On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
We can't just build things. Because we will need to spend 7 years and £250m writing a report about Newts.
So we need a Planning Enabling Act. We're going to JFDI Twyford Down style.
M11 Link Road - canned back in the 1970s but built anyway in the 1990s!
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
Why is every response to a report of Israeli wrongdoing a piece of whataboutery ?
Singling out an entire population (save one) as dishonest? Hmmm. What would you call me if I did that for any other country?
Well try listening to it. They are two and both heads of large organisations in Israel who explain to CNN why the information out of a so called 'democratic country' has become so distorted and corrupted which was Nigels original question
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
We can't just build things. Because we will need to spend 7 years and £250m writing a report about Newts.
So we need a Planning Enabling Act. We're going to JFDI Twyford Down style.
M11 Link Road - canned back in the 1970s but built anyway in the 1990s!
So your example of us doing something is going back thirty years ago, to a previous century?
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
From what I’ve heard the lack of rail projects is decimating the industry to the extent that it will never be able to recover
HS2 had to set up several training centres at the start of the project, because they couldn’t find skills they needed.
The industry and government needs to ensure there’s a steady pipeline of rail projects when HS2 is completed, otherwise people will drift off into other jobs and the skills will again be lost.
Already happening - I know someone who was in one of those HS2 centres, most people have left the industry because they couldn’t get permanent jobs
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
On the subject of toast, I am someone who likes it charcoal black. I once set fire to a Novotel toaster in an effort to get it to go beyond the 'dried bread' anaemia stage (it was the third pass that did for it, as I recall).
And yes, I know burnt toast is potentially carcinogenic - I limit myself to toast once a fortnight or so.
I did see a hotel toaster set on fire, but as I recall it was because someone sent a croissant through it, so not you that time.
I recall a fellow student making cheese on toast in a toaster. I imagine this is how Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity.
First week at uni I had to explain to someone that would couldn't just microwave an unopened jar of pasta sauce.
What an idiot! That wouldn't be a good meal. One would need to also microwave an unopened packet of pasta.
When I say unopened, I don't just mean metal lid firmly on, I mean plastic seal unbroken.
Ah, it'd be fine then, I guess
Leads me to muse on what happens if one tries to microwave an unopened tin of beans. Does the tin act as a Faraday cage/shield so there's no penetration inside and no heating inside? So akin to running the microwave emtpy - trash the microwave, but no exploding beans?
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
On the subject of toast, I am someone who likes it charcoal black. I once set fire to a Novotel toaster in an effort to get it to go beyond the 'dried bread' anaemia stage (it was the third pass that did for it, as I recall).
And yes, I know burnt toast is potentially carcinogenic - I limit myself to toast once a fortnight or so.
I did see a hotel toaster set on fire, but as I recall it was because someone sent a croissant through it, so not you that time.
I recall a fellow student making cheese on toast in a toaster. I imagine this is how Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity.
I guess he could have put the toaster on its side 😉
Don't be silly, attaching the cheese to the bread with rubber bands is the obvious solution.
If it’s a mild cheddar would anyone notice the difference ?
Yes because burnt rubber doesn't taste like cheese. At least, I doubt it.
Secret confession as we are all friends on PB - I love the crunchy cheese that's been melted and then cooled down from a toasted sandwich.
That bit of crispy cheese on the edge of the lasagna dish is just wonderful.
How many people did not have a "scrape the pie dish" family tradition?
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
On the subject of toast, I am someone who likes it charcoal black. I once set fire to a Novotel toaster in an effort to get it to go beyond the 'dried bread' anaemia stage (it was the third pass that did for it, as I recall).
And yes, I know burnt toast is potentially carcinogenic - I limit myself to toast once a fortnight or so.
I did see a hotel toaster set on fire, but as I recall it was because someone sent a croissant through it, so not you that time.
I recall a fellow student making cheese on toast in a toaster. I imagine this is how Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity.
First week at uni I had to explain to someone that would couldn't just microwave an unopened jar of pasta sauce.
What an idiot! That wouldn't be a good meal. One would need to also microwave an unopened packet of pasta.
When I say unopened, I don't just mean metal lid firmly on, I mean plastic seal unbroken.
Ah, it'd be fine then, I guess
Leads me to muse on what happens if one tries to microwave an unopened tin of beans. Does the tin act as a Faraday cage/shield so there's no penetration inside and no heating inside? So akin to running the microwave emtpy - trash the microwave, but no exploding beans?
Good question When you've tried it, let us know. I'm really interested.
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
We can't just build things. Because we will need to spend 7 years and £250m writing a report about Newts.
So we need a Planning Enabling Act. We're going to JFDI Twyford Down style.
M11 Link Road - canned back in the 1970s but built anyway in the 1990s!
So your example of us doing something is going back thirty years ago, to a previous century?
Any new motorways built this decade? Century?
No I just gave another Twyford Down type scenario!
Anyway: What might have been, Barty, what might have been!
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
From what I’ve heard the lack of rail projects is decimating the industry to the extent that it will never be able to recover
HS2 had to set up several training centres at the start of the project, because they couldn’t find skills they needed.
The industry and government needs to ensure there’s a steady pipeline of rail projects when HS2 is completed, otherwise people will drift off into other jobs and the skills will again be lost.
Already happening - I know someone who was in one of those HS2 centres, most people have left the industry because they couldn’t get permanent jobs
Well that’s crap. It shouldn’t take a genius to work out that losing skills in niche industries is really expensive, so the next project will run over time and over budget because they’ll need to repeat the training exercise again.
With tax thresholds seemingly frozen it seems inevitable (Not this budget) that the state pension will go above the (normal) PA.
So does Starmer, Streeting or 'our Ang'
a) Do a pensioners carve out on the PA b) Deduct tax at source c) Explicitly ditch the triple lock d) Require pensioners to do self assessment
Answers on a postcard
b) Would be the obvious answer. Why on earth HMRC requires every income provider except the DWP to be able to deduct PAYE is utterly baffling.
Criminal that benefits are not taxed
Many are. Which of those which are not taxed would you like to see taxed?
- Attendance Allowance - Bereavement support payment - Disability Living Allowance - free TV licence for over-75s - Guardian’s Allowance - Housing Benefit - Income Support - though you may have to pay tax on Income Support if you’re involved in a strike - Income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) - Industrial Injuries Benefit - Lump-sum bereavement payments - Maternity Allowance - Pension Credit - Personal Independence Payment (PIP) - Severe Disablement Allowance - Universal Credit - War Widow’s Pension - Winter Fuel Payments and Christmas Bonus
UC is a special case because there is in effect a 55% marginal tax rate for any other income the recipient earns.
Which benefits are taxed via National Insurance, the same as earned incomes are?
Here is a list of benefits and amounts. You can get it from www.rightsnet.org.uk. The ones on the left are potentially liable for tax and some of them have a taper. The ones on the left are not means tested but can be subject to tax. An example of the complexity in the system and why all the clickbait you see in the media is just that.
If you want to go deeper, here is a book (pages) that attempts to cover all the eventualities but even that only scratches the surface as you need to go through the legislation and case law. Bottom line is if you want to discuss benefits and tax, you are highly likely not to have a clue what you are talking about.
With tax thresholds seemingly frozen it seems inevitable (Not this budget) that the state pension will go above the (normal) PA.
So does Starmer, Streeting or 'our Ang'
a) Do a pensioners carve out on the PA b) Deduct tax at source c) Explicitly ditch the triple lock d) Require pensioners to do self assessment
Answers on a postcard
b) Would be the obvious answer. Why on earth HMRC requires every income provider except the DWP to be able to deduct PAYE is utterly baffling.
