Refusal should count as a black mark against future promotions.
As discussed yesterday, there's a very real chance that No10 North doesn't outlive Burnham, so why would you go? You could be swapping your family home in e.g. Hackney for easily a 6 figure loss (3 forced sales, 2 forced purchases and 2 lots of stamp duty) and a family home in e.g. West Ham in 3-4 years time. Plus it's likely your partner has a career which won't neatly synchronise with a relocation.
Thinking you can just relocate people show's a lack of understanding about real life in the 2020s, maybe it would have worked in the 1980s.
Indeed. See the disasterous relocation of the ONS:
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Anyone who thinks that British prisons are like 5* hotels needs to improve their Trivago skills, ot has clearly never visited one.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Good thinking. Except for the barring tourism part. We want tourists. They are good for the economy, good for the country. That is why Herr Leon and Monsieur le Leon are given free holidays to encourage their countrymen to visit.
I don't know for sure, buy instinctively I'd say the countries that criminals from are quite different to the countries which tourists come from.
London is said to be one of the larger cities in France at election time, due to the number of French people who live there. If we assume that those French people in London are basically normal people then they will have normal rates of criminal offending, and with such a large population you'd expect a fair number to end up in prison.
The other thing to bear in mind is that if Britain starts sending Australians and Spaniards it has imprisoned back to Australia and Spain to serve their prison sentences, then we can expect those countries to reciprocate. The net reduction in prisoner numbers will inevitably be lower.
You have to take the rough with the smooth, and if a few time-share fraudsters need to head back to these shores from Spain so we can deport Pakistani groomers then so be it.
We already swap prisoners (prisoner transfer arrangements) with a number of countries.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Yes, that's the point. There are always emotive crimes like this. As for building more prisons, yes. But where? Remember it needs to be somewhere to where prison staff can commute on their £2 bus rides. Perhaps there will be space on industrial estates now we've given up on industry.
Also we have to recruit Prison Officers from abroad, mostly West Africa.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Good thinking. Except for the barring tourism part. We want tourists. They are good for the economy, good for the country. That is why Herr Leon and Monsieur le Leon are given free holidays to encourage their countrymen to visit.
I don't know for sure, buy instinctively I'd say the countries that criminals from are quite different to the countries which tourists come from.
I’d say that the ‘tourist visa’ profile of the countries that produce criminals, is different to the countries that generally don’t.
Most of the ‘good’ countries’ tourists don’t need a visa anyway, the only problems are likely to be some of the recent EU accession countries, for example Romania.
Ukrainian drones hit another massive Wildberries (think Amazon) distribution centre, this time in Krasnodar.
Russians were going crazy after the last one. Wildberries just changed their ToS saying they weren’t liable for drone strikes. Customers and businesses had to soak up the losses.
Ukrainian drones hit another massive Wildberries (think Amazon) distribution centre, this time in Krasnodar.
Russians were going crazy after the last one. Wildberries just changed their ToS saying they weren’t liable for drone strikes. Customers and businesses had to soak up the losses.
'Defence Secretary Wes Streeting has said there was "no ill intent" behind comments he made apparently about the early prisoner release scheme, which were caught on camera.
In a video, published by the news website Guido Fawkes, the new Justice Secretary Alex Norris can be seen walking towards Streeting and Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood.
Streeting, can then be heard calling Norris "the enemy now" while Mahmood responds "no he's not". Streeting goes on to say "he wants to let them all out" - appearing to reference the government's plans for early release for prisoners.'
Conclusion: And finally, wartime logistics. Wildberries’ extensive warehouse and distribution network serves as a critical dual-use logistics backbone in Russia. While primarily a civilian e-commerce platform, it handles vast volumes of goods – including electronics, fiber-optic cables for FPV drones, body armor and other items that can support military efforts. Halving capacity would create bottlenecks in moving these items to manufacturers, volunteers, or frontline units. This could slow drone production/assembly, repair of equipment, and ad-hoc procurement that bypasses official military channels.
Of course, not all military supplies go through Wildberries. The Russian army has its own official supply systems, and other online platforms like Ozon. Plus, Russia’s war-focused economy and income from oil and gas provide some protection. (Though, Ukraine takes care of it, too). However, repeated attacks or major damage like this would make logistics less efficient, increase costs, and force changes that could weaken the military’s ability to stay supplied over time.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
Hunt / Rishi left £xbn of public sector payrises unpaid and called an election so they didn't have to find the money themselves...
I'm sorry but there are multiple reasons why employee NI should have been left how it was - just ask any employer who has struggled following the massive Employer NI increases that had to be done instead...
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Anyone who thinks that British prisons are like 5* hotels needs to improve their Trivago skills, ot has clearly never visited one.
If you’re from Asia or Africa, they’re like 5* hotels compared to their local prisons.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
Violent criminals? I thought we were trying to keep the Argies out of the Falklands?
On Harper's killers "release" surely because someone is eligible for something doesn't mean they should get it. Can the HS or a right minded judge not use their discretion (And say no) on such a case ?
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
What Hunt didn't do was allocate funds for essential works or identify funding for his spending commitments, knowing this would leave a financial hole for the incoming chancellor. It was a classic scortched earth policy to lay traps.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
Hunt / Rishi left £xbn of public sector payrises unpaid and called an election so they didn't have to find the money themselves...
I'm sorry but there are multiple reasons why employee NI should have been left how it was - just ask any employer who has struggled following the massive Employer NI increases that had to be done instead...
Sorry but Reeves making a massive mistake does not mean that Hunt did and does not change the fact their NI/Threshold changes were a net tax increase.
There should not have been a massive Employer NI increase. NI is completely the wrong tax to raise.
If there needed to be a tax rise, it should have been Income Tax, not NI that was raised.
On Harper's killers "release" surely because someone is eligible for something doesn't mean they should get it. Can the HS or a right minded judge not use their discretion (And say no) on such a case ?
You can't say one rule for some prisoners and not for others depending on the victim of the crime.
The sentence should determine the point someone leaves prison, if that is too early it's the sentence that was wrong in the first place...
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Refusal should count as a black mark against future promotions.
As discussed yesterday, there's a very real chance that No10 North doesn't outlive Burnham, so why would you go? You could be swapping your family home in e.g. Hackney for easily a 6 figure loss (3 forced sales, 2 forced purchases and 2 lots of stamp duty) and a family home in e.g. West Ham in 3-4 years time. Plus it's likely your partner has a career which won't neatly synchronise with a relocation.
Thinking you can just relocate people show's a lack of understanding about real life in the 2020s, maybe it would have worked in the 1980s.
Plus children settled in schools and other caring responsibilities. Why disrupt your family and partner's career? If really necessary, commute by train for the days you really need to be there.
If my employer threatened me in such a way, I'd be looking for jobs elsewhere.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
Hunt / Rishi left £xbn of public sector payrises unpaid and called an election so they didn't have to find the money themselves...
I'm sorry but there are multiple reasons why employee NI should have been left how it was - just ask any employer who has struggled following the massive Employer NI increases that had to be done instead...
Sorry but Reeves making a massive mistake does not mean that Hunt did and does not change the fact their NI/Threshold changes were a net tax increase.
There should not have been a massive Employer NI increase. NI is completely the wrong tax to raise.
