Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance " And if they hadn't given ridiculous pay rises to the world and his wife the black hole would be half the size | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance" If Labour taxed everyone by another 1%, they'd get even more tax and be able to improve services. But apparently that's mad man's talk, because they promised that they wouldn't raise taxes, so now we all have to suffer while they spend more than is available, and blame the Tories for the problem. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“How do we fund them?”" Reduce inefficiency and waste? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“How do we fund them?” Reduce inefficiency and waste?" Ah that old chest nut 
Without doubt there is some. Mainly due to the behemoth that is Govt. But would that really be the silver bullet that solves everything? I say no! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£70bn a year (40% nhs budget) treating self inflicted obesity, smoking diseases, drug and alcohol abuse £70bn over budget on hs2 £9bn a month servicing the perpetual national debt £5-8bn a year spent on migrants Billions wasted heating empty municipal offices £450 million paid to France for ineffective border control, and £800m wasted on illegal Rwanda scheme 700 private finance initiatives from new labour, many we are still paying for with astronomical cost and poor investment delivery £29bn spent on illegal Iraq and Afghan wars £15bn covid corruption £115000 life pensions for ex prime ministers including a war criminal and a seven week lettuce Red and blue wasting tax payers money " Depending on your viewpoint, not all of these are waste and some are not the “fault” of govt red or blue. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“How do we fund them?” Reduce inefficiency and waste? Ah that old chest nut
Without doubt there is some. Mainly due to the behemoth that is Govt. But would that really be the silver bullet that solves everything? I say no!"Solve everything, probably not. Go a good way towards it, yes. It is not just the big items another poster mentioned, the small things probably make a bigger difference. Fighting the IT systems, not having the correct tools for the job (spreadsheet instead of database etc.) slow computers or connectivity, multiple logins to incompatible systems, red tape and antiquated processes, annual budget cycles etc..... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“How do we fund them?” Reduce inefficiency and waste? Ah that old chest nut
Without doubt there is some. Mainly due to the behemoth that is Govt. But would that really be the silver bullet that solves everything? I say no!
Solve everything, probably not.
Go a good way towards it, yes.
It is not just the big items another poster mentioned, the small things probably make a bigger difference.
Fighting the IT systems, not having the correct tools for the job (spreadsheet instead of database etc.) slow computers or connectivity, multiple logins to incompatible systems, red tape and antiquated processes, annual budget cycles etc....."100% agree but to solve those IT issues it requires budget. There are countless Govt IT systems that are old and out of date that should have been replaced over the last 20 years. However, back office functions are neither sexy or headline grabbing, so politicians constantly want to divert budget to policies that further their own, or their party’s, career. The state of Govt IT is a joke, but it requires significant investment to solve. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance " Or not send over 11 billion abroad or stop millipede spaffing 8 billion on wind farms for private investors to make money out of | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Reeves this morning: "But the prize - if we can bring stability back to our economy, if we can bring investment back to Britain - is economic growth, good jobs, paying decent wages in all parts of our country, to realise the huge potential that we have.” If? I'd like to know the odds before gambling. Is it 50/50, or a long shot at 100/1 against? What is plan 'B'? " Genuine question, not antagonistic…if the Tories gad won the GE what do you think Hunt would be saying right now? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Reeves this morning: "But the prize - if we can bring stability back to our economy, if we can bring investment back to Britain - is economic growth, good jobs, paying decent wages in all parts of our country, to realise the huge potential that we have.” If? I'd like to know the odds before gambling. Is it 50/50, or a long shot at 100/1 against? What is plan 'B'? Genuine question, not antagonistic…if the Tories gad won the GE what do you think Hunt would be saying right now?" They didn’t we because we were persuaded to vote Labour. No if’s no but’s. I have no idea what Hunt et al would have done. In the same way that J2N has no idea which of the Tories policies will be reversed in the next five years. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance Or not send over 11 billion abroad or stop millipede spaffing 8 billion on wind farms for private investors to make money out of "What is the £11b sent overseas..? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance Or not send over 11 billion abroad or stop millipede spaffing 8 billion on wind farms for private investors to make money out of
What is the £11b sent overseas..?"For so called climate emergency | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance Or not send over 11 billion abroad or stop millipede spaffing 8 billion on wind farms for private investors to make money out of
What is the £11b sent overseas..?