Criminal that benefits are not taxed
Many are. Which of those which are not taxed would you like to see taxed?
- Attendance Allowance - Bereavement support payment - Disability Living Allowance - free TV licence for over-75s - Guardian’s Allowance - Housing Benefit - Income Support - though you may have to pay tax on Income Support if you’re involved in a strike - Income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) - Industrial Injuries Benefit - Lump-sum bereavement payments - Maternity Allowance - Pension Credit - Personal Independence Payment (PIP) - Severe Disablement Allowance - Universal Credit - War Widow’s Pension - Winter Fuel Payments and Christmas Bonus
UC is a special case because there is in effect a 55% marginal tax rate for any other income the recipient earns.
Which benefits are taxed via National Insurance, the same as earned incomes are?
Here is a list of benefits and amounts. You can get it from www.rightsnet.org.uk. The ones on the left are potentially liable for tax and some of them have a taper. The ones on the left are not means tested but can be subject to tax. An example of the complexity in the system and why all the clickbait you see in the media is just that.
If you want to go deeper, here is a book (pages) that attempts to cover all the eventualities but even that only scratches the surface as you need to go through the legislation and case law. Bottom line is if you want to discuss benefits and tax, you are highly likely not to have a clue what you are talking about.
That article argues that if you're going to suffer unpopularity, you might as well do something significant and worthwhile, that either delivers or allows you to afford some big compensating wins elsewhere. That is the argument for the 2p tax rise that almost woz.....
It makes a good case for getting rid of the Triple Lock.
We all know that it has to go at some point, and its not as if pensioners vote Labour.
The state pension is below minimum wage, there may be a case for means testing it but not ending it completely
...but well above Universal Credit (£230.25 pw versus £92.34 pw).
Fair enough, those on UC are often not in work at all despite being of working age, state pensioners will have worked most of their working lives. So logically it makes sense for UC to be below the state pension and both to be below the minimum wage
Could be worse for Starmer 'Bangladesh's former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has been found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to death' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cpwvg0w4ljrt
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
From what I’ve heard the lack of rail projects is decimating the industry to the extent that it will never be able to recover
HS2 had to set up several training centres at the start of the project, because they couldn’t find skills they needed.
The industry and government needs to ensure there’s a steady pipeline of rail projects when HS2 is completed, otherwise people will drift off into other jobs and the skills will again be lost.
Already happening - I know someone who was in one of those HS2 centres, most people have left the industry because they couldn’t get permanent jobs
Well that’s crap. It shouldn’t take a genius to work out that losing skills in niche industries is really expensive, so the next project will run over time and over budget because they’ll need to repeat the training exercise again.
You will remember that one of the things a lot of people on here have repeated for years is that we need orchestrated long term plans for all infrastructure projects
Heck it’s one of my tests as to how clueful a poster on here actually is - we should have 20 year (at various levels of details) plans for power, rail, infrastructure, housing and a whole set of things - if something is planned and then cancelled it should generate annoyance not glee with someone clueful
And we really should be the leaving people to it, because we need hospitals, roads, schools, trains so just give them a budget and leave them to it
Could be worse for Starmer 'Bangladesh's former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has been found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to death' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cpwvg0w4ljrt
I dunno. At least their suffering has an end date….
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
From what I’ve heard the lack of rail projects is decimating the industry to the extent that it will never be able to recover
HS2 had to set up several training centres at the start of the project, because they couldn’t find skills they needed.
The industry and government needs to ensure there’s a steady pipeline of rail projects when HS2 is completed, otherwise people will drift off into other jobs and the skills will again be lost.
Already happening - I know someone who was in one of those HS2 centres, most people have left the industry because they couldn’t get permanent jobs
Well that’s crap. It shouldn’t take a genius to work out that losing skills in niche industries is really expensive, so the next project will run over time and over budget because they’ll need to repeat the training exercise again.
You will remember that one of the things a lot of people on here have repeated for years is that we need orchestrated long term plans for all infrastructure projects
Heck it’s one of my tests as to how clueful a poster on here actually is - we should have 20 year (at various levels of details) plans for power, rail, infrastructure, housing and a whole set of things - if something is planned and then cancelled it should generate annoyance not glee with someone clueful
And we really should be the leaving people to it, because we need hospitals, roads, schools, trains so just give them a budget and leave them to it
And once agreed, with a budget, it should be locked in. No chopping and changing constantly.
Of course if it didn't take decades to get through planning, there'd be fewer opportunities for constant chopping and changing as political fortunes change.
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
We can't just build things. Because we will need to spend 7 years and £250m writing a report about Newts.
So we need a Planning Enabling Act. We're going to JFDI Twyford Down style.
M11 Link Road - canned back in the 1970s but built anyway in the 1990s!
So your example of us doing something is going back thirty years ago, to a previous century?
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
On the subject of toast, I am someone who likes it charcoal black. I once set fire to a Novotel toaster in an effort to get it to go beyond the 'dried bread' anaemia stage (it was the third pass that did for it, as I recall).
And yes, I know burnt toast is potentially carcinogenic - I limit myself to toast once a fortnight or so.
I did see a hotel toaster set on fire, but as I recall it was because someone sent a croissant through it, so not you that time.
I recall a fellow student making cheese on toast in a toaster. I imagine this is how Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity.
First week at uni I had to explain to someone that would couldn't just microwave an unopened jar of pasta sauce.
What an idiot! That wouldn't be a good meal. One would need to also microwave an unopened packet of pasta.
When I say unopened, I don't just mean metal lid firmly on, I mean plastic seal unbroken.
Ah, it'd be fine then, I guess
Leads me to muse on what happens if one tries to microwave an unopened tin of beans. Does the tin act as a Faraday cage/shield so there's no penetration inside and no heating inside? So akin to running the microwave emtpy - trash the microwave, but no exploding beans?
Good question When you've tried it, let us know. I'm really interested.
(Explanation: the Faraday cage is leaky, I think.)
That might be part of it.
If the tin were a sphere, or similar smooth object, then likely nothing would happen. But tins aren't smooth, so high electrical charge probably accumulates around the folds at the top and bottom of the tin; electrons might be stripped from air molecules, leading to heated plasmas.
I'm not very clear on whether simple heat transfer to the tin contents provides enough energy to explode it. PB physicists ?
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
From what I’ve heard the lack of rail projects is decimating the industry to the extent that it will never be able to recover
HS2 had to set up several training centres at the start of the project, because they couldn’t find skills they needed.
The industry and government needs to ensure there’s a steady pipeline of rail projects when HS2 is completed, otherwise people will drift off into other jobs and the skills will again be lost.
Already happening - I know someone who was in one of those HS2 centres, most people have left the industry because they couldn’t get permanent jobs
Well that’s crap. It shouldn’t take a genius to work out that losing skills in niche industries is really expensive, so the next project will run over time and over budget because they’ll need to repeat the training exercise again.
You will remember that one of the things a lot of people on here have repeated for years is that we need orchestrated long term plans for all infrastructure projects
Heck it’s one of my tests as to how clueful a poster on here actually is - we should have 20 year (at various levels of details) plans for power, rail, infrastructure, housing and a whole set of things - if something is planned and then cancelled it should generate annoyance not glee with someone clueful
And we really should be the leaving people to it, because we need hospitals, roads, schools, trains so just give them a budget and leave them to it
One of the annoying trends in British governance has been the extent to which government has gone in the opposite direction to that. Everything is a special one-off scheme so that the politicians can milk it for the maximum number of announcements. Force the people who will use the money to apply for it, multiplying the amount of bureaucracy involved.
