, unless you contributed to the profits of those companies I worked for, and then presumably you did so because you chose to.
They were a part of the package yes.
But they were never paid for at the time. The bill was passed on.
We're still paying today for DB schemes. Every taxpayer is.
Instead of NI being a higher rate of tax on employment, a higher rate of tax on DB pensions to reflect the way they were unfunded and still need paying for would make more sense.
Alternatively we could tax everyone the same.
But that's how finances work. If you have a mortgage you aren't setting aside a fund out of which to make future payments, you are relying on the prospect of future wages. People tend to start costing the NHS once they hit 50. Do you want to deny them treatment because nobody set aside a fund in 1974 to pay for their future ailments?
No.
I want today's well off pensioners who are in a privileged position to pay at least the same rate of tax as someone earning the same income via PAYE.
That is reasonable and I agree, but it has nothing to do with DB pensions being funded or not
Throwing a rock at someone’s head could conceivably be “attempted murder”? You are deliberately doing something violent to someone in the full knowledge it might kill them, and for no other reason than to hurt them
IANAL but that feels qualitatively different to the milkshakes
Knowledge it "might" kill them is insufficient for attempted murder. You need to intend to kill.
Attempted murder is harder to prosecute in that sense than murder, as the mens rea is narrower. For murder the intent can be "only" to seriously injure.
I see Sunak now trying the 'Don't hand them a Landslide" defence.
The most successful democratic party in the world reduced to this.
LOL.
Another 24 days of this execrable performance to endure. It’s no wonder that even the politically engaged are tuning out the campaigns entirely: it’s just day after day of pointless shit flinging we all have to get through until the election day when we will finally put the Cons out of their misery.
Nobody has to endure any of it to be fair
Just do what I have done, tune into sports channels and enjoy the garden/ outdoors
It is good for your wellbeing and I will go to bed early on the 4th July and wake up for breakfast on the 5th July and whatever the results , so be it
You may be pleasantly surprised and the polls are wrong.
Macron's decision to call a snap general election may be as disastrous as Sunak's. The first poll from Harris puts RN on the cusp of a majority.
I heard a theory that he's ok with that. Sully the far right with some government so they can't run for president as insurgents who can just moan and push buttons and make wild promises.
What could possibly go wrong with that?
Yes could Macron be the new Hindenburg?
Hindenburg, Von Papen, and Muller, rolled into one.
I'm in the biggest work slump of my freelance career and the grand or two I make a month would go much further outside the UK. Combine that with a potential incoming wealth tax (I earn little, but I used to earn a lot, so have plenty of assets) and it becomes a no-brainer. I was previously looking at Portugal, but it's probably not much cheaper living than the UK.
I can't imagine I'm the only person making the same calculation.
I'm thinking of retiring early and joining the economically inactive (well, apart from a few jobs for Mrs Flatlander's business to make use of the threshold) as we are very Yorkshire and don't spend a lot of money.
We've saved about 20-30x income over the years at a savings rate of over 50% despite avoiding the 40% threshold. I guess that makes us members of the 'FIRE' community even if I'd never heard of such a thing until recently.
I dread what form Labour's wealth tax is going to take. A property tax would be OK as that is cheap here in the Flatlands but any taxes on savings or the like and I'm going to be absolutely livid.
I prefer to have time rather than stuff. Is that not going to be allowed now?
The people doing Tory strategy should never work again in politics or PR....
Tax cuts for landlords, opening door for some real dodgy tax avoidance when selling and for NI for "self employed"....nobody likes landlords, I am not sure even landlords like landlords, and public don't like other people taking advantage of tax efficiencies (even if they do it themselves).
Where as IHT is for people who actually vote something that concerns them (even if today they wouldn't pay it), it goes to the heart of I want to leave something to my children.
If you are going to go fantasy magic money tree, as least have populist policies.
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
Not to the greedy barstewards on here , they woudl take it off them in a second.
TO SECURE OUR COMMUNITIES… WE WILL DELIVER: 92,000 extra nurses and 28,000 extra doctors – while driving up NHS productivity. 8,000 more full time police officers so every police ward has a new officer. 1.6 million more good homes while protecting our countryside.
So given the lead time to train a doctor where are you going to get 28,000 from... and building 300,000 homes is going to be fun when we struggle to build 150,000 a year...
