General News Thread

[davieG]

26 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said:

Can anyone get a streak over 10? 

 

https://guesstheparty.co.uk/

I've proved I can't judge a book by it's cover.

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

Yeah you said this when I mentioned it last time and since then it's just become even more of a one issue discussion. I just can't see how even a major world event shifts the focus of the next election away from migration. 

Well, to use extreme examples, I'm reasonably sure an asteroid impact event or Yellowstone deciding it's time for another round of letting off steam would be a distraction. There might be other examples, too. 

 

But yes, barring that migration could well be the issue the next election is fought on, and if it is we may well all be looking forward to the outcome of an attempt to turn the UK into an ethnostate, with all the fun and games that entails (whether people actually wanted that when they voted Reform or not). And just at the time when international cooperation and togetherness is needed more than ever.

 

How thrilling. 

[davieG]

24 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Unless pensioners will be willing to take a pension cut, this will be an ongoing issue even though nobody wants to talk about it. 

Which part of the basic £184 a week are you planning to cut. Even with additional bits that I've contributed to it only comes to £324 ish

 

The National Minimum wage is £12.71 for a 35hr week that is £444

[Lionator]

1 minute ago, davieG said:

Which part of the basic £184 a week are you planning to cut. Even with additional bits that I've contributed to it only comes to £324 ish

 

The National Minimum wage is £12.71 for a 35hr week that is £444

I’m not planning on cutting anything, I’m just stating what the issues are. Labour wanted to means tested pension which I think was a good policy, somebody sitting on 6 figure savings probably shouldn’t be getting a state pension but they bottled it because next weeks vote is more important than the long term future of the country.

[Innovindil]

"I'm not going to walk away and plunge the country into chaos," he says, after the first results in England showed losses for Labour.

 

He points to Labour's landslide victory in the July 2024 general election: "I led our party to that victory, that is a five-year mandate to change the country."

 

Starmer says that "in the coming days", he'll "set out the further steps" that Labour will take to convince the electorate.

 

Asked if he will stand in the next general election, he replies: "Yes. It was a five-year term I was elected to do, I intend to see that through."

 

--------

 

Literally told by the electorate that he is the issue. Smash fingers in ears, la la la la. Hopeless. 

[davieG]

3 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I’m not planning on cutting anything, I’m just stating what the issues are. Labour wanted to means tested pension which I think was a good policy, somebody sitting on 6 figure savings probably shouldn’t be getting a state pension but they bottled it because next weeks vote is more important than the long term future of the country.

It's more complicated than that it depends on how those savings were accumulated. If you punish people for being frugal and choosing to save rather than spend, spend, spend then that will eventually harm the economy.  Savings are good for Investments, Government Borrowings and overall Financial Stability of the Country

[davieG]

39 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Unless pensioners will be willing to take a pension cut, this will be an ongoing issue even though nobody wants to talk about it. 

 

8 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I’m not planning on cutting anything, I’m just stating what the issues are. Labour wanted to means tested pension which I think was a good policy, somebody sitting on 6 figure savings probably shouldn’t be getting a state pension but they bottled it because next weeks vote is more important than the long term future of the country.

 

[Foxdiamond]

10 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I’m not planning on cutting anything, I’m just stating what the issues are. Labour wanted to means tested pension which I think was a good policy, somebody sitting on 6 figure savings probably shouldn’t be getting a state pension but they bottled it because next weeks vote is more important than the long term future of the country.

I think your  post at least suggests you want  pensioners to take a cut. You have back tracked slightly by indicating better off pensioners which is not the majority 

[Trav Le Bleu]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

suppose it depends on what the terms of the ceasefire are 
 

Like ‘farage’ ????

That you cease firing?

[Zear0]

Kind of hope he takes a fatalist approach going forwards and uses his unpopularity for some good by knowing he’s not a prayer at the next GE. Closer alignment to the EU being the obvious one on this where he can actually do some long term good.

[bovril]

Just a little bit more right wing brexitism bro, I swear just a bit more and this country will be fixed, honestly. 

[Sampson]

22 minutes ago, davieG said:

Which part of the basic £184 a week are you planning to cut. Even with additional bits that I've contributed to it only comes to £324 ish

 

The National Minimum wage is £12.71 for a 35hr week that is £444

How do you support an economy where 2/3rds of the population is on its pension and 2/3rds the tax payer money goes on pensions or health care for the over 65s because that’s the way the world is going either way generations of below replacement birth rates?