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
On the subject of toast, I am someone who likes it charcoal black. I once set fire to a Novotel toaster in an effort to get it to go beyond the 'dried bread' anaemia stage (it was the third pass that did for it, as I recall).
And yes, I know burnt toast is potentially carcinogenic - I limit myself to toast once a fortnight or so.
I did see a hotel toaster set on fire, but as I recall it was because someone sent a croissant through it, so not you that time.
I recall a fellow student making cheese on toast in a toaster. I imagine this is how Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity.
First week at uni I had to explain to someone that would couldn't just microwave an unopened jar of pasta sauce.
Hopefully before the explosion?
At Uni, a microwave for chemistry/industrial purposes was declared end of life.
So they packed it full of the things you are not supposed to microwave, put it in the concrete surrounded test cell in the physics lab setup…
Wish we had filmed it. I still say that putting magnesium in there was cheating - couldn’t see much else, when that went.
The problem for Reeves is that she’s undermined her credibility one too many times.
A Chancellor has to be seen as the steward of the British economy and it is important that they demonstrate a certain level of stability, competency, certainty.
Reeves for months now has been giving off an air of uncertainty, which hasn’t helped, and her screeching U-Turns are severe blows to her competency. To be honest, I think the only thing keeping her in post is the need for Starmer to save his own skin (I suspect he is now too politically weak to sack her, though he may yet try as part of a final reset attempt), and the fact the markets aren’t confident that there would be anyone any better along to save the day.
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
From what I’ve heard the lack of rail projects is decimating the industry to the extent that it will never be able to recover
HS2 had to set up several training centres at the start of the project, because they couldn’t find skills they needed.
The industry and government needs to ensure there’s a steady pipeline of rail projects when HS2 is completed, otherwise people will drift off into other jobs and the skills will again be lost.
Already happening - I know someone who was in one of those HS2 centres, most people have left the industry because they couldn’t get permanent jobs
Well that’s crap. It shouldn’t take a genius to work out that losing skills in niche industries is really expensive, so the next project will run over time and over budget because they’ll need to repeat the training exercise again.
You will remember that one of the things a lot of people on here have repeated for years is that we need orchestrated long term plans for all infrastructure projects
Heck it’s one of my tests as to how clueful a poster on here actually is - we should have 20 year (at various levels of details) plans for power, rail, infrastructure, housing and a whole set of things - if something is planned and then cancelled it should generate annoyance not glee with someone clueful
And we really should be the leaving people to it, because we need hospitals, roads, schools, trains so just give them a budget and leave them to it
There needs to be both a strategic and a tactical plan, looking at both where we will need to be a decade or two from now, while also looking at what are today’s bottlenecks in the system.
And yes, a lot less of the bureaucracy, the government should be able to pass a Bill for key projects and the work start soon afterwards, rather than years and millions spent on shuffling paper before the spades hit the ground.
Could be worse for Starmer 'Bangladesh's former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has been found guilty of crimes against humanity and sentenced to death' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cpwvg0w4ljrt
In absentia. How would they tell if Starmer was absentia or not?
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
The global economy doesn't expect sovereign debt to be repaid, only refinanced.
We absolutely could borrow to invest in capex. Our problem is that we have stopped doing capex projects and we're borrowing to pay the in year costs of our declining economy.
Borrow to invest? Return on investment, economy grows. Borrow for a black hole? More debt, economy slows. So of course we're doing the latter. We need to invest our way out of the hole...
I absolutely get it that the national finances are not the same as a household budget. but at some point people have to understand just how much money we spend each year paying off loans.
I do agree we need to spend on investment. But both recent flavours of government have been shit at this. The Tories destroyed HS2. And then in come the ming vase crowd and can loads of roads projects (e.g. Stonehenge, where millions has already been spent). Projects in the UK pump prime things. If you are spending money on construction all those workers are being paid etc.
We can't just build things. Because we will need to spend 7 years and £250m writing a report about Newts.
So we need a Planning Enabling Act. We're going to JFDI Twyford Down style.
M11 Link Road - canned back in the 1970s but built anyway in the 1990s!
So your example of us doing something is going back thirty years ago, to a previous century?
Any new motorways built this decade? Century?
this century? A1M from Leeds to Scotch Corner
Thanks.
A rather pathetic list. Especially considering our population has grown by nearly 20% in that time, just to stand still we should have had many more new motorways (and other infrastructure built) let alone to invest in growth.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. They do it because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
With tax thresholds seemingly frozen it seems inevitable (Not this budget) that the state pension will go above the (normal) PA.
So does Starmer, Streeting or 'our Ang'
a) Do a pensioners carve out on the PA b) Deduct tax at source c) Explicitly ditch the triple lock d) Require pensioners to do self assessment
Answers on a postcard
b) Would be the obvious answer. Why on earth HMRC requires every income provider except the DWP to be able to deduct PAYE is utterly baffling.
Criminal that benefits are not taxed
Many are. Which of those which are not taxed would you like to see taxed?
- Attendance Allowance - Bereavement support payment - Disability Living Allowance - free TV licence for over-75s - Guardian’s Allowance - Housing Benefit - Income Support - though you may have to pay tax on Income Support if you’re involved in a strike - Income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) - Industrial Injuries Benefit - Lump-sum bereavement payments - Maternity Allowance - Pension Credit - Personal Independence Payment (PIP) - Severe Disablement Allowance - Universal Credit - War Widow’s Pension - Winter Fuel Payments and Christmas Bonus
UC is a special case because there is in effect a 55% marginal tax rate for any other income the recipient earns.
Which benefits are taxed via National Insurance, the same as earned incomes are?
Here is a list of benefits and amounts. You can get it from www.rightsnet.org.uk. The ones on the left are potentially liable for tax and some of them have a taper. The ones on the left are not means tested but can be subject to tax. An example of the complexity in the system and why all the clickbait you see in the media is just that.
If you want to go deeper, here is a book (pages) that attempts to cover all the eventualities but even that only scratches the surface as you need to go through the legislation and case law. Bottom line is if you want to discuss benefits and tax, you are highly likely not to have a clue what you are talking about.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. It's because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
We have to be realistic here. If someone in the UK has £16k in savings (including non personal jewellery) they don't get any universal credit and the taper starts at just £6k.
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
No surprise that the French are enthusiastic to sell Ukraine weapons just as Europe inches closer to using frozen Russian assets for Ukraine to spend on armaments. I think their total support for Ukraine has been less than Sweden's - they're certainly one of the main laggards in Europe, except when they might receive money instead of spend it.
the aid from "EU institutions" dwarves the aid from each of the individual EU members. Assuming that EU institutions are funded roughly in proportion to the size of EU member states, this would mean that France's overall contribution is still substantial and certainly greater than Sweden's contribution (though not per capita).
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
Is this stuff more or less damaging for all involved? Like, I thought the issue was what went on with young women/underage girls...
As well as the illegal sexual activity, it’s not difficult to imagine a whole load of not illegal but very embarrassing sexual activity that was documented by Epstein.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
Yes, making it clear in hindsight, but in the fog of war mistakes happen. Especially when delaying an instant can result in your own death.
A LABOUR Home Office Minister confirms that refugees will have their jewellery confiscated on arrival in the UK.