They’re just random numbers, plucked from the air to make empty promises sound less hollow, and to create the illusion that there might be some thinking or analysis behind them. Like the few 10,000s of migrants we are supposed only to be having.
Macron's decision to call a snap general election may be as disastrous as Sunak's. The first poll from Harris puts RN on the cusp of a majority.
I heard a theory that he's ok with that. Sully the far right with some government so they can't run for president as insurgents who can just moan and push buttons and make wild promises.
What could possibly go wrong with that?
Yes could Macron be the new Hindenburg?
Hindenburg, Von Papen, and Muller, rolled into one.
So you agree Marine Le Pen/Rassemblement National are Hitler/The Nazis
TO SECURE OUR COMMUNITIES… WE WILL DELIVER: 92,000 extra nurses and 28,000 extra doctors – while driving up NHS productivity. 8,000 more full time police officers so every police ward has a new officer. 1.6 million more good homes while protecting our countryside.
So given the lead time to train a doctor where are you going to get 28,000 from... and building 300,000 homes is going to be fun when we struggle to build 150,000 a year...
They’re just random numbers, plucked from the air to make empty promises sound less hollow, and to create the illusion that there might be some thinking or analysis behind them. Like the few 10,000s of migrants we are supposed only to be having.
All political parties do it. Will we have a rehash of the loft laggers army and the millions of new green jobs (that include cobblers, not cobblers in terms of nonsense, actual cobblers and people who work at petrol stations).
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
I'm very sorry you haven't got a DB pension Barty but you do appreciate they were part of the package which some people chose to accept, others opted for different packages at different employers.
You have not paid a penny of my DB pension, unless you contributed to the profits of those companies I worked for, and then presumably you did so because you chose to.
They were a part of the package yes.
But they were never paid for at the time. The bill was passed on.
We're still paying today for DB schemes. Every taxpayer is.
Instead of NI being a higher rate of tax on employment, a higher rate of tax on DB pensions to reflect the way they were unfunded and still need paying for would make more sense.
Alternatively we could tax everyone the same.
But that's how finances work. If you have a mortgage you aren't setting aside a fund out of which to make future payments, you are relying on the prospect of future wages. People tend to start costing the NHS once they hit 50. Do you want to deny them treatment because nobody set aside a fund in 1974 to pay for their future ailments?
No.
I want today's well off pensioners who are in a privileged position to pay at least the same rate of tax as someone earning the same income via PAYE.
@Geri_E_L_Scott In this-is-fine news, Tunbridge Wells Tory candidate says the party has “disappointed” with “some poor policies, worse implementation, infighting. Announcements in the rain”. 😬
Distances himself from govt, says: “We have let you down - I am so very sorry.”
I'm not saying Neil Mahapatra has had a ticking off from CCHQ but he has now said Rishi Sunak is a "man of decency and integrity" who has inherited a "poisoned chalice" and blames PM's advisers for damage to the party.
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
I'm very sorry you haven't got a DB pension Barty but you do appreciate they were part of the package which some people chose to accept, others opted for different packages at different employers.
You have not paid a penny of my DB pension, unless you contributed to the profits of those companies I worked for, and then presumably you did so because you chose to.
They were a part of the package yes.
But they were never paid for at the time. The bill was passed on.
We're still paying today for DB schemes. Every taxpayer is.
Instead of NI being a higher rate of tax on employment, a higher rate of tax on DB pensions to reflect the way they were unfunded and still need paying for would make more sense.
Alternatively we could tax everyone the same.
But that's how finances work. If you have a mortgage you aren't setting aside a fund out of which to make future payments, you are relying on the prospect of future wages. People tend to start costing the NHS once they hit 50. Do you want to deny them treatment because nobody set aside a fund in 1974 to pay for their future ailments?
Usual mince from Bart Simpon, the Idiot's economist.
Perhaps they felt they couldn't do IHT because of the wealth of the Sunaks.
Scrap it perhaps, but raise threshold to £1-2 million? In terms of Sunak's wealth that would make no difference. The saving on his IHT would be far less than the money they make every year on interest etc.
Awaiting Sunak at Tory manifesto launch at Silverstone…
Labour have already called it the “most expensive panic attack in history”.