If there needed to be a tax rise, it should have been Income Tax, not NI that was raised.
Which part of Hunt didn't have the money to pay for public sector pay increases that were known about can you not comprehend...
And remember
1) SKS / Reeves promised that income tax and employee NI wouldn't be increased - that part is on them but the lack of leeway that resulted in taxes being need to be raised sits with Rishi and Hunt for not managing spending correctly and missing basic fundamentals such as legally required pay increases. 2) my favoured increase was 2-3p on income tax attached to retaining the Winter Fuel allowance so it didn't impact pensioners with very small private pensions..
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
What Hunt didn't do was allocate funds for essential works or identify funding for his spending commitments, knowing this would leave a financial hole for the incoming chancellor. It was a classic scortched earth policy to lay traps.
Indeed, just like Starmer's government - with Darren Jones complaining about half of the planned spending on ID cards being redirected to a tax cut, on the basis of "but we hadn't funded the ID card spending".
Sadly every government since 2002 has failed to fund their commitments, which is why we have had a deficit since then. Nothing new.
Does not change the fact that the tax changes Hunt made were a net tax rise, nor that transitioning away from taxing NI towards taxing income more equitably is both fairer and will raise more revenue in the long term as an increasing proportion of income is not liable for NI.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Good thinking. Except for the barring tourism part. We want tourists. They are good for the economy, good for the country. That is why Herr Leon and Monsieur le Leon are given free holidays to encourage their countrymen to visit.
I don't know for sure, buy instinctively I'd say the countries that criminals from are quite different to the countries which tourists come from.
London is said to be one of the larger cities in France at election time, due to the number of French people who live there. If we assume that those French people in London are basically normal people then they will have normal rates of criminal offending, and with such a large population you'd expect a fair number to end up in prison.
The other thing to bear in mind is that if Britain starts sending Australians and Spaniards it has imprisoned back to Australia and Spain to serve their prison sentences, then we can expect those countries to reciprocate. The net reduction in prisoner numbers will inevitably be lower.
You have to take the rough with the smooth, and if a few time-share fraudsters need to head back to these shores from Spain so we can deport Pakistani groomers then so be it.
We already swap prisoners (prisoner transfer arrangements) with a number of countries.
Including Spain and Australia, IIRC
We all know that Spain and Australia aren’t the problem.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
Hunt / Rishi left £xbn of public sector payrises unpaid and called an election so they didn't have to find the money themselves...
I'm sorry but there are multiple reasons why employee NI should have been left how it was - just ask any employer who has struggled following the massive Employer NI increases that had to be done instead...
It didn’t ’have to be done’ it was a political choice as the Labour Party boxed itself in during the campaign by ruling out certain tax rises then in power deciding to raise taxes.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
Hunt / Rishi left £xbn of public sector payrises unpaid and called an election so they didn't have to find the money themselves...
I'm sorry but there are multiple reasons why employee NI should have been left how it was - just ask any employer who has struggled following the massive Employer NI increases that had to be done instead...
Sorry but Reeves making a massive mistake does not mean that Hunt did and does not change the fact their NI/Threshold changes were a net tax increase.
There should not have been a massive Employer NI increase. NI is completely the wrong tax to raise.
If there needed to be a tax rise, it should have been Income Tax, not NI that was raised.
Which part of Hunt didn't have the money to pay for public sector pay increases that were known about can you not comprehend...
I do comprehend it, it is an unrelated issue to a net tax rise though.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
Violent criminals? I thought we were trying to keep the Argies out of the Falklands?
Keeping them off the football pitch would also help.
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
No need to go quite that far, Ascencion Island works just as well.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Ukrainian drones hit another massive Wildberries (think Amazon) distribution centre, this time in Krasnodar.
Russians were going crazy after the last one. Wildberries just changed their ToS saying they weren’t liable for drone strikes. Customers and businesses had to soak up the losses.
As wars drag on, attacks on civilians become more and more normalised. Same goes in Lebanon, Iran, and Sudan where another city is about to be massacred.
Putin could stop his war any time he chooses of course.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Anyone who thinks that British prisons are like 5* hotels needs to improve their Trivago skills, ot has clearly never visited one.
If you’re from Asia or Africa, they’re like 5* hotels compared to their local prisons.
Like this woman in your neck of the woods moaning about the state of her prison.
She stopped paying rent, owes £19 grand, and now is inside and, somehow, she’s the victim
Still, it’s good clickbait and there’s always a gofundme.
On Harper's killers "release" surely because someone is eligible for something doesn't mean they should get it. Can the HS or a right minded judge not use their discretion (And say no) on such a case ?
You can't say one rule for some prisoners and not for others depending on the victim of the crime.
The sentence should determine the point someone leaves prison, if that is too early it's the sentence that was wrong in the first place...
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
No need to go quite that far, Ascencion Island works just as well.
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
No need to go quite that far, Ascencion Island works just as well.
Slacker thinking
Send them to the Moon - start a penal colony there. They can dig tunnels there to grow crops (using lunar ice) etc and export the product via electromagnetic catapult to Earth.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Yet he's managed to cut VAT on electricity bills and cap bus fares all without a budget.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
No need to go quite that far, Ascencion Island works just as well.
Slacker thinking
Send them to the Moon - start a penal colony there. They can dig tunnels there to grow crops (using lunar ice) etc and export the product via electromagnetic catapult to Earth.
By 2076 we could be turning a profit.
Can’t see a flaw in this scheme.
I'm not sure you are treating this issue with the gravity it needs.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Anyone who thinks that British prisons are like 5* hotels needs to improve their Trivago skills, ot has clearly never visited one.
If you’re from Asia or Africa, they’re like 5* hotels compared to their local prisons.
Like this woman in your neck of the woods moaning about the state of her prison.
She stopped paying rent, owes £19 grand, and now is inside and, somehow, she’s the victim
Still, it’s good clickbait and there’s always a gofundme.
LOL there’s always a few of those stories out here.
She’s not paid rent for a year in a foreign country, and expects what exactly to be the outcome?
Oh, she expects a UK press sob story and a GoFundMe to bail her out. Doesn’t anyone take responsibility for themselves any more?
A friend of mine got three months here, and did well to avoid deportation, for bouncing a cheque on a £40k car loan. He lived here for 3 years, earning an average of £3k a month and spending an average of £4k a month, and eventually it all caught up with him.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
No need to go quite that far, Ascencion Island works just as well.
Slacker thinking
Send them to the Moon - start a penal colony there. They can dig tunnels there to grow crops (using lunar ice) etc and export the product via electromagnetic catapult to Earth.
By 2076 we could be turning a profit.
Can’t see a flaw in this scheme.
I'm not sure you are treating this issue with the gravity it needs.
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
On Harper's killers "release" surely because someone is eligible for something doesn't mean they should get it. Can the HS or a right minded judge not use their discretion (And say no) on such a case ?
You can't say one rule for some prisoners and not for others depending on the victim of the crime.
The sentence should determine the point someone leaves prison, if that is too early it's the sentence that was wrong in the first place...
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Do you pay employee NI?
If not you aren't paying the same taxes as a employee as you are exempt from employee NI from the tax year following your 66th birthday.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
No need to go quite that far, Ascencion Island works just as well.