I wonder whether there have been any earlier precedents for removing jewellery from refugees...
Performative shite for the Reform curious voter. All that pandering to the Farage world view seems to have gone really well so far, let’s double down.
They may be Reform Curious but that to me means that they aren’t Labour voters or even Labour Curious.
I just don’t see what the purpose is - it will annoy a whole set of Labour / Green curious voters l and just hawks back to Nazi Germany
Labour’s calculation is that unless they are seen to take a very firm hand on asylum/migration policy they will never be able to claw back the necessary public backing/support to win a further election.
I think there is something in that.
But of course all these things are balancing acts and realising that they’re never going to out-Reform Reform and that they need to keep voters on the left on side too is a tricky seesaw to walk. I’m not sure things like seizing jewellery are going to help with that.
The stuff around speeding up hearings/removing certain appeal rights is likely to be more impactful (but they do need to square the circle about how to get around the ECHR on points like this and unless they’re talking derogation it’s going to be very hard for them to enact this change without significant legal challenge).
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
Yes, making it clear in hindsight, but in the fog of war mistakes happen. Especially when delaying an instant can result in your own death.
You cannot defend that case. The guys were shot not in the fog of war but out of a vile malevolence.
A LABOUR Home Office Minister confirms that refugees will have their jewellery confiscated on arrival in the UK.
I wonder whether there have been any earlier precedents for removing jewellery from refugees...
Performative shite for the Reform curious voter. All that pandering to the Farage world view seems to have gone really well so far, let’s double down.
They may be Reform Curious but that to me means that they aren’t Labour voters or even Labour Curious.
I just don’t see what the purpose is - it will annoy a whole set of Labour / Green curious voters l and just hawks back to Nazi Germany
Labour’s calculation is that unless they are seen to take a very firm hand on asylum/migration policy they will never be able to claw back the necessary public backing/support to win a further election.
I think there is something in that.
But of course all these things are balancing acts and realising that they’re never going to out-Reform Reform and that they need to keep voters on the left on side too is a tricky seesaw to walk. I’m not sure things like seizing jewellery are going to help with that.
The stuff around speeding up hearings/removing certain appeal rights is likely to be more impactful (but they do need to square the circle about how to get around the ECHR on points like this and unless they’re talking derogation it’s going to be very hard for them to enact this change without significant legal challenge).
So you find a way to fast track those cases. This may well be a time when Rwanda was useful - case gone to ECHR well you can sit in Rwanda until it’s determined
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
Deficits don't matter to current politicians because it is a problem for future politicians.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
God only knows what other atrocities the IDF have perpetrated in Gaza given their exclusion of foreign journalists from the region and their propensity to murder native reporters. We get glimpses of their barbarism when events such as killings of medics are accidenally revealed by discovered phone footage and from incidents such as the one you mention, but this is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg. The state of Israel clearly regards the Palestinians as little more than vermin, much as the apartheid regime in South Africa regarded the black population of that country.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
Yes, making it clear in hindsight, but in the fog of war mistakes happen. Especially when delaying an instant can result in your own death.
You cannot defend that case. The guys were shot not in the fog of war but out of a vile malevolence.
I'm not trying to defend it, just not rushing to judgment.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
Yes, making it clear in hindsight, but in the fog of war mistakes happen. Especially when delaying an instant can result in your own death.
You cannot defend that case. The guys were shot not in the fog of war but out of a vile malevolence.
You weren't there - you cannot know what was in the mind's of the shooters.
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
On the subject of toast, I am someone who likes it charcoal black. I once set fire to a Novotel toaster in an effort to get it to go beyond the 'dried bread' anaemia stage (it was the third pass that did for it, as I recall).
And yes, I know burnt toast is potentially carcinogenic - I limit myself to toast once a fortnight or so.
I did see a hotel toaster set on fire, but as I recall it was because someone sent a croissant through it, so not you that time.
I recall a fellow student making cheese on toast in a toaster. I imagine this is how Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity.
First week at uni I had to explain to someone that would couldn't just microwave an unopened jar of pasta sauce.
What an idiot! That wouldn't be a good meal. One would need to also microwave an unopened packet of pasta.
When I say unopened, I don't just mean metal lid firmly on, I mean plastic seal unbroken.
Ah, it'd be fine then, I guess
Leads me to muse on what happens if one tries to microwave an unopened tin of beans. Does the tin act as a Faraday cage/shield so there's no penetration inside and no heating inside? So akin to running the microwave emtpy - trash the microwave, but no exploding beans?
Good question When you've tried it, let us know. I'm really interested.
That article argues that if you're going to suffer unpopularity, you might as well do something significant and worthwhile, that either delivers or allows you to afford some big compensating wins elsewhere. That is the argument for the 2p tax rise that almost woz.....
It makes a good case for getting rid of the Triple Lock.
We all know that it has to go at some point, and its not as if pensioners vote Labour.
The state pension is below minimum wage, there may be a case for means testing it but not ending it completely
...but well above Universal Credit (£230.25 pw versus £92.34 pw).
not if you add free rent , free council tax and all the other ones that can be added
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
Deficits don't matter to current politicians because it is a problem for future politicians.
Deficits don’t matter if the economy is growing - they do when that growth stops
Knowing that the sham investigation into Clinton and other Democrats will mean that they can’t be released.
This sudden change of heart from Trump should fool no one .
Very funny.
Trump doesn't want to release the files: PB in uproar Trump does want to release the files: PB in uproar
Indeed, start with OrangeManBad and work backwards, even if he’s exposing child abuse it’s still bad.
Let's be honest though, no one in their right mind thinks any of this is about Trump exposing child abuse... or doing anything indeed apart from helping Trump.
Oh of course, but it’s funny to see nearly everyone do a 180 on the subject depending on what the president’s last comment on it happened to be.
Democrats in the US had almost nothing to say on Epstein for years, until they sensed a split within the Republicans.
I suspect if the Dems had been more proactive regarding the Epstein files Trump would not have been elected President again.
You probably have a point that the Dems were protecting their own by their inaction, but that doesn't absolve Trump of anything.
Now obviously we don’t know exactly what’s in the FBI’s warehouse, but Trump must be pretty confident in himself that there’s nothing that can sink him.
I’ve always thought that if there was something in there regarding Trump that was so bad as to be disqualifying, Biden’s DOJ would have found a way to get it out before the election.
The full revelations will almost certainly bring down dozens of people involved in politics though, on all sides. It’s of note that most of the Congressmen and women voting to release the files are from the younger recent intakes, who were a lot less likely to have moved in Epstein’s circles when he was alive. Senators, governors, judges, and a lot of political donors, on the other hand…
Yes, this sounds like a juicy can of worms about to be opened.
Popcorn, anyone?
Given what happened to the Andrew formerly known as Prince, which started with one harmless-looking photo, there’s going to be a lot of Americans (and others) very nervous about what might be about to be made public.
Wealthy people who thought they were too well-connected to ever end up in trouble, who had paid off the right movers and fixers over the decades.
There are also issues around banks who distributed his criminal money without reporting, are there not?
Potentially yes, there’s one large bank under investigation for a lack of due diligence to the money coming in and going out of his accounts.
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
It is time to shit or get off the toilet.
Do what you think needs to be done to balance the budget, or you don't deserve to be in office.
He doesn't know how. Then again, neither do the Tories. We need to drive growth to generate tax revenues. But collectively seem to think that making people have less money in their pocket - cuts and tax rises - will make that happen.
I blame the Treasury. Liz Truss was right as much as she was bonkers - she turned her guns on the Treasury. She just didn't go far enough.