Not sure joking about panic attacks is the best idea in these days of mental health issuee
Labour are so smug. Reality will hit home to them and their supporters when they actually have to do stuff and realise that most of their front bench would struggle to get above middle management in a failing district council, let alone run a country.
And this is the essential weakness of our system. If one had to fix a failing company who would say,
"Hey, let's bring in a team that has never done anything like this before"?
"Let's make a public sector lawyer the CEO and a team of lightweights none of whom have ever run anything. That'll make a nice change. But it is OK, many of them were leading figures in their university Students' Unions."
It's an argument for a presidential system where the executive (the cabinet) is appointment from wider society, rather than being limited to the legislature (Parliament).
It also means you don't get constant shuffling of rolls during a Parliament as people try to get closer the the 'top' of the Cabinet.
Their policy would of course all need to go through Parliament. Would be an argument for fewer statutory instruments that don't.
Spot on! We have the ludicrous convention where if a PM wants to bring someone talented into cabinet, they have to be elevated to the Lords. It is ridiculous and unnecessary.
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
I'm very sorry you haven't got a DB pension Barty but you do appreciate they were part of the package which some people chose to accept, others opted for different packages at different employers.
You have not paid a penny of my DB pension, unless you contributed to the profits of those companies I worked for, and then presumably you did so because you chose to.
They were a part of the package yes.
But they were never paid for at the time. The bill was passed on.
We're still paying today for DB schemes. Every taxpayer is.
Instead of NI being a higher rate of tax on employment, a higher rate of tax on DB pensions to reflect the way they were unfunded and still need paying for would make more sense.
Alternatively we could tax everyone the same.
But that's how finances work. If you have a mortgage you aren't setting aside a fund out of which to make future payments, you are relying on the prospect of future wages. People tend to start costing the NHS once they hit 50. Do you want to deny them treatment because nobody set aside a fund in 1974 to pay for their future ailments?
No.
I want today's well off pensioners who are in a privileged position to pay at least the same rate of tax as someone earning the same income via PAYE.
Perhaps they felt they couldn't do IHT because of the wealth of the Sunaks.
Scrap it perhaps, but raise threshold to £1-2 million? In terms of Sunak's wealth that would make no difference. The saving on his IHT would be far less than the money they make every year on interest etc.
I'm as surprised as you are. It's a hated tax inc by those who'll never pay it.
Well without any change to Inheritance tax, attacking Labour is all Rishi has to offer...
The £2k lie already seems to be coming up in focus groups as a concern about Labour. Lying works. Ask Boris. It catches up with you eventually, but for the period of an election campaign, it works.
Is it a lie?
As far as I can tell (not having looked very hard) they’ve (a) made some negative assumptions about tax/spending policies; and (b) converted 4x £500 into £2,000 without being clear about time periods
But both of those are stuff that politicians have done for ever (including Gordon Brpwn on spending). Not really a “lie”.
The reality is taxes will go up regardless of who wins. Whether than is £1k or 2k is just a matter of debate
@Geri_E_L_Scott In this-is-fine news, Tunbridge Wells Tory candidate says the party has “disappointed” with “some poor policies, worse implementation, infighting. Announcements in the rain”. 😬
Distances himself from govt, says: “We have let you down - I am so very sorry.”
I'm not saying Neil Mahapatra has had a ticking off from CCHQ but he has now said Rishi Sunak is a "man of decency and integrity" who has inherited a "poisoned chalice" and blames PM's advisers for damage to the party.
Good news for Mike Martin. I think he has a decent chance.
I see Sunak now trying the 'Don't hand them a Landslide" defence.
The most successful democratic party in the world reduced to this.
LOL.
Another 24 days of this execrable performance to endure. It’s no wonder that even the politically engaged are tuning out the campaigns entirely: it’s just day after day of pointless shit flinging we all have to get through until the election day when we will finally put the Cons out of their misery.
Nobody has to endure any of it to be fair
Just do what I have done, tune into sports channels and enjoy the garden/ outdoors
It is good for your wellbeing and I will go to bed early on the 4th July and wake up for breakfast on the 5th July and whatever the results , so be it
You may be pleasantly surprised and the polls are wrong.
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
You are conflating old age pensions with civil service pensions. They may both be called pensions but one is a state benefit and the other is a contractual entitlement. The contractual entitlement ones were paid for in advance, by doing the job they were attached to.