Slacker thinking
Send them to the Moon - start a penal colony there. They can dig tunnels there to grow crops (using lunar ice) etc and export the product via electromagnetic catapult to Earth.
By 2076 we could be turning a profit.
Can’t see a flaw in this scheme.
I'm not sure you are treating this issue with the gravity it needs.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Problem for Macron is the young people will be able to swerve all of this as they are very IT literate as are their peers
If it's implemented across all of the EU the few remaining VPN exit points in countries without such bans will be overloaded.
Mind you I don't understand why we are implementing rules that Meta and co are actively lobbying for to avoid doing proper moderation.
But the game of whack-a-mole will provide decades of employment for lawyers and regulators.
So notices will be served to ISPs blocking sites that don’t meet the standard. Then to VPNs that evade the blocks. Then to VPNs that allow connection to VPNs that evade the blocks. Then to VPNs that allow connection to VPNs that allow connection….
This will require a logo, a Richard Rogeresque HQ (custom designed), a CEO on £650k plus pension, a managing board, expensive artwork for the foyer, ten thousand staff. A couple of IT guys, maybe.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that NI is a tax.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that NI is a tax.
It is a form of social insurance, you can't get JSA without paying in enough NI contributions and you also need NI payments or credits to be able to claim the state pension.
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that NI is a tax.
It’s a tax on incomes.
As defined multiple times by the U.K. government, HMRC and mentioned as such in multiple international treaties.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Problem for Macron is the young people will be able to swerve all of this as they are very IT literate as are their peers
Tbh I'm not sure how IT-literate young people are. They know more about phones but less about PCs than older generations, according to anecdotal reports from workplaces and schools where even basic concepts like files and folders need to be taught from scratch.
I'm sceptical about blocking young'uns from social media, and fearful of its consequences for privacy, but polling suggests it is popular.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
On Harper's killers "release" surely because someone is eligible for something doesn't mean they should get it. Can the HS or a right minded judge not use their discretion (And say no) on such a case ?
You can't say one rule for some prisoners and not for others depending on the victim of the crime.
The sentence should determine the point someone leaves prison, if that is too early it's the sentence that was wrong in the first place...
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Next year they are going to have to start taxing people whose only income is state pension. Increasing the TFA to at least that level would make sense. You could presumably pay for it by reducing the 40% threshold by the same amount. I understand that tinkering with rates is unlikely as Burnham feels bound by the Labour manifesto. Which is one reason I think there will be an election within a year.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Problem for Macron is the young people will be able to swerve all of this as they are very IT literate as are their peers
Tbh I'm not sure how IT-literate young people are. They know more about phones but less about PCs than older generations, according to anecdotal reports from workplaces and schools where even basic concepts like files and folders need to be taught from scratch.
I'm sceptical about blocking young'uns from social media, and fearful of its consequences for privacy, but polling suggests it is popular.
The way it works, is that the class nerds figure it out. And become the go-to guys for “sorting it out”.
Also a million YouTube videos on how to do it.
This has been observed in action in Australia.
The thing about most teenagers is that they aren’t interested in many, many things. Until it touches on something they regard as essential. At which point they focus on it with the power of a thousand suns.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that NI is a tax.
It’s a tax on incomes.
As defined multiple times by the U.K. government, HMRC and mentioned as such in multiple international treaties.
Yes, diplomatic staff are either subject to it or exempt from it, in exactly the same way as regular income tax.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
No need to go quite that far, Ascencion Island works just as well.
Slacker thinking
Send them to the Moon - start a penal colony there. They can dig tunnels there to grow crops (using lunar ice) etc and export the product via electromagnetic catapult to Earth.
By 2076 we could be turning a profit.
Can’t see a flaw in this scheme.
We simply will not tolerate funnelling taxpayers' money to Elon Musk in order to fly them there. Perhaps something can be done with very long ladders but we'd need to order them from Amazon and Bezos is almost as bad.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
If you are going to tax, better to do it through more honest and visible taxation rather than stealth and more stealth?
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
I like the bus fare cap proposal. Ok it's not huge (it's 'breathing space' stuff) but it shows a direction of travel. Even better, it shows a mode of travel too.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Next year they are going to have to start taxing people whose only income is state pension. Increasing the TFA to at least that level would make sense. You could presumably pay for it by reducing the 40% threshold by the same amount. I understand that tinkering with rates is unlikely as Burnham feels bound by the Labour manifesto. Which is one reason I think there will be an election within a year.
If the state pension goes above the personal allowance deducting a few pence and taxing it at source makes sense.
As @malcolmg has accidently pointed out and as Dan Neidle did yesterday - Hunt and co were right in saying that the best tax to deduct is employee NI as it helps even the lowest paid workers far more than an increase in the personal allowance.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Problem for Macron is the young people will be able to swerve all of this as they are very IT literate as are their peers
Tbh I'm not sure how IT-literate young people are. They know more about phones but less about PCs than older generations, according to anecdotal reports from workplaces and schools where even basic concepts like files and folders need to be taught from scratch.
I'm sceptical about blocking young'uns from social media, and fearful of its consequences for privacy, but polling suggests it is popular.
The onus needs to be on the Social Media companies. They need to be liable as publishers, same as legacy media.
Then let the lawyers loose on them. They will soon pull in their horns, at no cost to either government or personal liberty.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
I’m not sure there’s many that disagree with someone who knowingly kills a police officer being imprisoned for several decades.
Certainly long enough that the officer’s parents aren’t still alive to see their adult child’s killers released from prison.
Turn shorter sentences for non-violent crimes into serious community service, and build more prisons - even temporary prisons on military land - before letting killers and sex offenders out early.
They could even think really outside the box, and have the prisoners living in the Portakabins help build their new permanent prison.
Time to be radical. Use the Falkland Islands for sex offenders and violent criminals.
No need to go quite that far, Ascencion Island works just as well.
Slacker thinking
Send them to the Moon - start a penal colony there. They can dig tunnels there to grow crops (using lunar ice) etc and export the product via electromagnetic catapult to Earth.
By 2076 we could be turning a profit.
Can’t see a flaw in this scheme.
We simply will not tolerate funnelling taxpayers' money to Elon Musk in order to fly them there. Perhaps something can be done with very long ladders but we'd need to order them from Amazon and Bezos is almost as bad.
Which is why we need to fund my space program to land the entire DfE on the Sun and the entire of Parliament on Uranus.
The spare capacity from that will easily support a Lunar penal colony.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Next year they are going to have to start taxing people whose only income is state pension. Increasing the TFA to at least that level would make sense. You could presumably pay for it by reducing the 40% threshold by the same amount. I understand that tinkering with rates is unlikely as Burnham feels bound by the Labour manifesto. Which is one reason I think there will be an election within a year.
If the state pension goes above the personal allowance deducting a few pence and taxing it at source makes sense.
As @malcolmg has accidently pointed out and as Dan Neidle did yesterday - Hunt and co were right in saying that the best tax to deduct is employee NI as it helps even the lowest paid workers far more than an increase in the personal allowance.
So Hunt raising taxes by freezing thresholds combined with cutting NI was a good move then?
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Anyone who thinks that British prisons are like 5* hotels needs to improve their Trivago skills, ot has clearly never visited one.
If you’re from Asia or Africa, they’re like 5* hotels compared to their local prisons.