Truss cut tax without cutting spending which with the size of the deficit the markets wouldn't have
I have rewatched the end of Truss over the weekend when mulling over the state of Starmer.
Fascinating to watch the winding up of the fracking debate. The minister proudly boasts about how the Conservatives had massively developed renewable energy. Because its right for Britain and puts us in a good place for the future.
Whatever happened to the Conservative Party? Even at its zenith of loopyness it was still better grounded in reality than Badenoch's mob.
One thing occurs. When Thatcher and Howe took over in 1979 there was a budget deficit and high inflation. They choose to try to squeeze inflation out of the system which eventually led to a strong upturn in the economy, although not without an awful lot of pain en route. The deficit was definitely a BAD thing and should be avoided.
Now we have been living with deficits for decades and arguably it has become normalised. In some ways its the same a the availability of cheap credit to all of us. Want that new car? Credit makes it happen. Want that new phone? Stick it on your credit card. Etc etc.
Have our politicians just come to accept that deficits don't really matter? Is that why no-one is ever serious about getting rid of them?
Deficits don't matter to current politicians because it is a problem for future politicians.
Deficits don’t matter if the economy is growing - they do when that growth stops
Or if interest rates go from 0.5% to 5%, adding an order of magnitude to the planned debt servicing cost.
With tax thresholds seemingly frozen it seems inevitable (Not this budget) that the state pension will go above the (normal) PA.
So does Starmer, Streeting or 'our Ang'
a) Do a pensioners carve out on the PA b) Deduct tax at source c) Explicitly ditch the triple lock d) Require pensioners to do self assessment
Answers on a postcard
b) Would be the obvious answer. Why on earth HMRC requires every income provider except the DWP to be able to deduct PAYE is utterly baffling.
Criminal that benefits are not taxed
Many are. Which of those which are not taxed would you like to see taxed?
- Attendance Allowance - Bereavement support payment - Disability Living Allowance - free TV licence for over-75s - Guardian’s Allowance - Housing Benefit - Income Support - though you may have to pay tax on Income Support if you’re involved in a strike - Income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) - Industrial Injuries Benefit - Lump-sum bereavement payments - Maternity Allowance - Pension Credit - Personal Independence Payment (PIP) - Severe Disablement Allowance - Universal Credit - War Widow’s Pension - Winter Fuel Payments and Christmas Bonus
UC is a special case because there is in effect a 55% marginal tax rate for any other income the recipient earns.
Any of them , possibly excluding the criminal TV tax, that takes a person above the tax threshold which everybody else has to start paying tax at.
Knowing that the sham investigation into Clinton and other Democrats will mean that they can’t be released.
This sudden change of heart from Trump should fool no one .
Very funny.
Trump doesn't want to release the files: PB in uproar Trump does want to release the files: PB in uproar
Indeed, start with OrangeManBad and work backwards, even if he’s exposing child abuse it’s still bad.
Let's be honest though, no one in their right mind thinks any of this is about Trump exposing child abuse... or doing anything indeed apart from helping Trump.
Oh of course, but it’s funny to see nearly everyone do a 180 on the subject depending on what the president’s last comment on it happened to be.
Democrats in the US had almost nothing to say on Epstein for years, until they sensed a split within the Republicans.
I suspect if the Dems had been more proactive regarding the Epstein files Trump would not have been elected President again.
You probably have a point that the Dems were protecting their own by their inaction, but that doesn't absolve Trump of anything.
Now obviously we don’t know exactly what’s in the FBI’s warehouse, but Trump must be pretty confident in himself that there’s nothing that can sink him.
I’ve always thought that if there was something in there regarding Trump that was so bad as to be disqualifying, Biden’s DOJ would have found a way to get it out before the election.
The full revelations will almost certainly bring down dozens of people involved in politics though, on all sides. It’s of note that most of the Congressmen and women voting to release the files are from the younger recent intakes, who were a lot less likely to have moved in Epstein’s circles when he was alive. Senators, governors, judges, and a lot of political donors, on the other hand…
Yes, this sounds like a juicy can of worms about to be opened.
Popcorn, anyone?
Given what happened to the Andrew formerly known as Prince, which started with one harmless-looking photo, there’s going to be a lot of Americans (and others) very nervous about what might be about to be made public.
Wealthy people who thought they were too well-connected to ever end up in trouble, who had paid off the right movers and fixers over the decades.
There are also issues around banks who distributed his criminal money without reporting, are there not?
Potentially yes, there’s one large bank under investigation for a lack of due diligence to the money coming in and going out of his accounts.
On topic - the budget is already sinking and there is a week and a half to go. They have managed to get to an extraordinary position where whatever they unveil, the response from political wonks will be "is that it?" and the response from market wonks will be "don't like that".
And so the recriminations. I'm on record saying McSweeney will the first up against the wall, gone by the 2nd week of December as the budget fallout gets brutal.
After that? Starmer is toast. The kind of toast where you're desperately scraping it with your knife to try and save it, but knowing in your heart that you will still be able to taste the burn.
There won't be a general election before 2029, so we have to put up with this shit. So let's hope someone with some nous and some vision comes forward or we truly will be sunk.
There is a model that the government could adopt - the miracle of Manchester. This has been a 30 year turnaround so its not all on Burnham, but as the metro mayor he knows what works and how to get significant changes done effectively. Shift Gwynne aside and get him into parliament. Whilst there is still time...
On the subject of toast, I am someone who likes it charcoal black. I once set fire to a Novotel toaster in an effort to get it to go beyond the 'dried bread' anaemia stage (it was the third pass that did for it, as I recall).
And yes, I know burnt toast is potentially carcinogenic - I limit myself to toast once a fortnight or so.
I did see a hotel toaster set on fire, but as I recall it was because someone sent a croissant through it, so not you that time.
I recall a fellow student making cheese on toast in a toaster. I imagine this is how Sir Isaac Newton discovered gravity.
First week at uni I had to explain to someone that would couldn't just microwave an unopened jar of pasta sauce.
What an idiot! That wouldn't be a good meal. One would need to also microwave an unopened packet of pasta.
When I say unopened, I don't just mean metal lid firmly on, I mean plastic seal unbroken.
Ah, it'd be fine then, I guess
Leads me to muse on what happens if one tries to microwave an unopened tin of beans. Does the tin act as a Faraday cage/shield so there's no penetration inside and no heating inside? So akin to running the microwave emtpy - trash the microwave, but no exploding beans?
Good question When you've tried it, let us know. I'm really interested.
(Explanation: the Faraday cage is leaky, I think.)
I don't think the Faraday cage would be leaky. My guess is that the microwaves induce strong electric currents in the can which then becomes very hot from resistive heating and warms the contents (the beans) by thermal conduction. Eventually the water in the beans begins to vapourise and the pressure in the can increases until it explodes.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. It's because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
We have to be realistic here. If someone in the UK has £16k in savings (including non personal jewellery) they don't get any universal credit and the taper starts at just £6k.
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
It was the government who highlighted jewellery in the story they fed to the Sun. They could have neutrally stated assets could be offset against expenses (if any are found). But they deliberately went for the Nazi Extermination Camp metaphor. God knows what they were thinking.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. It's because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
We have to be realistic here. If someone in the UK has £16k in savings (including non personal jewellery) they don't get any universal credit and the taper starts at just £6k.
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
It was the government who highlighted jewellery in the story they fed to the Sun. They could have neutrally stated assets could be offset against expenses (if any are found). But they deliberately went for the Nazi Extermination Camp metaphor. God knows what they were thinking.