You are wrong.
Doing the job may have got the contractual entitlement but it was absolutely never paid for at the time.
Defined contribution schemes are paid for at the time. DB schemes were not.
If DB schemes were paid for at the time they wouldn't cost us a penny today. That's not the case.
I think a distinction needs to be made between funded and unfunded DB schemes. I receive a modest (index-linked hurrah!) DB pension from the Strathclyde local government Pension Fund. It is backed by billions of invested assets, currently worth a lot more than the projected liabilities.
Big row brewing in French politics - leader of centre-right Les Republicains (party of Chirac Sarkozy) - says he supports the party forming a right-wing alliance with Marine Le Pen's National Rally party.
Big names from the party - from Pécresse to Wauquiez and Xavier Bertrand - all are vehemently against the move.
Every time Fraser Nelson mentions that the top 1% contribute 28% of all income tax, it just serves as a reminder that the 1% are minted and the rest of the country isn't earning much at all.
The same with this stat. Something has gone horribly wrong when pensioners are the biggest contributors of incometax.
We have a crop of pensioners who put lots into pensions and as a result quite a few have high pension incomes in retirement.
Which is better than them all starving in heaps.
We also have a crop of pensioners on extremely generous gold plated defined benefit pensions that they did not contribute in full towards.
Pensions that were not funded at the time and instead set up on the basis that future workers would pay for the costs instead then they'd get future pensions afterwards, except then the ladder was removed and those pensions aren't available to today's workers.
So we have a triple whammy of needing to pay for pensions that were never costed at the time, not being eligible for those ourselves despite paying for them, AND having to pay higher taxes too.
You are conflating old age pensions with civil service pensions. They may both be called pensions but one is a state benefit and the other is a contractual entitlement. The contractual entitlement ones were paid for in advance, by doing the job they were attached to.
You are wrong.
Doing the job may have got the contractual entitlement but it was absolutely never paid for at the time.
Defined contribution schemes are paid for at the time. DB schemes were not.
If DB schemes were paid for at the time they wouldn't cost us a penny today. That's not the case.
Even defined contribution pensions aren't really paid for at the time the savings are made, because all savings are a bet on their being labour available to buy at affordable rates at the time in the future when you want to buy it. Ultimately all pensions come out of current expenditure of the country at the time they are paid out.
If the country wants to be able to pay out decent pensions the argument about defined benefit or defined contribution pensions is a distraction from ensuring that the country in the future that will be actually paying the pensions will be rich enough to do so, with enough left over to pay for everything else.
The people doing Tory strategy should never work again in politics or PR....
Tax cuts for landlords, opening door for some real dodgy tax avoidance when selling and for NI for "self employed"....nobody likes landlords, I am not sure even landlords like landlords, and public don't like other people taking advantage of tax efficiencies (even if they do it themselves).
Where as IHT is for people who actually vote something that concerns them (even if today they wouldn't pay it), it goes to the heart of I want to leave something to my children.
If you are going to go fantasy magic money tree, as least have populist policies.
The avoidance opportunities with the landlords CGT move are not only endless, but not easily countered by anti-avoidance. There would be two main options here.
1. A time limit test, i.e. tenant needs to have been renting for at least x years/months - anticipated anyway I think., but the trouble is either you set the bar at very long tenancy that would exclude many bona fide arrangements, or make it short enough that it's worth people doing some avoidance 2. A purposive test i.e. if there is a pre-ordained series of steps leading to the sale of the property. But that one would be very hard to prove and could take up a lot of litigation time
Is the self-employed NI the only rabbit from this hat?
A straightforward bribe to the self-employed that might buy a few votes, I guess. I'm struggling to remember the current ins and outs for self-employed versus employed taxation but... should all income from whatever source be taxed equitably?
Macron's decision to call a snap general election may be as disastrous as Sunak's. The first poll from Harris puts RN on the cusp of a majority.
I heard a theory that he's ok with that. Sully the far right with some government so they can't run for president as insurgents who can just moan and push buttons and make wild promises.
What could possibly go wrong with that?
Yes could Macron be the new Hindenburg?
Hindenburg, Von Papen, and Muller, rolled into one.
So you agree Marine Le Pen/Rassemblement National are Hitler/The Nazis
I think that would be going too far. But, I think there is the parallel of leaders being too clever by half.