Like this woman in your neck of the woods moaning about the state of her prison.
She stopped paying rent, owes £19 grand, and now is inside and, somehow, she’s the victim
Still, it’s good clickbait and there’s always a gofundme.
LOL there’s always a few of those stories out here.
She’s not paid rent for a year in a foreign country, and expects what exactly to be the outcome?
Oh, she expects a UK press sob story and a GoFundMe to bail her out. Doesn’t anyone take responsibility for themselves any more?
A friend of mine got three months here, and did well to avoid deportation, for bouncing a cheque on a £40k car loan. He lived here for 3 years, earning an average of £3k a month and spending an average of £4k a month, and eventually it all caught up with him.
There’s one about a ‘Grandad’ too, as if that makes any difference. Or this woman being a ‘mum’
They go out there for the lifestyle and work and when it goes wrong due to their own stupidity they moan and expect to come back to the U.K.
Fuck them.
Maybe she assumed she could get away with not paying rent there, like tenants can here.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Next year they are going to have to start taxing people whose only income is state pension. Increasing the TFA to at least that level would make sense. You could presumably pay for it by reducing the 40% threshold by the same amount. I understand that tinkering with rates is unlikely as Burnham feels bound by the Labour manifesto. Which is one reason I think there will be an election within a year.
If the state pension goes above the personal allowance deducting a few pence and taxing it at source makes sense.
As @malcolmg has accidently pointed out and as Dan Neidle did yesterday - Hunt and co were right in saying that the best tax to deduct is employee NI as it helps even the lowest paid workers far more than an increase in the personal allowance.
So Hunt raising taxes by freezing thresholds combined with cutting NI was a good move then?
Glad for your Damascene conversion.
You cut taxes when you can afford to cut taxes - Hunt wasn't in a position to do so but he did it any way.
I don't think I've ever said it was the wrong tax to cut - what I've said continually is that he didn't have the leeway to have done so.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
If you are going to tax, better to do it through more honest and visible taxation rather than stealth and more stealth?
Indeed, which is why we should be abolishing NI and having a single rate of income tax that is paid by everyone the same, honestly and visibly.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Next year they are going to have to start taxing people whose only income is state pension. Increasing the TFA to at least that level would make sense. You could presumably pay for it by reducing the 40% threshold by the same amount. I understand that tinkering with rates is unlikely as Burnham feels bound by the Labour manifesto. Which is one reason I think there will be an election within a year.
If the state pension goes above the personal allowance deducting a few pence and taxing it at source makes sense.
As @malcolmg has accidently pointed out and as Dan Neidle did yesterday - Hunt and co were right in saying that the best tax to deduct is employee NI as it helps even the lowest paid workers far more than an increase in the personal allowance.
So Hunt raising taxes by freezing thresholds combined with cutting NI was a good move then?
Glad for your Damascene conversion.
You cut taxes when you can afford to cut taxes - Hunt wasn't in a position to do so but he did it any way.
I don't think I've ever said it was the wrong tax to cut - what I've said continually is that he didn't have the leeway to have done so.
He didn't cut taxes though, he raised them, so that's moot.
Refusal should count as a black mark against future promotions.
As discussed yesterday, there's a very real chance that No10 North doesn't outlive Burnham, so why would you go? You could be swapping your family home in e.g. Hackney for easily a 6 figure loss (3 forced sales, 2 forced purchases and 2 lots of stamp duty) and a family home in e.g. West Ham in 3-4 years time. Plus it's likely your partner has a career which won't neatly synchronise with a relocation.
Thinking you can just relocate people show's a lack of understanding about real life in the 2020s, maybe it would have worked in the 1980s.
Indeed. See the disasterous relocation of the ONS:
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Next year they are going to have to start taxing people whose only income is state pension. Increasing the TFA to at least that level would make sense. You could presumably pay for it by reducing the 40% threshold by the same amount. I understand that tinkering with rates is unlikely as Burnham feels bound by the Labour manifesto. Which is one reason I think there will be an election within a year.
If the state pension goes above the personal allowance deducting a few pence and taxing it at source makes sense.
As @malcolmg has accidently pointed out and as Dan Neidle did yesterday - Hunt and co were right in saying that the best tax to deduct is employee NI as it helps even the lowest paid workers far more than an increase in the personal allowance.
So Hunt raising taxes by freezing thresholds combined with cutting NI was a good move then?
Glad for your Damascene conversion.
You cut taxes when you can afford to cut taxes - Hunt wasn't in a position to do so but he did it any way.
I don't think I've ever said it was the wrong tax to cut - what I've said continually is that he didn't have the leeway to have done so.
He didn't cut taxes though, he raised them, so that's moot.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
What Hunt didn't do was allocate funds for essential works or identify funding for his spending commitments, knowing this would leave a financial hole for the incoming chancellor. It was a classic scortched earth policy to lay traps.
Indeed, just like Starmer's government - with Darren Jones complaining about half of the planned spending on ID cards being redirected to a tax cut, on the basis of "but we hadn't funded the ID card spending".
Sadly every government since 2002 has failed to fund their commitments, which is why we have had a deficit since then. Nothing new.
Does not change the fact that the tax changes Hunt made were a net tax rise, nor that transitioning away from taxing NI towards taxing income more equitably is both fairer and will raise more revenue in the long term as an increasing proportion of income is not liable for NI.
No, not "just like" Starmer's government. The hole in the accounts that Sunak/Hunt left was off the scale, and the hole that was known about before the 2024 election turned out to be far deeper, an example being when it came to light that the Government had budgeted to spend nothing on temporarily housing asylum seekers after 2024, that is assuming that the problem it had so signally failed to deal with would vanish at a stroke. Breathtaking.
Meanwhile, in his desire to undermine Burnham the petty Darren Jones highlights a problem of his/Starmer's own making and in so doing damns only himself. All he's saying is that Starmer left a modest hole in his last budget which Burnham has yet to deal with. And it's not as though Burnham even sought to hide that, in switching the spending commitment from the cancelled digital ID to the cut in VAT on domestic electricity. The government press release was pretty transparent, saying: "We are funding this through the cancellation of the Digital ID programme, which was going to cost £1.8 billion over the next three years. Savings were due to be identified from within existing budgets through reprioritisation, which will now be redirected towards this measure. Any further action, including on funding for longer-term measures, will be taken at the Budget, and all decisions at that point will be funded and also consistent with the government’s fiscal rules."
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Problem for Macron is the young people will be able to swerve all of this as they are very IT literate as are their peers
Tbh I'm not sure how IT-literate young people are. They know more about phones but less about PCs than older generations, according to anecdotal reports from workplaces and schools where even basic concepts like files and folders need to be taught from scratch.
I'm sceptical about blocking young'uns from social media, and fearful of its consequences for privacy, but polling suggests it is popular.
The onus needs to be on the Social Media companies. They need to be liable as publishers, same as legacy media.
Then let the lawyers loose on them. They will soon pull in their horns, at no cost to either government or personal liberty.
It is simply impractical. People complain about algorithms but the only way their wishes can be met is with even more algorithms because no human can read, still less moderate, 5 to 10,000 tweets a second.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Problem for Macron is the young people will be able to swerve all of this as they are very IT literate as are their peers
If it's implemented across all of the EU the few remaining VPN exit points in countries without such bans will be overloaded.