That's your problem, crediting them with thinking.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. It's because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
We have to be realistic here. If someone in the UK has £16k in savings (including non personal jewellery) they don't get any universal credit and the taper starts at just £6k.
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
It was the government who highlighted jewellery in the story they fed to the Sun. They could have neutrally stated assets could be offset against expenses (if any are found). But they deliberately went for the Nazi Extermination Camp metaphor. God knows what they were thinking.
They weren’t thinking about History and PR more about anything that sounds hard / cruel and offsets costs
So on the one hand excited for new stuff from the Whoniverse but on the other afraid that they will have written some bollocks with all the DEI they can cram in (unit seems to be hitting all the targets any lonely HR manager would want - disabled, trans, mature women, gay, and probably even a few straight men). They have also changed the design of the sea devils again (presumably to make a human/sea devil relationship more plausible - neglecting the existing human/sea devil relationship in Who).
I admire what was tried with Torchwood, for instance, but the biggest issue was it was always a run of doctor-lite Dr Who stories.
A ‘special edition’ of The Sea-Devils, a term that is problematic apparently’, it will be another Benjamin Cook masterpiece. I’m not sure why they couldn’t have used the perfectly serviceable omnibus edition that still exists or trim that a little.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
God only knows what other atrocities the IDF have perpetrated in Gaza given their exclusion of foreign journalists from the region and their propensity to murder native reporters. We get glimpses of their barbarism when events such as killings of medics are accidenally revealed by discovered phone footage and from incidents such as the one you mention, but this is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg. The state of Israel clearly regards the Palestinians as little more than vermin, much as the apartheid regime in South Africa regarded the black population of that country.
I haven't been keeping score, but I can recall many (perhaps dozens of) occasions after such shootings when it was reported that the IDF would be conducting a full investigation. I can't recall the results of any of those investigation subsequently being reported; or Israeli government spokespeople being persistently questioned about them.
And I am extremely reluctant to take sides in this conflict, since it seems to me the leadership on both sides has been acting in ways which are morally repulsive.
With tax thresholds seemingly frozen it seems inevitable (Not this budget) that the state pension will go above the (normal) PA.
So does Starmer, Streeting or 'our Ang'
a) Do a pensioners carve out on the PA b) Deduct tax at source c) Explicitly ditch the triple lock d) Require pensioners to do self assessment
Answers on a postcard
b) Would be the obvious answer. Why on earth HMRC requires every income provider except the DWP to be able to deduct PAYE is utterly baffling.
Criminal that benefits are not taxed
Many are. Which of those which are not taxed would you like to see taxed?
- Attendance Allowance - Bereavement support payment - Disability Living Allowance - free TV licence for over-75s - Guardian’s Allowance - Housing Benefit - Income Support - though you may have to pay tax on Income Support if you’re involved in a strike - Income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) - Industrial Injuries Benefit - Lump-sum bereavement payments - Maternity Allowance - Pension Credit - Personal Independence Payment (PIP) - Severe Disablement Allowance - Universal Credit - War Widow’s Pension - Winter Fuel Payments and Christmas Bonus
UC is a special case because there is in effect a 55% marginal tax rate for any other income the recipient earns.
Any of them , possibly excluding the criminal TV tax, that takes a person above the tax threshold which everybody else has to start paying tax at.
I don't disagree, although many of these would not be paid anyway to someone whose total income is above the tax threshold.
A ‘special edition’ of The Sea-Devils, a term that is problematic apparently’, it will be another Benjamin Cook masterpiece. I’m not sure why they couldn’t have used the perfectly serviceable omnibus edition that still exists or trim that a little.
Just trim it to cut out the fat, tbh. TV was a lot slower back in the day!
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
God only knows what other atrocities the IDF have perpetrated in Gaza given their exclusion of foreign journalists from the region and their propensity to murder native reporters. We get glimpses of their barbarism when events such as killings of medics are accidenally revealed by discovered phone footage and from incidents such as the one you mention, but this is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg. The state of Israel clearly regards the Palestinians as little more than vermin, much as the apartheid regime in South Africa regarded the black population of that country.
I haven't been keeping score, but I can recall many (perhaps dozens of) occasions after such shootings when it was reported that the IDF would be conducting a full investigation. I can't recall the results of any of those investigation subsequently being reported; or Israeli government spokespeople being persistently questioned about them.
And I am extremely reluctant to take sides in this conflict, since it seems to me the leadership on both sides has been acting in ways which are morally repulsive.
I agree that the leadership on both sides has been acting in ways which are morally repulsive. What I don't understand, given this moral equivalence, is why we are happy to sell arms and give support to one side while labelling the other as terrorists worthy only of extermination.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
Yes, making it clear in hindsight, but in the fog of war mistakes happen. Especially when delaying an instant can result in your own death.
You cannot defend that case. The guys were shot not in the fog of war but out of a vile malevolence.
You weren't there - you cannot know what was in the mind's of the shooters.
Neither were you, but you will be content to give them the benefit of any miniscule doubt.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
Yes, making it clear in hindsight, but in the fog of war mistakes happen. Especially when delaying an instant can result in your own death.
You cannot defend that case. The guys were shot not in the fog of war but out of a vile malevolence.
You weren't there - you cannot know what was in the mind's of the shooters.
Neither were you, but you will be content to give them the benefit of any miniscule doubt.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. It's because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
We have to be realistic here. If someone in the UK has £16k in savings (including non personal jewellery) they don't get any universal credit and the taper starts at just £6k.
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
It was the government who highlighted jewellery in the story they fed to the Sun. They could have neutrally stated assets could be offset against expenses (if any are found). But they deliberately went for the Nazi Extermination Camp metaphor. God knows what they were thinking.
Ignoring the comms part of this - Labour are terrible at comms and the Sun along with most of the press are quite delighted to cause mayhem for them whenever given the opportunity - do you think an asylum seeker arriving with 100k in assets should pay for their own accommodation?
I don't see how this is compatible with the reported large order for the Gripen. Or, more to the point, how they (and their European backers) will fund both.
That article argues that if you're going to suffer unpopularity, you might as well do something significant and worthwhile, that either delivers or allows you to afford some big compensating wins elsewhere. That is the argument for the 2p tax rise that almost woz.....
It makes a good case for getting rid of the Triple Lock.
We all know that it has to go at some point, and its not as if pensioners vote Labour.
The state pension is below minimum wage, there may be a case for means testing it but not ending it completely
...but well above Universal Credit (£230.25 pw versus £92.34 pw).
not if you add free rent , free council tax and all the other ones that can be added
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
God only knows what other atrocities the IDF have perpetrated in Gaza given their exclusion of foreign journalists from the region and their propensity to murder native reporters. We get glimpses of their barbarism when events such as killings of medics are accidenally revealed by discovered phone footage and from incidents such as the one you mention, but this is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg. The state of Israel clearly regards the Palestinians as little more than vermin, much as the apartheid regime in South Africa regarded the black population of that country.
Do you think, in hindsight, Hamas's attack on October 7th 2023 was a good idea, or a bad idea?
That article argues that if you're going to suffer unpopularity, you might as well do something significant and worthwhile, that either delivers or allows you to afford some big compensating wins elsewhere. That is the argument for the 2p tax rise that almost woz.....
It makes a good case for getting rid of the Triple Lock.
We all know that it has to go at some point, and its not as if pensioners vote Labour.