Savanta poll of UK Muslims (compared to October) -
Lab 63 (-1), C 12 (-7), LD 12 (+3), G 7 (+2), Oths 5 (+2)
So the initial Gaza effect has remained but apparently not deepened despite Rochdale BE. The Con Muslim vote has dropped sharply. Bits and pieces for LD and Greens.
Perhaps they felt they couldn't do IHT because of the wealth of the Sunaks.
Scrap it perhaps, but raise threshold to £1-2 million? In terms of Sunak's wealth that would make no difference. The saving on his IHT would be far less than the money they make every year on interest etc.
I'm as surprised as you are. It's a hated tax inc by those who'll never pay it.
If the somebody could come up with a better campaign / manifesto that would minimise the number of Tory seats I would love to see it.
Big row brewing in French politics - leader of centre-right Les Republicains (party of Chirac Sarkozy) - says he supports the party forming a right-wing alliance with Marine Le Pen's National Rally party.
Big names from the party - from Pécresse to Wauquiez and Xavier Bertrand - all are vehemently against the move.
Big row brewing in French politics - leader of centre-right Les Republicains (party of Chirac Sarkozy) - says he supports the party forming a right-wing alliance with Marine Le Pen's National Rally party.
Big names from the party - from Pécresse to Wauquiez and Xavier Bertrand - all are vehemently against the move.
Big row brewing in French politics - leader of centre-right Les Republicains (party of Chirac Sarkozy) - says he supports the party forming a right-wing alliance with Marine Le Pen's National Rally party.
Big names from the party - from Pécresse to Wauquiez and Xavier Bertrand - all are vehemently against the move.
The people doing Tory strategy should never work again in politics or PR....
Tax cuts for landlords, opening door for some real dodgy tax avoidance when selling and for NI for "self employed"....nobody likes landlords, I am not sure even landlords like landlords, and public don't like other people taking advantage of tax efficiencies (even if they do it themselves).
Where as IHT is for people who actually vote something that concerns them (even if today they wouldn't pay it), it goes to the heart of I want to leave something to my children.
If you are going to go fantasy magic money tree, as least have populist policies.
The avoidance opportunities with the landlords CGT move are not only endless, but not easily countered by anti-avoidance. There would be two main options here.
1. A time limit test, i.e. tenant needs to have been renting for at least x years/months - anticipated anyway I think., but the trouble is either you set the bar at very long tenancy that would exclude many bona fide arrangements, or make it short enough that it's worth people doing some avoidance 2. A purposive test i.e. if there is a pre-ordained series of steps leading to the sale of the property. But that one would be very hard to prove and could take up a lot of litigation time
Savanta poll of UK Muslims (compared to October) -
Lab 63 (-1), C 12 (-7), LD 12 (+3), G 7 (+2), Oths 5 (+2)
So the initial Gaza effect has remained but apparently not deepened despite Rochdale BE. The Con Muslim vote has dropped sharply. Bits and pieces for LD and Greens.
I wonder if Layla Moran's vocal but balanced support for Gazans accounts for the 3% increase. Interesting that LDs are on similar or slightly higher vote share with Muslims vs general population.
Remember how the media went mental that Trump used a hand rail going down a ramp as a sign he was too old. This is every day now...they really need to find somebody else, otherwise Trump will win.
The people doing Tory strategy should never work again in politics or PR....
Tax cuts for landlords, opening door for some real dodgy tax avoidance when selling and for NI for "self employed"....nobody likes landlords, I am not sure even landlords like landlords, and public don't like other people taking advantage of tax efficiencies (even if they do it themselves).
Where as IHT is for people who actually vote something that concerns them (even if today they wouldn't pay it), it goes to the heart of I want to leave something to my children.
If you are going to go fantasy magic money tree, as least have populist policies.
The avoidance opportunities with the landlords CGT move are not only endless, but not easily countered by anti-avoidance. There would be two main options here.