Mind you I don't understand why we are implementing rules that Meta and co are actively lobbying for to avoid doing proper moderation.
But the game of whack-a-mole will provide decades of employment for lawyers and regulators.
So notices will be served to ISPs blocking sites that don’t meet the standard. Then to VPNs that evade the blocks. Then to VPNs that allow connection to VPNs that evade the blocks. Then to VPNs that allow connection to VPNs that allow connection….
This will require a logo, a Richard Rogeresque HQ (custom designed), a CEO on £650k plus pension, a managing board, expensive artwork for the foyer, ten thousand staff. A couple of IT guys, maybe.
We are talking a whole industry here.
Meanwhile everyone will quickly find that the next-gen Starlink is cheaper and faster than a regular UK ISP, and can easily drop to a VPN node in the US where they have a 1st Amendment.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
But we do pay tax on our income in exactly the same way as everybody else. I pay exactly the same amount of income tax as I would if I were still working - my state pension is pretty much my personal allowance, and my company pension is taxed at 20%. The only difference is that I don't pay NI. Maybe I should.
There are some real dummies on here who don't even know that pensioners pay the same tax as everybody else.
Next year they are going to have to start taxing people whose only income is state pension. Increasing the TFA to at least that level would make sense. You could presumably pay for it by reducing the 40% threshold by the same amount. I understand that tinkering with rates is unlikely as Burnham feels bound by the Labour manifesto. Which is one reason I think there will be an election within a year.
If the state pension goes above the personal allowance deducting a few pence and taxing it at source makes sense.
As @malcolmg has accidently pointed out and as Dan Neidle did yesterday - Hunt and co were right in saying that the best tax to deduct is employee NI as it helps even the lowest paid workers far more than an increase in the personal allowance.
So Hunt raising taxes by freezing thresholds combined with cutting NI was a good move then?
Glad for your Damascene conversion.
You cut taxes when you can afford to cut taxes - Hunt wasn't in a position to do so but he did it any way.
I don't think I've ever said it was the wrong tax to cut - what I've said continually is that he didn't have the leeway to have done so.
He didn't cut taxes though, he raised them, so that's moot.
He didn't raise taxes enough then....
Perhaps, but that's a different issue to the fact that his tax rise (by cutting NI rates but freezing thresholds) was both economically and philosophically a good idea that both improved the fiscal position and decreased the differential between earned and unearned tax rates.
Yet you keep criticising it, by disregarding half the package and the fact it was a net tax rise.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
If you are going to tax, better to do it through more honest and visible taxation rather than stealth and more stealth?
Indeed, which is why we should be abolishing NI and having a single rate of income tax that is paid by everyone the same, honestly and visibly.
Not taxing employment more than unearned incomes.
That is possible but you'd need to unravel NI from the pension system which will take at least some thought and legislation. On a wider point about differential taxation of earned and unearned income, the government is supposed to be looking at private equity, dividends and capital gains tax.
On Harper's killers "release" surely because someone is eligible for something doesn't mean they should get it. Can the HS or a right minded judge not use their discretion (And say no) on such a case ?
You can't say one rule for some prisoners and not for others depending on the victim of the crime.
The sentence should determine the point someone leaves prison, if that is too early it's the sentence that was wrong in the first place...
I think we saw from the calamitous WFA debacle that once the public make up their mind it’s very hard to move them .
Burnham and Healey whilst not spending a great deal at least are trying to store up some goodwill .
Small steps
Inflation unexpectedly continuing to go south against expectations is a positive too. (Burnham will be praying that continues to September when all the various pension indexs are linked to September inflation figure)
The politician in Burnham , as I suggested yesterday, will want to get the the budger and say we have saved the majority of the population £xxx (I think he'll be looking at £500 as a target) by these simple measures, there may be 10x £50 measures, that will qualify as his "breathing space"...
Budgets offer bigger more headline measures but if he can continue this "breathing space" theme trough in to 2027 it just starts to drip down like continual short but regular shwers into the public pshyche - far better than one off torrential downpout then drought!
The Tories can bleat it's uncosted (a) it's costed to a degree (b) the public don't care (c) the Public still don't believe any Tory on the economy., Reform can call for a GE all they like as Farage looks increasingly desperate and yesterdays man.
What we are seeing is the start of a Government that is far more politically tuned in and whilst it may not be a better one than Starmer, if the public have a modicum of trust and belief it goes a long way. Of course its the job of the right wing media, eg 90% of the media to disparage it and to just find moaners and whingers, but slowly but surely the thought that Government is on your side will permeate.
“ What we are seeing is the start of a Government that is far more politically tuned in”
Hah hah hah 😂
Your posts are so hysterically funny. 🤣
Do you actually believe de-industrialisation, globalisation, automation, were decisions made by previous governments and can be unmade?
Labour is now massively split, and already sniping and briefing at each other, the government is now staffed with useless weird failures and felons.
This has effectively been a change from boring but living in real world of no money so sensibly not over promising politicians, to Johnsonian type populist politics. And you said “more tuned in” 😂
And as Labour doesn’t have a single back bencher who will vote for welfare reform - no one in government has a plan for welfare reform - no advisors helping them achieve it - they are screwed. There’s only one place this is going. Massive majority and they fucked it up 🙂
Do you actually believe de-industrialisation, globalisation, automation, were decisions made by previous governments and can be unmade? 🤣
Only day 3 - what should be honeymoon bounce - and I’m already loving it. It’s so funny.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Being unable to brazen out simple questions like that - at a press conference where he's attacking his opponent's record - is just pathetic. And he won't debate Talarico.
Texas deserves all it gets if it elects Paxton. Truly, an appalling candidate. Even Reform couldn't find anybody as bad.
'France's parliament has approved a law to ban social media for under-15s from January 2027, making it the first European country to block young people from the platforms.
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
Problem for Macron is the young people will be able to swerve all of this as they are very IT literate as are their peers
Tbh I'm not sure how IT-literate young people are. They know more about phones but less about PCs than older generations, according to anecdotal reports from workplaces and schools where even basic concepts like files and folders need to be taught from scratch.
I'm sceptical about blocking young'uns from social media, and fearful of its consequences for privacy, but polling suggests it is popular.
The onus needs to be on the Social Media companies. They need to be liable as publishers, same as legacy media.
Then let the lawyers loose on them. They will soon pull in their horns, at no cost to either government or personal liberty.
Quite,
Much like the ID Cards debate and the intricacies of various voting systems, this one has been around the block a few times on PB.
Social Media (indeed too much screen time in general) is an identified, actual harm for children and doing nothing is as much a choice as doing something. I agree with age restrictions for Social Media (in the same way as I agree with age restrictions on buying alcohol or tobacco for instance). How this is implemented is less important. Making the providers liable as publishers would be a strong step also.
Being unable to brazen out simple questions like that - at a press conference where he's attacking his opponent's record - is just pathetic. And he won't debate Talarico.
Texas deserves all it gets if it elects Paxton. Truly, an appalling candidate. Even Reform couldn't find anybody as bad.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
If you are going to tax, better to do it through more honest and visible taxation rather than stealth and more stealth?
Indeed, which is why we should be abolishing NI and having a single rate of income tax that is paid by everyone the same, honestly and visibly.
Not taxing employment more than unearned incomes.