The state pension is below minimum wage, there may be a case for means testing it but not ending it completely
...but well above Universal Credit (£230.25 pw versus £92.34 pw).
not if you add free rent , free council tax and all the other ones that can be added
True also for those on State Pension
You have to be on pension credit to get help with rent and poll tax, not just pension.
I don't see how this is compatible with the reported large order for the Gripen. Or, more to the point, how they (and their European backers) will fund both.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. It's because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
We have to be realistic here. If someone in the UK has £16k in savings (including non personal jewellery) they don't get any universal credit and the taper starts at just £6k.
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
It was the government who highlighted jewellery in the story they fed to the Sun. They could have neutrally stated assets could be offset against expenses (if any are found). But they deliberately went for the Nazi Extermination Camp metaphor. God knows what they were thinking.
Ignoring the comms part of this - Labour are terrible at comms and the Sun along with most of the press are quite delighted to cause mayhem for them whenever given the opportunity - do you think an asylum seeker arriving with 100k in assets should pay for their own accommodation?
I suspect someone with 100K in assets doesn't need to come into the UK by plastic dinghy, or at least could find another country willing to take them. But I don't know that.
But yes if they have assets I don't see any reason for them not to pay for their own accommodation.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. It's because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
We have to be realistic here. If someone in the UK has £16k in savings (including non personal jewellery) they don't get any universal credit and the taper starts at just £6k.
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
It was the government who highlighted jewellery in the story they fed to the Sun. They could have neutrally stated assets could be offset against expenses (if any are found). But they deliberately went for the Nazi Extermination Camp metaphor. God knows what they were thinking.
None of the talk around personal item confiscation is intended for a domestic audience, it is meant to spread on social media among potential chancers in Calais etc... looking to make the boat trip. This and the other measures are supposed to be a deterrent and if idiot Labour MPs are able to hold their noses and vote it through they might actually stand a chance at the next election as illegal immigration and asylum seeking drops by 80%. I don't see it though, they're too stupid as we can see from the pearl clutching on here.
At least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, Israeli data shows
Exclusive: Real toll likely substantially higher as hundreds of detainees from Gaza are missing, says NGO Physicians for Human Rights - Israel
Israeli data shows at least 98 Palestinians have died in custody since October 2023, and the real toll is likely substantially higher because hundreds of people detained in Gaza are missing, an Israel-based human rights group has said.
Physicians for Human Rights – Israel (PHRI) tracked deaths from causes including physical violence, medical neglect and malnutrition for a new report, using freedom of information requests, forensic reports and interviews with lawyers, activists, relatives and witnesses.
Israeli authorities only provided comprehensive data for the first eight months of the war. Over this period official figures show an unprecedented casualty rate among Palestinian detainees, on average one death every four days.
Isn't it wonderful how such a diverse and tolerant society as Israel can include groups such as this, who disagree with the government's actions and call them out when they occur. Reminds me of that group in Gaza which does the same thing and campaigns against Hamas. What was its name, again? It eludes me. I'm sure it is on the tip of your tongue.
I am not sure of your point. Although it must be a good one because someone liked it.
I don't believe anyone here is flying the flag for Hamas who are a lawless death cult. I don't believe the opposition (or lack of it) to Hamas is measurable in terms set out by western opinion pollsters, and the data collection even more sketchy, but who knows?
I would like to believe that a democratically elected government in a civilised country would operate to a more rigorous set of rules regarding the safety of civilians than Hamas does, and using United Nations guidance, even in the face of a lawless death cult.
Of course. But first, we don't know whether, how, or why these prisoners died. And secondly, that was part of the point I was making. I mean Bloody Sunday enquiries and whatnot aside (more "whataboutery" I'm sure people will say, although again as BR as pointed out, it's also context), you yourself have said that Israel is fighting a "lawless death cult". If only such analysis had been brought to the 2-year conflict as you finally have alighted on here. Because usually that assessment is then followed by a "...but..." and then by criticisism of the Israelis.
As you agree, Israel has both been fighting a lawless death cult for two years and also is being held to the highest account by its own domestic groups. What a place. Is all my first point observied.
I'm delighted that we align on this.
We align in so much as Israel have every right to remove individuals directly involved with Hamas who ruthlessly murdered 1500 people in October 2023. I don't have a problem with Israel taking out the bad guys in Doha either.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
What makes you think it was done for a giggle and not a horrible mistake as can happen in the fog of war, especially when facing a hideous death cult.
Because they were waving white shirts to demonstrate their surrender and had used food to write on their bodies messages of "don't shoot".
God only knows what other atrocities the IDF have perpetrated in Gaza given their exclusion of foreign journalists from the region and their propensity to murder native reporters. We get glimpses of their barbarism when events such as killings of medics are accidenally revealed by discovered phone footage and from incidents such as the one you mention, but this is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg. The state of Israel clearly regards the Palestinians as little more than vermin, much as the apartheid regime in South Africa regarded the black population of that country.
Do you think, in hindsight, Hamas's attack on October 7th 2023 was a good idea, or a bad idea?
You'd have to question what Hamas (their leaders, and footsoldiers) thought would be the outcome.
I don't see how this is compatible with the reported large order for the Gripen. Or, more to the point, how they (and their European backers) will fund both.
Very unlikely Ukraine will buy either 100 Gripins or Rafales IMO. But if they get a dozen or so of each now when they really need them, Zelenskyy will happily promise lots more for later.
Edit I think it's Mirage jets and anti aircraft systems that Ukraine will be getting now.
Taking the jewellery from those sent to the gas chambers vibes.
Must be a vote winner.
Imagine the reaction from Labour, if Farage or anyone in the last government had made the same suggestion.
Labour in government have always been pretty authoritarian, probably more so than the average UK HMG. In opposition they are much more liberal but the liberal voices never get appointed to the Home Office or Justice roles.
From here, I think most of the new suggestions are sensible but wary of the jewellery and assets one. Depending on the detail it could be just about be ok - someone coming into the country with £100k+ shouldn't be subsidised by the state, whereas someone with a family heirloom wedding ring worth £2k shouldn't have to give it up.
Labour feeding stories to the Sun about stripping jewellery from asylum seekers isn't a serious discussion about ways to fund settlement. It's because they think performative cruelty plays well with a certain commentariat.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
We have to be realistic here. If someone in the UK has £16k in savings (including non personal jewellery) they don't get any universal credit and the taper starts at just £6k.
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
It was the government who highlighted jewellery in the story they fed to the Sun. They could have neutrally stated assets could be offset against expenses (if any are found). But they deliberately went for the Nazi Extermination Camp metaphor. God knows what they were thinking.
Ignoring the comms part of this - Labour are terrible at comms and the Sun along with most of the press are quite delighted to cause mayhem for them whenever given the opportunity - do you think an asylum seeker arriving with 100k in assets should pay for their own accommodation?
I suspect someone with 100K in assets doesn't need to come into the UK by plastic dinghy, or at least could find another country willing to take them. But I don't know that.
But yes if they have assets I don't see any reason for them not to pay for their own accommodation.
No one with assets is going to be an Asylum Hostel - it really does show how bad Labour are at comms
“It’s right if people have money in the bank, if people have assets like cars, like e-bikes, they should be contributing.
“No, we are not going to be taking people’s heirlooms off them at the border.
Pressed whether rings or necklaces would be seized, Mr Norris replied: “In the instance that you are talking about, no, of course not.
“What we are saying is if someone comes over with a bag-full of gold rings that’s different to a family heirloom or personal items.”