1. A time limit test, i.e. tenant needs to have been renting for at least x years/months - anticipated anyway I think., but the trouble is either you set the bar at very long tenancy that would exclude many bona fide arrangements, or make it short enough that it's worth people doing some avoidance 2. A purposive test i.e. if there is a pre-ordained series of steps leading to the sale of the property. But that one would be very hard to prove and could take up a lot of litigation time
3. It's not going to happen anyway.
The thing is the Tories have no excuse for this hamfistedness. They have the whole Treasury and HMRC available to work through the feasibility of a policy. Labour have to rely on a handful of SPADs. Which suggests they have only given HMT a cursory glimpse at this and possibly not even consulted HMRC.
Savanta poll of UK Muslims (compared to October) -
Lab 63 (-1), C 12 (-7), LD 12 (+3), G 7 (+2), Oths 5 (+2)
So the initial Gaza effect has remained but apparently not deepened despite Rochdale BE. The Con Muslim vote has dropped sharply. Bits and pieces for LD and Greens.
It does seem that, contrary to what a lot of self-appointed experts think, Muslims actually vote on factors other than the Middle East. Who could possibly have imagined this to be the case?
Big row brewing in French politics - leader of centre-right Les Republicains (party of Chirac Sarkozy) - says he supports the party forming a right-wing alliance with Marine Le Pen's National Rally party.
Big names from the party - from Pécresse to Wauquiez and Xavier Bertrand - all are vehemently against the move.
Throwing a rock at someone’s head could conceivably be “attempted murder”? You are deliberately doing something violent to someone in the full knowledge it might kill them, and for no other reason than to hurt them
IANAL but that feels qualitatively different to the milkshakes
Knowledge it "might" kill them is insufficient for attempted murder. You need to intend to kill.
Attempted murder is harder to prosecute in that sense than murder, as the mens rea is narrower. For murder the intent can be "only" to seriously injure.
My success rate with attempted murder would be anecdotal evidence in support of your statement but the intent is inferred objectively by the action. So if you throw a rock at someone's head the jury should infer that you either intended to kill them or were recklessly indifferent as to the possible consequences.
In practice this does mean that those who got lucky often get away with attempted murder (albeit being convicted of an aggravated assault) and those who are unlucky often get convicted of murder.
The pandemic has to be paid for. It might have made sense to have a specific post-pandemic surcharge on income tax, to be abolished when the pandemic debt was repaid, but I'm guessing government accounting is not so simple.
Politically it might have been helpful, though. We borrowed lots of money to get through a difficult situation. Now we have to pay it back.
Remember how the media went mental that Trump used a hand rail going down a ramp as a sign he was too old. This is every day now...they really need to find somebody else, otherwise Trump will win.
Big row brewing in French politics - leader of centre-right Les Republicains (party of Chirac Sarkozy) - says he supports the party forming a right-wing alliance with Marine Le Pen's National Rally party.
Big names from the party - from Pécresse to Wauquiez and Xavier Bertrand - all are vehemently against the move.
Is the self-employed NI the only rabbit from this hat?
A straightforward bribe to the self-employed that might buy a few votes, I guess. I'm struggling to remember the current ins and outs for self-employed versus employed taxation but... should all income from whatever source be taxed equitably?
IR35 is the killer for freelancers at the moment. And businesses employing them. It's raised costs across the board, and now you're treated like an employee for tax purposes but with none of the job security, HR protections or holiday time etc.
Big row brewing in French politics - leader of centre-right Les Republicains (party of Chirac Sarkozy) - says he supports the party forming a right-wing alliance with Marine Le Pen's National Rally party.
Big names from the party - from Pécresse to Wauquiez and Xavier Bertrand - all are vehemently against the move.
The pandemic has to be paid for. It might have made sense to have a specific post-pandemic surcharge on income tax, to be abolished when the pandemic debt was repaid, but I'm guessing government accounting is not so simple.
Politically it might have been helpful, though. We borrowed lots of money to get through a difficult situation. Now we have to pay it back.
Temporary surcharges are never temporary. It was why Sunak idea of NI++ from a Tory idealogical perspective was so idiotic, it would have only got larger and wider.
The pandemic has to be paid for. It might have made sense to have a specific post-pandemic surcharge on income tax, to be abolished when the pandemic debt was repaid, but I'm guessing government accounting is not so simple.
Politically it might have been helpful, though. We borrowed lots of money to get through a difficult situation. Now we have to pay it back.
We could have had a one-off wealth tax to cover all the costs.
The pandemic has to be paid for. It might have made sense to have a specific post-pandemic surcharge on income tax, to be abolished when the pandemic debt was repaid, but I'm guessing government accounting is not so simple.