 

The pension was designed for a small percentage of the population for a few years at the end of their life rather than 1/3rd of the population for 25 years of their life.

 

It’s not that the pension rate should be cut, it’s that the state pension age never increased in the post-war years along with rising life expectancy and if you want a realistic level of burden then the pension age would  realistically be around 80 or 85 these days. But people in their 50s 60s and 70s who make up a large amount of the voting population aren’t going to vote for that - I’m not talking about the morals of it, but just the realistic cost of it. I mean you saw the riots in France when they tried to raise the pension age by 2 years a few years back. Everyone complains but they don’t want to live with the decisions that are needed to fix it. And it’s easier to blame immigrants and government inefficiency when in Farage’s own words “it’s common sense politics” that you can afford spending 1/2 of your national budget on pensions and healthcare for an ageing population (when over 65s make up the overwhelming majority of healthcare costs) and where you’re ratio ends up being more pensioners to working age people 

Edited 8 May by Sampson

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, bovril said:

Just a little bit more right wing brexitism bro, I swear just a bit more and this country will be fixed, honestly. 

Exactly! Just ignore the corpses.

[Foxdiamond]

4 minutes ago, Sampson said:

How do you support an economy where 2/3rds of the population is on its pension and 2/3rds the tax payer money goes on pensions or health care for the over 65s because that’s the way the world is going either way generations of below replacement birth rates?

 

The pension was designed for a small percentage of the population for a few years at the end of their life rather than 1/3rd of the population for 25 years of their life.

 

It’s not that the pension rate should be cut, it’s that the state pension age never increased in the post-war years along with rising life expectancy and if you want a realistic level of burden then the pension age would  realistically be around 80 or 85 these days. But people in their 50s 60s and 70s who make up a large amount of the voting population aren’t going to vote for that - I’m not talking about the morals of it, but just the realistic cost of it. I mean you saw the riots in France when they tried to raise the pension age by 2 years a few years back. Everyone complains but they don’t want to live with the decisions that are needed to fix it. And it’s easier to blame immigrants and government inefficiency when in Farage’s own words “it’s common sense politics” that you can afford spending 1/2 of your national budget on pensions and healthcare for an ageing population (when over 65s make up the overwhelming majority of healthcare costs) and where you’re ratio ends up being more pensioners to working age people 

If only those that should be paying taxes did so

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Foxdiamond said:

If only those that should be paying taxes did so

And that's when it is known that this is a global matter, not just a UK one. 

[RoboFox]

I'm so tired of it. 

 

Finally I can totally understand voter apathy. 

[leicsmac]

19 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

I'm so tired of it. 

 

Finally I can totally understand voter apathy. 

It's tiring to live in constantly interesting times. 

[EnderbyFox]

 

[davieG]

51 minutes ago, Sampson said:

How do you support an economy where 2/3rds of the population is on its pension and 2/3rds the tax payer money goes on pensions or health care for the over 65s because that’s the way the world is going either way generations of below replacement birth rates?

 

The pension was designed for a small percentage of the population for a few years at the end of their life rather than 1/3rd of the population for 25 years of their life.

 

It’s not that the pension rate should be cut, it’s that the state pension age never increased in the post-war years along with rising life expectancy and if you want a realistic level of burden then the pension age would  realistically be around 80 or 85 these days. But people in their 50s 60s and 70s who make up a large amount of the voting population aren’t going to vote for that - I’m not talking about the morals of it, but just the realistic cost of it. I mean you saw the riots in France when they tried to raise the pension age by 2 years a few years back. Everyone complains but they don’t want to live with the decisions that are needed to fix it. And it’s easier to blame immigrants and government inefficiency when in Farage’s own words “it’s common sense politics” that you can afford spending 1/2 of your national budget on pensions and healthcare for an ageing population (when over 65s make up the overwhelming majority of healthcare costs) and where you’re ratio ends up being more pensioners to working age people 

I don't disagree with the pension age rising but for that to work you need employers willing to take on 'older' people. I was made redundant in my early 50s from a middle management job. Despite applying for hundreds of lesser and similar jobs I never got a single offer and ended up working part time.

 

You can't just randomly change one part of a complex equation without looking at the impact on the other parts. 