That is possible but you'd need to unravel NI from the pension system which will take at least some thought and legislation. On a wider point about differential taxation of earned and unearned income, the government is supposed to be looking at private equity, dividends and capital gains tax.
I don't think there is much left to tax on dividends.
Once you are on higher rate tax £1 from a company becomes £0.75 which is then taxed at 35.75% to give you £0.482
Taken via PAYE after deducting Employer NI and income tax / employee NI you would get £0.504
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
Once you discount London and GM and all the places without a useful bus service, this is a bit more sizzle than sausage.
Given the choice of being the one bestowing goodies or giving that power to others, Andy isn't going to devolve, is he?
A bus journey in London is £1.75 isn't it? Around here if you go more than 1 mile its £3.
A bus journey in London is a lot more than that if you live in (e.g.) the West Midlands and don't have an Oystercard.
And here in the urban West Midlands we pay £3. So someone who relies on buses to get to and from work or college daily will be saving several hundred pounds per year.
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
Once you discount London and GM and all the places without a useful bus service, this is a bit more sizzle than sausage.
Given the choice of being the one bestowing goodies or giving that power to others, Andy isn't going to devolve, is he?
A bus journey in London is £1.75 isn't it? Around here if you go more than 1 mile its £3.
A bus journey in London is a lot more than that if you live in (e.g.) the West Midlands and don't have an Oystercard.
And here in the urban West Midlands we pay £3. So someone who relies on buses to get to and from work or college daily will be saving several hundred pounds per year.
No it isn't - it's £1.75 using a credit / debit card or oyster card and cash isn't allowed.
I know as I used them multiple times last week (it's a nicer journey from hotel to client co than the tube).
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
If you are going to tax, better to do it through more honest and visible taxation rather than stealth and more stealth?
Indeed, which is why we should be abolishing NI and having a single rate of income tax that is paid by everyone the same, honestly and visibly.
Not taxing employment more than unearned incomes.
That is possible but you'd need to unravel NI from the pension system which will take at least some thought and legislation. On a wider point about differential taxation of earned and unearned income, the government is supposed to be looking at private equity, dividends and capital gains tax.
I don't think there is much left to tax on dividends.
Once you are on higher rate tax £1 from a company becomes £0.75 which is then taxed at 35.75% to give you £0.482
Taken via PAYE after deducting Employer NI and income tax / employee NI you would get £0.504
You have forgotten Employer NIC in your calculation.
EDIT: When I clicked quote, Employer NIC wasn't part of the text I was quoting.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
If you are going to tax, better to do it through more honest and visible taxation rather than stealth and more stealth?
Indeed, which is why we should be abolishing NI and having a single rate of income tax that is paid by everyone the same, honestly and visibly.
Not taxing employment more than unearned incomes.
That is possible but you'd need to unravel NI from the pension system which will take at least some thought and legislation. On a wider point about differential taxation of earned and unearned income, the government is supposed to be looking at private equity, dividends and capital gains tax.
The need to unravel NI from the pensions system can be a long-term problem if you set employee NI to 1% in the short term, and change the income tax 20% rate to I think 28% renenue-neutral.
Any changes upwards of tax rates of capital gains will absolutely cost more than they raise. Arthur Laffer is waving from the door of the Treasury.
Any mad idea of taxing CG at income tax levels will drive hundreds of billions in investment vehicles offshore almost immediately. Dubai and Singapore are actively looking to recruit global PE funds.
A bit of good news on inflation; will be interesting to see if that, and the high of taking power, will blind Burnham et al to the glaring bear trap which is steps away.....
Heidi Alexander on Today just now said that it wouldn't apply to the person behind the wheel.
If they think that is going to cut the mustard, they won't last very long in power.
The trouble with any early-release scheme, or parole, or just releases in general is there are always cases where the victims (and press and public) will object. Ironically, if we'd not ratcheted up sentences to assuage newspaper-led public opinion, we'd not have the current crunch on prison cells.
Poppycock. Sentences are what the public want.
Two better solutions:
Build more prisons Cut prison population by bringing immigration down - more 10% of prisoners are foreign nationals
Otherwise those in charge will be seen as soft on crime.
9% of that that 10% should be easy. Tell their countries of origin they must accept them back and lock them up if requested, as a condition of issuing incoming visas to tourists and/or receiving international aid.
If you’re a foreigner sentenced to imprisonment, you’ve forfeited your right to remain in the country. Knowing that you’ll serve your sentence in your own country will probably help moderate certain behaviours among recent immigrants too. British prisons are 5* hotels to most countries.
There will be a few that the UK want to keep in prison, such as well-connected fraudsters or politically-motivated violent criminals, but the vast majority can better serve their sentences in their own countries.
Anyone who thinks that British prisons are like 5* hotels needs to improve their Trivago skills, ot has clearly never visited one.
If you’re from Asia or Africa, they’re like 5* hotels compared to their local prisons.
Like this woman in your neck of the woods moaning about the state of her prison.
She stopped paying rent, owes £19 grand, and now is inside and, somehow, she’s the victim
Still, it’s good clickbait and there’s always a gofundme.
LOL there’s always a few of those stories out here.
She’s not paid rent for a year in a foreign country, and expects what exactly to be the outcome?
Oh, she expects a UK press sob story and a GoFundMe to bail her out. Doesn’t anyone take responsibility for themselves any more?
A friend of mine got three months here, and did well to avoid deportation, for bouncing a cheque on a £40k car loan. He lived here for 3 years, earning an average of £3k a month and spending an average of £4k a month, and eventually it all caught up with him.
Interesting comment about how low the wages in Dubai are now. There's little or no tax but those 'service' charges mount up. Why do they come if there is no real financial benefit working there now?
'Andy Burnham has announced that most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from the start of next year, with the prime minister saying no one should be "priced out" or "left behind" when it comes to affordable transport links.'
Once you discount London and GM and all the places without a useful bus service, this is a bit more sizzle than sausage.
Given the choice of being the one bestowing goodies or giving that power to others, Andy isn't going to devolve, is he?
He would have to be a saint to do so. All the power that has been devolved onto him. Mayor of Great Britain. How does anyone choose to give that power away to other people, only to watch them feck it up?
Anyway, I guess that's two ways to judge Burnham now.
1. How are the national finances? 2. Does he give power away?
It's only a Northern Song (Thong for the first sex scandal). Moving Up North Look North (which is allegedly still a TV programme) Cock 'O the North (March of Gordon and the Highlanders.) *
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
If you are going to tax, better to do it through more honest and visible taxation rather than stealth and more stealth?
Indeed, which is why we should be abolishing NI and having a single rate of income tax that is paid by everyone the same, honestly and visibly.
Not taxing employment more than unearned incomes.
That is possible but you'd need to unravel NI from the pension system which will take at least some thought and legislation. On a wider point about differential taxation of earned and unearned income, the government is supposed to be looking at private equity, dividends and capital gains tax.
The need to unravel NI from the pensions system can be a long-term problem if you set employee NI to 1% in the short term, and change the income tax 20% rate to I think 28% renenue-neutral.
Any changes upwards of tax rates of capital gains will absolutely cost more than they raise. Arthur Laffer is waving from the door of the Treasury.