Politically it might have been helpful, though. We borrowed lots of money to get through a difficult situation. Now we have to pay it back.
A message the government has been particularly rubbish at emphasising.
Comments
https://x.com/DerynConsulting/status/1800490907843870873
Chris Giles
@ChrisGiles_
·
19m
Class 4 national insurance (self-employed) is levied at a rate of 6% to £50,270
Abolishing it while leaving a 6% employee rate leaves a big gap
There are better ways to support entrepreneurs - unless you're in the tax avoidance business
S U R E L Y, there can't have been nobody in Sunak's team that looked at the speech and said: 'considering the top story about you at the moment is that you left D-Day early and - literally - failed to stand with our allies, we should drop this line'.
https://x.com/BestForBritain/status/1800489635422064979
The nightmare for Farage is being ignored. Now he will be one of the main news stories of the day, again. Because some utter bell-end hurled a rock at him
Neil Fox : Genetically, pedophiles have more genes in common with crabs than they do with you and me. Now that is scientific fact. There's no real evidence for it, but it's scientific fact
Use AI to free up Doctors / Nurses time - as someone who knows a bit about AI how is that going to work?
IANAL but that feels qualitatively different to the milkshakes
Ben Houchen says of Rishi Sunak “he doesn’t stop half way”
@adamboultonTABB
HS2 does
“Yes, in English law, throwing a rock at someone’s head with the intent to cause serious injury or death could potentially be prosecuted as “attempted murder.” For a charge of attempted murder, the prosecution must prove that the defendant had the intent to kill the victim and took a direct action towards that end. If the act of throwing the rock is seen as a direct action with the intent to kill, then it could meet the criteria for attempted murder.
However, the specific charge would depend on the circumstances and the intent behind the action. If the intent was to cause serious harm but not necessarily to kill, it might instead be prosecuted under different charges, such as grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent, which is also a serious offense under English law.”
Sounds like the latter. GBH with intent
And:
In English law, the offense of grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent, which is charged under Section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, is considered very serious. The maximum sentence for GBH with intent is life imprisonment.
The actual sentence imposed will depend on various factors, including the severity of the injuries inflicted, the circumstances of the offense, the intent and premeditation involved, the defendant's criminal history, and any mitigating or aggravating factors. Sentencing guidelines help judges determine the appropriate sentence within the range up to the maximum of life imprisonment.
Long story short, they got about 9 miles in intense heat before succumbing. No mean feat.
Farage will actually benefit by this and time everyone in politics condemned violence against any public figure
https://x.com/GuidoFawkes/status/1800483828558876895?t=ADFGw6B7UlpMIjI7grNd0w&s=19
Keep away from the guy with the funny eye
Also this was a little near the knuckle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pFbzrbzrtE
How will Labours GB Energy save us all hundreds of pounds ?
The Day Today was similarly awesome
Not great at several levels.
Also if you are opposed to Farage it seems the stupidest thing in the world to do stuff that gets the rest of the political class defending him. The last thing genuine opponents of Farage should be doing is garnering him sympathy, but then Antifa types rarely help themselves in this regard.
The 28-year old culprit. Hard 28.
Also, in 1982, no one died.
As far as I can tell (not having looked very hard) they’ve (a) made some negative assumptions about tax/spending policies; and (b) converted 4x £500 into £2,000 without being clear about time periods
But both of those are stuff that politicians have done for ever (including Gordon Brpwn on spending). Not really a “lie”.
The reality is taxes will go up regardless of who wins. Whether than is £1k or 2k is just a matter of debate
I used to dress up in bikinis that had been left behind and parade around singing a song, a Joan Baez protest song.
Why should today's workers be penalised for the failings of previous workers employers either?
I'd be happy with all income rated at the same rate, but if we were to tax anything higher it should be DB pensions higher than earned incomes.
Really.
For reasons of us having no idea would have been a slightly less disingenuous answer.
It would be far more effective if people turned their backs on Farage or were silent. I agree a) throwing any object at anyone is stupid and needs to be dealt with and b) this is all good publicity for Farage. Were he to be ignored it would be much more negative.
I want today's well off pensioners who are in a privileged position to pay at least the same rate of tax as someone earning the same income via PAYE.