 

When being parttime employed I was not able to claim a single benefit, and the minimum wage did not exist then because I had some savings. I've not had a decent holiday and certainly not abroad for 10 years now.

 

I'm not moaning about it as I said in another post I think I've lived in a good era I'm just trying to show that the cap doesn't always fit.

 

Why should people put some money aside only for it to be taken away because they've got 'too much'

 

So many people look at the headlines in all areas and assume that is the norm.

 

Anyway it wont be solved on here there's better minds out there that have not come up with a tolerable solution.

 

 

[Sampson]

18 minutes ago, davieG said:

I don't disagree with the pension age rising but for that to work you need employers willing to take on 'older' people. I was made redundant in my early 50s from a middle management job. Despite applying for hundreds of lesser and similar jobs I never got a single offer and ended up working part time.

 

You can't just randomly change one part of a complex equation without looking at the impact on the other parts. 

 

When being parttime employed I was not able to claim a single benefit, and the minimum wage did not exist then because I had some savings. I've not had a decent holiday and certainly not abroad for 10 years now.

 

I'm not moaning about it as I said in another post I think I've lived in a good era I'm just trying to show that the cap doesn't always fit.

 

Why should people put some money aside only for it to be taken away because they've got 'too much'

 

So many people look at the headlines in all areas and assume that is the norm.

 

Anyway it wont be solved on here there's better minds out there that have not come up with a tolerable solution.

 

 

But isn’t this the problem? People feel like they’re being attacked and get defensive when people are making economic arguments and not moral ones. so it’s been easier for politicians and the the fast food media to blame immigrants and NHS ineffeciency when these are economic issues and rising political populism are just as big an issue in the US, Japan, Korea, Denmark, the Netherlands, Germany as they are in the UK with all their different types of healthcare systems and immigration levels?
 

But all the solutions are intolerable - isn’t that the point? I mean it is - tax all the rich and let them leave the country and try and start again with a different economy system, cut pensions or just keep going with a system everyone can feel has making them feel worse for a good 20 years now until we inevitably end up with some war or rebellion? 

Edited 8 May by Sampson

[RoboFox]

33 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's tiring to live in constantly interesting times. 

Interesting is certainly one way of putting it, sure. 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, RoboFox said:

Interesting is certainly one way of putting it, sure. 

There's a reason the Chinese use "interesting times" as a curse rather than a benediction. 

[foxy tiler]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

I think our overall tax burden is comparable to some of these countries. The mismanagement of the health and social care system is v relevant. 

we still pay a lot of people to do not as much as they could be doing I can’t see that changing anytime soon.

 

 

Things like NHS procurement need looking at....for example if a fridge breaks the trust cant just go and buy a cheap one for £300 quid ...it goes to procurement and they end up buying the same fridge for double the price. That goes for everything pens up to complex machines......lunacy.

[CornwallFox]

2 hours ago, Innovindil said:

I literally said "on employee wages perhaps" and you post a link talking exclusively about wages. I get that bit, now you get that when you tax everything else too, it's always the generators (for example the workers) that pay it. 

 

As for the rest of the rambling, not sure what it has to do with me bringing up taxes but I'll have a bite at it anyways. If the government of the day want British businesses to grow, like the one I work for that does generate goods and income for the British public (and the world at large) maybe taxing them to the point where it is difficult to afford to expand is a bad idea too. 

If the business you work for operated in an environment where ordinary people had money and/or the government was injecting additional funds into the economy to rebuild our nation, then the tax level would be less important, because there'd be more liquidity in the economy, there'd be more opportunity to make money, more reason to invest. 

 

You can cut taxes as much as you want but nobody has any money to spend in the first place. And government spending,  which underpins the entire economy, has been held back year after year. No business is going to invest without orders, whatever the tax rate. Tax cuts for businesses in the UK have not produced the investment or growth claimed when tried before. 

 

Here's an article on this very thing. 

 

https://www.ippr.org/articles/cutting-corporation-tax-not-magic-bullet-for-increasing-investment

Edited 8 May by CornwallFox

[CornwallFox]

9 minutes ago, foxy tiler said:

Things like NHS procurement need looking at....for example if a fridge breaks the trust cant just go and buy a cheap one for £300 quid ...it goes to procurement and they end up buying the same fridge for double the price. That goes for everything pens up to complex machines......lunacy.

The private sector taking advantage of government procurement definitely does need looking at