Any mad idea of taxing CG at income tax levels will drive hundreds of billions in investment vehicles offshore almost immediately. Dubai and Singapore are actively looking to recruit global PE funds.
You already get NIC "contributions" at 0% so no problem with setting a global 0% threshold rate for NICs, merge income tax, and still keep contributions based on income as it currently is.
This is a good video about why rail projects in the English-speaking world are so catastrophically expensive, if you don't mind half an hour of an Australian accent and pronounciation of "PROH-ject":
Needless to say, the catastrophic HS2 is mentioned several times.
There isn't one reason (risk aversion, poor project management, political pressure, etc.), but governmental incompetence and inability to control the private sector rears its head over and over again.
Burnham has an aspiration to do something, he can't do anything til the Budget anyway.
They need to see what fiscal leeway they have, they would have had a fair dollop had it not been for Iran and Trump, the need about 10bn to do anyting meaningful to allowances but there could well be incremental things they could add in.
A set ladder over 3-4 years of x % to cover inflation plus 1% as an example.
A specific increase for those of pensionable age to link to State Pension standard amount so no one purely on State Pension pasy tax on it
My hunch would be to find a way of balancing the tax allowance for pensioners to the triple lock, so that you start to unlock the triple lock to a median point where you commit to ensuring it by inceasing personal allowances instead initially for pensioners with then an aim of increasing for all!
Putting aside the right wing ad hominem, I vote Labour in GE’s, I don’t see how this article is ‘right wing’ either.
why shouldn’t pensioners pay tax above the threshold ? It’s income after all. Those purely on the state oension do get other passported benefits.
I think Dan Neidle is right. Leave this and target NI, it’s a tax on employment. We need more employment and to make work pay.
We were canvassed by our MP and his aides at the weekend. One thing I told them is work doesn’t pay in this country.
The rational thing is for pensioners to pay tax on their income in the same way as everyone else. But as we saw with the WFA debacle, rationality goes out the window when it comes to pensioners.
I continue to blame Clive Dunn and St Winifred's School Choir.
I blame Reeves for simply not reversing Hunt’s uncosted employee NI cuts that removed all headroom
Which is bullshit.
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
If you are going to tax, better to do it through more honest and visible taxation rather than stealth and more stealth?
Indeed, which is why we should be abolishing NI and having a single rate of income tax that is paid by everyone the same, honestly and visibly.
Not taxing employment more than unearned incomes.
That is possible but you'd need to unravel NI from the pension system which will take at least some thought and legislation. On a wider point about differential taxation of earned and unearned income, the government is supposed to be looking at private equity, dividends and capital gains tax.
I don't think there is much left to tax on dividends.
Once you are on higher rate tax £1 from a company becomes £0.75 which is then taxed at 35.75% to give you £0.482
Taken via PAYE after deducting Employer NI and income tax / employee NI you would get £0.504
You have forgotten Employer NIC in your calculation.
No I didn't
It's included in the PAYE side of things - the only thing I didn't include was apprenticeship levy.
£1 becomes £0.88 once the 15% Employer NI is deducted. Employee Ni above £50,000 is 2% and income tax is 40%
58% of £0.88 is £0.504..
One of my sidelines is making sure Umbrella workers are paid correctly - I know how payroll works in way too much detail (to the extent that I advice some people at Treasury North on this topic).
On Harper's killers "release" surely because someone is eligible for something doesn't mean they should get it. Can the HS or a right minded judge not use their discretion (And say no) on such a case ?
You can't say one rule for some prisoners and not for others depending on the victim of the crime.
The sentence should determine the point someone leaves prison, if that is too early it's the sentence that was wrong in the first place...
Comments
Hunts freeze on threshold fully funded the Employee NI change.
It was a net tax rise.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cdx7z2wwe7qt
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cdx7z2wwe7qt
Including Spain and Australia, IIRC
And for Russian troops trying to buy night-vision goggles.
Most of the ‘good’ countries’ tourists don’t need a visa anyway, the only problems are likely to be some of the recent EU accession countries, for example Romania.
Ukrainian drones hit another massive Wildberries (think Amazon) distribution centre, this time in Krasnodar.
Russians were going crazy after the last one. Wildberries just changed their ToS saying they weren’t liable for drone strikes. Customers and businesses had to soak up the losses.
#explodey
https://bsky.app/profile/chadbourn.bsky.social/post/3mr7vlemtxc2h
In a video, published by the news website Guido Fawkes, the new Justice Secretary Alex Norris can be seen walking towards Streeting and Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood.
Streeting, can then be heard calling Norris "the enemy now" while Mahmood responds "no he's not". Streeting goes on to say "he wants to let them all out" - appearing to reference the government's plans for early release for prisoners.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgk4x44mm50o
A good essay on why WildBerries:
https://x.com/pepel_klaasa/status/2079804297575813169
Conclusion:
And finally, wartime logistics.
Wildberries’ extensive warehouse and distribution network serves as a critical dual-use logistics backbone in Russia. While primarily a civilian e-commerce platform, it handles vast volumes of goods – including electronics, fiber-optic cables for FPV drones, body armor and other items that can support military efforts. Halving capacity would create bottlenecks in moving these items to manufacturers, volunteers, or frontline units. This could slow drone production/assembly, repair of equipment, and ad-hoc procurement that bypasses official military channels.
Of course, not all military supplies go through Wildberries. The Russian army has its own official supply systems, and other online platforms like Ozon. Plus, Russia’s war-focused economy and income from oil and gas provide some protection. (Though, Ukraine takes care of it, too).
However, repeated attacks or major damage like this would make logistics less efficient, increase costs, and force changes that could weaken the military’s ability to stay supplied over time.
I'm sorry but there are multiple reasons why employee NI should have been left how it was - just ask any employer who has struggled following the massive Employer NI increases that had to be done instead...
The law will mean everyone in France must verify their age to access social media and comes as the UK and EU are developing their own limits in response to concerns for children's mental health.
French President Emmanuel Macron has welcomed the move, which he had pledged to introduce to mark the end of his decade in office.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cq56l9p4y93o
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/spring-budget-2024-public-services
There should not have been a massive Employer NI increase. NI is completely the wrong tax to raise.
If there needed to be a tax rise, it should have been Income Tax, not NI that was raised.
The sentence should determine the point someone leaves prison, if that is too early it's the sentence that was wrong in the first place...
If my employer threatened me in such a way, I'd be looking for jobs elsewhere.
And remember
1) SKS / Reeves promised that income tax and employee NI wouldn't be increased - that part is on them but the lack of leeway that resulted in taxes being need to be raised sits with Rishi and Hunt for not managing spending correctly and missing basic fundamentals such as legally required pay increases.
2) my favoured increase was 2-3p on income tax attached to retaining the Winter Fuel allowance so it didn't impact pensioners with very small private pensions..
Sadly every government since 2002 has failed to fund their commitments, which is why we have had a deficit since then. Nothing new.
Does not change the fact that the tax changes Hunt made were a net tax rise, nor that transitioning away from taxing NI towards taxing income more equitably is both fairer and will raise more revenue in the long term as an increasing proportion of income is not liable for NI.
It’s not a case of the Tories made them do it.
https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/find-fares/bus-and-tram-fares
Putin could stop his war any time he chooses of course.