Rishi Sunak attacks Keir Starmer for saying: “Smash the gangs’, ‘smash the gangs’
"A slogan is not a plan" the PM says - after spending 18 months shouting "stop the boats"
Eric Ciotti, the leader of the centre-right Les Républicains party formerly led b.y Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy, will announce tonight that he will cooperate with Marine Le Pen's Rassemblement National.
This will be in the form of local electoral alliances
https://x.com/julienhoez/status/1800461385014685921?s=61
At least the French centre right is reliably French… capitulating in the face of fascists.
Attempted murder is harder to prosecute in that sense than murder, as the mens rea is narrower. For murder the intent can be "only" to seriously injure.
We've saved about 20-30x income over the years at a savings rate of over 50% despite avoiding the 40% threshold. I guess that makes us members of the 'FIRE' community even if I'd never heard of such a thing until recently.
I dread what form Labour's wealth tax is going to take. A property tax would be OK as that is cheap here in the Flatlands but any taxes on savings or the like and I'm going to be absolutely livid.
I prefer to have time rather than stuff. Is that not going to be allowed now?
Tax cuts for landlords, opening door for some real dodgy tax avoidance when selling and for NI for "self employed"....nobody likes landlords, I am not sure even landlords like landlords, and public don't like other people taking advantage of tax efficiencies (even if they do it themselves).
Where as IHT is for people who actually vote something that concerns them (even if today they wouldn't pay it), it goes to the heart of I want to leave something to my children.
If you are going to go fantasy magic money tree, as least have populist policies.
Looks like Penny Mordaunt wasn’t at the Tory manifesto launch
Also those living off any non-work income.
In this-is-fine news, Tunbridge Wells Tory candidate says the party has “disappointed” with “some poor policies, worse implementation, infighting. Announcements in the rain”. 😬
Distances himself from govt, says: “We have let you down - I am so very sorry.”
UPDATE
@Geri_E_L_Scott
I'm not saying Neil Mahapatra has had a ticking off from CCHQ but he has now said Rishi Sunak is a "man of decency and integrity" who has inherited a "poisoned chalice" and blames PM's advisers for damage to the party.
I receive a modest (index-linked hurrah!) DB pension from the Strathclyde local government Pension Fund.
It is backed by billions of invested assets, currently worth a lot more than the projected liabilities.
Big names from the party - from Pécresse to Wauquiez and Xavier Bertrand - all are vehemently against the move.
https://x.com/andrewiconnell/status/1800489815042875882?s=61
So looks like Les Republicains are in the process of splitting before our eyes. Must have MLP rubbing her hands.
If the country wants to be able to pay out decent pensions the argument about defined benefit or defined contribution pensions is a distraction from ensuring that the country in the future that will be actually paying the pensions will be rich enough to do so, with enough left over to pay for everything else.
1. A time limit test, i.e. tenant needs to have been renting for at least x years/months - anticipated anyway I think., but the trouble is either you set the bar at very long tenancy that would exclude many bona fide arrangements, or make it short enough that it's worth people doing some avoidance
2. A purposive test i.e. if there is a pre-ordained series of steps leading to the sale of the property. But that one would be very hard to prove and could take up a lot of litigation time
A straightforward bribe to the self-employed that might buy a few votes, I guess. I'm struggling to remember the current ins and outs for self-employed versus employed taxation but... should all income from whatever source be taxed equitably?
Lab 63 (-1), C 12 (-7), LD 12 (+3), G 7 (+2), Oths 5 (+2)
So the initial Gaza effect has remained but apparently not deepened despite Rochdale BE. The Con Muslim vote has dropped sharply. Bits and pieces for LD and Greens.
Has this ever happened before?
Biden appears to freeze at White House concert
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/06/11/biden-appears-to-freeze-white-house-concert/
People don't like to see others get tax cuts, especially when they are hard pressed.
We forgot:
@TSE and the French.
In practice this does mean that those who got lucky often get away with attempted murder (albeit being convicted of an aggravated assault) and those who are unlucky often get convicted of murder.
Politically it might have been helpful, though. We borrowed lots of money to get through a difficult situation. Now we have to pay it back.
"Sorry Michelle, I'm afraid you're going to have to..."
And here is the reply...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5c1F8FzPfz8