I'm afraid it doesn't sound any better
It does sound better to me tbh.
As has already been pointed out, it's the same as a Universal Credit or Pension Credit claimant would be treated.
It makes it sound like tinkering at the edges. The problem this government are having is that they don't seem able to get a grip of what voters consider to be big issues. Advertising that you are looking for nickels and dimes just appears to prove the point
Regarding the triple lock, I wonder if the bast way to reform it is to adjust the formula rather than change the name.
For example, continue to use the greater of 2.5%, CPI and wage growth, but compare each one over a rolling 3/5 year period. That would remove much of the long-term unaffordability due to the computing impact of inflation spiking one year and then wages the next etc.
Comments
Any new motorways built this decade? Century?
I wouldn't recommend standing anywhere near, though.
(Explanation: the Faraday cage is leaky, I think.)
Anyway:
What might have been, Barty, what might have been!
https://www.roads.org.uk/ringways
https://www.roads.org.uk/blog/ringways-map-here
https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/maps/index.php?view=51.55496,-0.04229&zoom=12&layer=plans/ringways
https://www.gov.uk/income-tax/taxfree-and-taxable-state-benefits
If you want to go deeper, here is a book (pages) that attempts to cover all the eventualities but even that only scratches the surface as you need to go through the legislation and case law. Bottom line is if you want to discuss benefits and tax, you are highly likely not to have a clue what you are talking about.
https://cpag.org.uk/shop/handbook/welfare-benefits-handbook-202526
I will repeat:
Which benefits are taxed via National Insurance, the same as earned incomes are?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cpwvg0w4ljrt
Heck it’s one of my tests as to how clueful a poster on here actually is - we should have 20 year (at various levels of details) plans for power, rail, infrastructure, housing and a whole set of things - if something is planned and then cancelled it should generate annoyance not glee with someone clueful
And we really should be the leaving people to it, because we need hospitals, roads, schools, trains so just give them a budget and leave them to it
Of course if it didn't take decades to get through planning, there'd be fewer opportunities for constant chopping and changing as political fortunes change.
I wonder whether there have been any earlier precedents for removing jewellery from refugees...
If the tin were a sphere, or similar smooth object, then likely nothing would happen.
But tins aren't smooth, so high electrical charge probably accumulates around the folds at the top and bottom of the tin; electrons might be stripped from air molecules, leading to heated plasmas.
I'm not very clear on whether simple heat transfer to the tin contents provides enough energy to explode it.
PB physicists ?
So they packed it full of the things you are not supposed to microwave, put it in the concrete surrounded test cell in the physics lab setup…
Wish we had filmed it. I still say that putting magnesium in there was cheating - couldn’t see much else, when that went.
A Chancellor has to be seen as the steward of the British economy and it is important that they demonstrate a certain level of stability, competency, certainty.
Reeves for months now has been giving off an air of uncertainty, which hasn’t helped, and her screeching U-Turns are severe blows to her competency. To be honest, I think the only thing keeping her in post is the need for Starmer to save his own skin (I suspect he is now too politically weak to sack her, though he may yet try as part of a final reset attempt), and the fact the markets aren’t confident that there would be anyone any better along to save the day.
And yes, a lot less of the bureaucracy, the government should be able to pass a Bill for key projects and the work start soon afterwards, rather than years and millions spent on shuffling paper before the spades hit the ground.
How would they tell if Starmer was absentia or not?
A rather pathetic list. Especially considering our population has grown by nearly 20% in that time, just to stand still we should have had many more new motorways (and other infrastructure built) let alone to invest in growth.
------
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/migrants-asylum-seekers-britain-jewellery-boats-immigration-b1258365.html
“It’s right if people have money in the bank, if people have assets like cars, like e-bikes, they should be contributing.
“No, we are not going to be taking people’s heirlooms off them at the border.
Pressed whether rings or necklaces would be seized, Mr Norris replied: “In the instance that you are talking about, no, of course not.
“What we are saying is if someone comes over with a bag-full of gold rings that’s different to a family heirloom or personal items.”
-“it wasn’t true”
And instead just said:
-“It wasn’t Clinton”
https://x.com/adamscochran/status/1990186414340821214
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tG2yciY1jaU
All that pandering to the Farage world view seems to have gone really well so far, let’s double down.
Where we diverge is acceptance of the carpet bombing of Gaza, the indiscriminate shooting of Palestinians (and Jews- let's not forget the IDF shot three escaped Israeli hostages for a bit of a giggle, not realising they were Israelis and not Palestinian, and Netanyahu apparently sustaining his Prime Ministership through violence in order to keep himself out of court and out of jail on corruption charges.
Performative cruelty doesn't work because people either think it's performative, or it's cruel, or both. This way you reduce your diminished trust even further.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04517/
I'm completely fine if they introduced similar rules on asylum seekers - exclude personal jewellery but include jewellery used for saving or avoidance, and use the same thresholds. I don't see why that is cruel or performative, it is common sense and I'm pretty liberal.
https://www.statista.com/chart/28489/ukrainian-military-humanitarian-and-financial-aid-donors/?srsltid=AfmBOorKEErqgnwb3I8QZGqrbvHxDV3TAbVIyI6EUFu6BPwXOXEbU9M1
the aid from "EU institutions" dwarves the aid from each of the individual EU members. Assuming that EU institutions are funded roughly in proportion to the size of EU member states, this would mean that France's overall contribution is still substantial and certainly greater than Sweden's contribution (though not per capita).
I just don’t see what the purpose is - it will annoy a whole set of Labour / Green curious voters l and just hawks back to Nazi Germany
I think there is something in that.
But of course all these things are balancing acts and realising that they’re never going to out-Reform Reform and that they need to keep voters on the left on side too is a tricky seesaw to walk. I’m not sure things like seizing jewellery are going to help with that.
The stuff around speeding up hearings/removing certain appeal rights is likely to be more impactful (but they do need to square the circle about how to get around the ECHR on points like this and unless they’re talking derogation it’s going to be very hard for them to enact this change without significant legal challenge).
Even if it were true, it would probably (unless "Bubba" is underage) be consensual activity.
But the memes are undeniably amusing, considering MAGA's institutionalised homophobia.
Shit happens in the fog of war.
I admire what was tried with Torchwood, for instance, but the biggest issue was it was always a run of doctor-lite Dr Who stories.
And I am extremely reluctant to take sides in this conflict, since it seems to me the leadership on both sides has been acting in ways which are morally repulsive.
As has already been pointed out, it's the same as a Universal Credit or Pension Credit claimant would be treated.
PatCrack episodes have changed a bit since I was a kid....Postman puffs on drugs pipe
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15296855/postman-puffs-drugs-pipe-Royal-Mail.html
Or, more to the point, how they (and their European backers) will fund both.
Zelensky in Paris has just agreed to buy up to 100 🇫🇷Rafale fighter jets, air-defense systems and drones. On his way to Paris, he called the deal “historic”
https://x.com/PedderSophie/status/1990366551178973513
But yes if they have assets I don't see any reason for them not to pay for their own accommodation.
I remember once watching a London bus driver going down Oxford Street drinking from a can of Red Stripe.
The rabbits used were massive and would be enough to make anyone think they were on drugs
Edit I think it's Mirage jets and anti aircraft systems that Ukraine will be getting now.
For example, continue to use the greater of 2.5%, CPI and wage growth, but compare each one over a rolling 3/5 year period. That would remove much of the long-term unaffordability due to the computing impact of inflation spiking one year and then wages the next etc.