She stopped paying rent, owes £19 grand, and now is inside and, somehow, she’s the victim
Still, it’s good clickbait and there’s always a gofundme.
https://metro.co.uk/2026/07/21/british-woman-jailed-dubai-19-000-unpaid-rent-shared-cell-murderers-29189825/?ito=
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=43417aa96f54b3daf0bb613493491722c9d9428e5a1bc07ab2c4ac4e08a7cafbJmltdHM9MTc4NDcwOTgyMg&ptn=3&fclid=712776e9-85a9-11f1-ae1c-4f3d3cb73db3&u=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
Once you discount London and GM and all the places without a useful bus service, this is a bit more sizzle than sausage.
Given the choice of being the one bestowing goodies or giving that power to others, Andy isn't going to devolve, is he?
Send them to the Moon - start a penal colony there. They can dig tunnels there to grow crops (using lunar ice) etc and export the product via electromagnetic catapult to Earth.
By 2076 we could be turning a profit.
Can’t see a flaw in this scheme.
Mind you I don't understand why we are implementing rules that Meta and co are actively lobbying for to avoid doing proper moderation.
She’s not paid rent for a year in a foreign country, and expects what exactly to be the outcome?
Oh, she expects a UK press sob story and a GoFundMe to bail her out. Doesn’t anyone take responsibility for themselves any more?
A friend of mine got three months here, and did well to avoid deportation, for bouncing a cheque on a £40k car loan. He lived here for 3 years, earning an average of £3k a month and spending an average of £4k a month, and eventually it all caught up with him.
If not you aren't paying the same taxes as a employee as you are exempt from employee NI from the tax year following your 66th birthday.
So notices will be served to ISPs blocking sites that don’t meet the standard. Then to VPNs that evade the blocks. Then to VPNs that allow connection to VPNs that evade the blocks. Then to VPNs that allow connection to VPNs that allow connection….
This will require a logo, a Richard Rogeresque HQ (custom designed), a CEO on £650k plus pension, a managing board, expensive artwork for the foyer, ten thousand staff. A couple of IT guys, maybe.
We are talking a whole industry here.
As defined multiple times by the U.K. government, HMRC and mentioned as such in multiple international treaties.
I'm sceptical about blocking young'uns from social media, and fearful of its consequences for privacy, but polling suggests it is popular.
Also a million YouTube videos on how to do it.
This has been observed in action in Australia.
The thing about most teenagers is that they aren’t interested in many, many things. Until it touches on something they regard as essential. At which point they focus on it with the power of a thousand suns.
At least it would keep him away from the next World Cup
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/07/22/trump-wants-nominate-infantino-un-secretary-general/
As @malcolmg has accidently pointed out and as Dan Neidle did yesterday - Hunt and co were right in saying that the best tax to deduct is employee NI as it helps even the lowest paid workers far more than an increase in the personal allowance.
Then let the lawyers loose on them. They will soon pull in their horns, at no cost to either government or personal liberty.
The spare capacity from that will easily support a Lunar penal colony.
Glad for your Damascene conversion.
They go out there for the lifestyle and work and when it goes wrong due to their own stupidity they moan and expect to come back to the U.K.
Fuck them.
Maybe she assumed she could get away with not paying rent there, like tenants can here.
https://x.com/saintjavelin/status/2079792543231779005
I don't think I've ever said it was the wrong tax to cut - what I've said continually is that he didn't have the leeway to have done so.
Not taxing employment more than unearned incomes.
Meanwhile, in his desire to undermine Burnham the petty Darren Jones highlights a problem of his/Starmer's own making and in so doing damns only himself. All he's saying is that Starmer left a modest hole in his last budget which Burnham has yet to deal with. And it's not as though Burnham even sought to hide that, in switching the spending commitment from the cancelled digital ID to the cut in VAT on domestic electricity. The government press release was pretty transparent, saying:
"We are funding this through the cancellation of the Digital ID programme, which was going to cost £1.8 billion over the next three years. Savings were due to be identified from within existing budgets through reprioritisation, which will now be redirected towards this measure. Any further action, including on funding for longer-term measures, will be taken at the Budget, and all decisions at that point will be funded and also consistent with the government’s fiscal rules."
Yet you keep criticising it, by disregarding half the package and the fact it was a net tax rise.
Hah hah hah 😂
Your posts are so hysterically funny. 🤣
Do you actually believe de-industrialisation, globalisation, automation, were decisions made by previous governments and can be unmade?
Labour is now massively split, and already sniping and briefing at each other, the government is now staffed with useless weird failures and felons.
This has effectively been a change from boring but living in real world of no money so sensibly not over promising politicians, to Johnsonian type populist politics. And you said “more tuned in” 😂
And as Labour doesn’t have a single back bencher who will vote for welfare reform - no one in government has a plan for welfare reform - no advisors helping them achieve it - they are screwed. There’s only one place this is going. Massive majority and they fucked it up 🙂
Do you actually believe de-industrialisation, globalisation, automation, were decisions made by previous governments and can be unmade? 🤣
Only day 3 - what should be honeymoon bounce - and I’m already loving it. It’s so funny.
His knowledge and his older 14 year old sister is very much par for young people today
Much like the ID Cards debate and the intricacies of various voting systems, this one has been around the block a few times on PB.
Social Media (indeed too much screen time in general) is an identified, actual harm for children and doing nothing is as much a choice as doing something.
I agree with age restrictions for Social Media (in the same way as I agree with age restrictions on buying alcohol or tobacco for instance). How this is implemented is less important.
Making the providers liable as publishers would be a strong step also.
Once you are on higher rate tax £1 from a company becomes £0.75 which is then taxed at 35.75% to give you £0.482
Taken via PAYE after deducting Employer NI and income tax / employee NI you would get £0.504
And here in the urban West Midlands we pay £3. So someone who relies on buses to get to and from work or college daily will be saving several hundred pounds per year.
I know as I used them multiple times last week (it's a nicer journey from hotel to client co than the tube).
EDIT: When I clicked quote, Employer NIC wasn't part of the text I was quoting.
Any changes upwards of tax rates of capital gains will absolutely cost more than they raise. Arthur Laffer is waving from the door of the Treasury.
Any mad idea of taxing CG at income tax levels will drive hundreds of billions in investment vehicles offshore almost immediately. Dubai and Singapore are actively looking to recruit global PE funds.
Anyway, I guess that's two ways to judge Burnham now.
1. How are the national finances?
2. Does he give power away?
It's only a Northern Song (Thong for the first sex scandal).
Moving Up North
Look North (which is allegedly still a TV programme)
Cock 'O the North (March of Gordon and the Highlanders.) *
Any more for any more?
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kR7vzDJbxo4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIET6M3phqA
Needless to say, the catastrophic HS2 is mentioned several times.
There isn't one reason (risk aversion, poor project management, political pressure, etc.), but governmental incompetence and inability to control the private sector rears its head over and over again.
It's included in the PAYE side of things - the only thing I didn't include was apprenticeship levy.
£1 becomes £0.88 once the 15% Employer NI is deducted.
Employee Ni above £50,000 is 2% and income tax is 40%
58% of £0.88 is £0.504..
One of my sidelines is making sure Umbrella workers are paid correctly - I know how payroll works in way too much detail (to the extent that I advice some people at Treasury North on this topic).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_KDzr0ACxg