For so called climate emergency "Just reading up on that. The money was pledged by Boris Johnson at the Cop summit in Glasgow. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“What do we want?” “Better public services” “How do we fund them?” “We don’t know!” “Increase your taxes?” “Fuck off!”" I know right, everyone is complaining about public services but unwilling to come up with a valid financial solution. When there's an obvious one staring us straight in the face. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“What do we want?” “Better public services” “How do we fund them?” “We don’t know!” “Increase your taxes?” “Fuck off!” I know right, everyone is complaining about public services but unwilling to come up with a valid financial solution. When there's an obvious one staring us straight in the face. " I can see both sides (as a centrist fence sitter): A) Really top quality public services funded by higher taxation B) People take increased responsibility for themselves using their higher retained income due to lower taxes The thing with B is that if you have been successful and warn a good income then you have the means to be able to pay for more things yourself (such as medical insurance, redundancy insurance) but what if your income or career choice means you do not have the funds to do that? What if you are working as a carer? Would anybody argue those jobs aren’t essential? And yet the pay is a total joke. As for A then a great example is Switzerland. You pay a lot of tax. But the public services are excellent. I believe mandatory medical insurance is 500 swiss francs a month. But medical care is 1st class. If you lose your job you get the equivalent of JSA for two years at 80% of your lost salary. After two years nothing. I believe the low paid still have access to state healthcare (as cannot afford 500 francs p/m) but that is only possible due to everyone else paying high taxes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance Or not send over 11 billion abroad or stop millipede spaffing 8 billion on wind farms for private investors to make money out of
What is the £11b sent overseas..?
For so called climate emergency
Just reading up on that. The money was pledged by Boris Johnson at the Cop summit in Glasgow. "Ah yes the cop out summit! That’s the one where they all fly in and out on private jets take private cars eat over the expensive food at us in top hotels and tell us all what to do 🤣🤣🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Switzerland. You pay a lot of tax. But the public services are excellent. I believe mandatory medical insurance is 500 swiss francs a month. But medical care is 1st class. If you lose your job you get the equivalent of JSA for two years at 80% of your lost salary. After two years nothing. I believe the low paid still have access to state healthcare (as cannot afford 500 francs p/m) but that is only possible due to everyone else paying high taxes. " Having lived there... Taxes are very low. Minimum wage is very high. Health insurance/care is private but mandatory. Like a mandatory private tax. People are xenophobic, even outside of their canton/language, let alone race. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Having lived there... " Oh, and cost of living was insane. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" As for A then a great example is Switzerland. You pay a lot of tax. But the public services are excellent. I believe mandatory medical insurance is 500 swiss francs a month. But medical care is 1st class. If you lose your job you get the equivalent of JSA for two years at 80% of your lost salary. After two years nothing. I believe the low paid still have access to state healthcare (as cannot afford 500 francs p/m) but that is only possible due to everyone else paying high taxes. " Don't think Switzerland has high taxes. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£70bn a year (40% nhs budget) treating self inflicted obesity, smoking diseases, drug and alcohol abuse £70bn over budget on hs2 £9bn a month servicing the perpetual national debt £5-8bn a year spent on migrants Billions wasted heating empty municipal offices £450 million paid to France for ineffective border control, and £800m wasted on illegal Rwanda scheme 700 private finance initiatives from new labour, many we are still paying for with astronomical cost and poor investment delivery £29bn spent on illegal Iraq and Afghan wars £15bn covid corruption £115000 life pensions for ex prime ministers including a war criminal and a seven week lettuce Red and blue wasting tax payers money " Surely that's all Blue debt, the Reds have only been in for a few weeks, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" As for A then a great example is Switzerland. You pay a lot of tax. But the public services are excellent. I believe mandatory medical insurance is 500 swiss francs a month. But medical care is 1st class. If you lose your job you get the equivalent of JSA for two years at 80% of your lost salary. After two years nothing. I believe the low paid still have access to state healthcare (as cannot afford 500 francs p/m) but that is only possible due to everyone else paying high taxes. Don't think Switzerland has high taxes. " Maybe not HIGH but… “The maximum overall rate of federal income tax is 11.5%. The various cantonal and municipal taxes are also levied at progressive rates, with a maximum combined cantonal and municipal rate of approximately 36%. In addition, cantonal and municipal net wealth taxes are levied.” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" As for A then a great example is Switzerland. You pay a lot of tax. But the public services are excellent. I believe mandatory medical insurance is 500 swiss francs a month. But medical care is 1st class. If you lose your job you get the equivalent of JSA for two years at 80% of your lost salary. After two years nothing. I believe the low paid still have access to state healthcare (as cannot afford 500 francs p/m) but that is only possible due to everyone else paying high taxes. Don't think Switzerland has high taxes. Maybe not HIGH but… “The maximum overall rate of federal income tax is 11.5%. The various cantonal and municipal taxes are also levied at progressive rates, with a maximum combined cantonal and municipal rate of approximately 36%. In addition, cantonal and municipal net wealth taxes are levied.”" Consumer prices in Switzerland are a whopping 41% more expensive than that of the UK. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" As for A then a great example is Switzerland. You pay a lot of tax. But the public services are excellent. I believe mandatory medical insurance is 500 swiss francs a month. But medical care is 1st class. If you lose your job you get the equivalent of JSA for two years at 80% of your lost salary. After two years nothing. I believe the low paid still have access to state healthcare (as cannot afford 500 francs p/m) but that is only possible due to everyone else paying high taxes. Don't think Switzerland has high taxes. Maybe not HIGH but… “The maximum overall rate of federal income tax is 11.5%. The various cantonal and municipal taxes are also levied at progressive rates, with a maximum combined cantonal and municipal rate of approximately 36%. In addition, cantonal and municipal net wealth taxes are levied.” Consumer prices in Switzerland are a whopping 41% more expensive than that of the UK." Interesting. They have no capital gains tax though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Aren't Scandanavian models of taxation along the lines of low (ish) personal tax with much higher taxation on things you buy. Hence why beer costs about £15 a pint in Norway, Sweden etc. Our son has lived in Malmo and it was very dear for anything when you bought anything. He moved there from Copenhagen, which is tge 5th most expensive city in the world to live in. So pros and cons to all different types of tax system. Governments have to raise money to run things. It's just different choices on how they do this I think, Mrs x" Scandinavian countries tax the shit of everyone. Not just the high earners. In Sweden, even the lowest earners pay close to 30% based on the municipalities. If you earn something that's equivalent of £50,000 per year, you fall into higher tax slab which increases their tax rates to over 50% | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£70bn a year (40% nhs budget) treating self inflicted obesity, smoking diseases, drug and alcohol abuse £70bn over budget on hs2 £9bn a month servicing the perpetual national debt £5-8bn a year spent on migrants Billions wasted heating empty municipal offices £450 million paid to France for ineffective border control, and £800m wasted on illegal Rwanda scheme 700 private finance initiatives from new labour, many we are still paying for with astronomical cost and poor investment delivery £29bn spent on illegal Iraq and Afghan wars £15bn covid corruption £115000 life pensions for ex prime ministers including a war criminal and a seven week lettuce Red and blue wasting tax payers money Surely that's all Blue debt, the Reds have only been in for a few weeks, Mrs x" It's an accumulated debt over the years including the previous Labour government. It did not start 14 years ago. Given the Tories have been in office longer and the cost of covid, I suspect a larger proportion came under blue but to say none is from under red is incorrect. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It's breathtakingly naïve and stupid for an incumbent chancellor to proclaim a £22bn "black hole" in government finances. As a former BoE chief economist said "It is unnecessary and probably unhelpful economically". In other words it could trigger the sort of financial chaos we saw from Liz Truss. It makes you wonder at the intelligence of our elected politicians." Reeves worked at BoE for six years A career economist she is not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"£70bn a year (40% nhs budget) treating self inflicted obesity, smoking diseases, drug and alcohol abuse £70bn over budget on hs2 £9bn a month servicing the perpetual national debt £5-8bn a year spent on migrants Billions wasted heating empty municipal offices £450 million paid to France for ineffective border control, and £800m wasted on illegal Rwanda scheme 700 private finance initiatives from new labour, many we are still paying for with astronomical cost and poor investment delivery £29bn spent on illegal Iraq and Afghan wars £15bn covid corruption £115000 life pensions for ex prime ministers including a war criminal and a seven week lettuce Red and blue wasting tax payers money Surely that's all Blue debt, the Reds have only been in for a few weeks, Mrs x It's an accumulated debt over the years including the previous Labour government. It did not start 14 years ago. Given the Tories have been in office longer and the cost of covid, I suspect a larger proportion came under blue but to say none is from under red is incorrect." I’d agree blue own the larger share having added £1.7trn of it However labours contribution would be significantly higher if the 700 private finance initiatives were included. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year." That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off." But would that GDP for the UK be even better if we were still in the EU? Would we now be no.1 ahead of Germany? Is the UK’s GDP performance because of Brexit or despite it? I genuinely don’t know but seems an interesting point? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year." "That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off." "But would that GDP for the UK be even better if we were still in the EU? Would we now be no.1 ahead of Germany? Is the UK’s GDP performance because of Brexit or despite it? I genuinely don’t know but seems an interesting point?" Maybe so, maybe not, who can tell? All we know is that there's no evidence of a downturn. So it's down to personal opinions. Which seems more likely - that Brexit hasn't done any significant harm to the economy - or that Britain is a powerhouse of innovation and would be doing incredibly well if it weren't for Brexit dragging us down to almost exactly where we were before it happened? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off." That's not according to Bloomburg, Sacha Goldman, the OBR and quite a few others who all claim we are 2.5% worse off by leaving the EU. 'Brexit has affected the UK's gross domestic product (GDP): Economic growth According to Statista, the UK's economy was 2.5% smaller in 2023 than it would have been if the UK had not left the EU. Goldman Sachs estimates that the UK economy has underperformed other advanced economies by 5% since Brexit, and that the actual impact may have been 4-8% of real GDP. Cost of living The average Briton was nearly £2,000 worse off in 2023, and the average Londoner was nearly £3,400 worse off. Trade The UK's total imports and exports to the European Union and the rest of the world decreased by 15%. Investment Brexit has created uncertainty for businesses, which has discouraged investment. Labor shortages There has been a decline in net migration from the EU, which has led to a shortage of skilled workers in the UK. Trade barriers Leaving the single market has increased trade barriers between the UK and the EU.' Bloomburg wrote on the 19th March 2024. ' Far from being the bloated, inefficient bureaucracy derided by Euroskeptics -- led by former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson when he was the fabulist journalist for the London Telegraph -- who colored the prevailing Brexit media narrative, the EU economy is growing 2.3 percentage points faster than the UK’s on an annual basis, with GDP advancing 24% since 2016, compared with the 6% for the UK. During the 10 years before the Brexit referendum, EU GDP lagged behind the UK annually by 12 basis points, since 2000 by 9 basis points and the two decades preceding Brexit, by 149 basis points, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The dichotomy is similar for GDP per individual among the 20 countries sharing the euro. The bloc’s per capita GDP increased 19%, or 2.19 percentage points more than the UK on annual basis since 2016, an overwhelming reversal of the decade prior to Brexit. During the 10 years preceding Brexit, annualized euro zone growth was barely eight basis points better than the UK, and between 2000 and 2016 the euro zone trailed the UK by six basis points. Contrary to the overwhelming perception, Britain had everything to gain from its EU inclusion and little to lose as the bloc expanded with the fall of the Soviet Union's Berlin Wall and rapid integration of Eastern European countries. Between 2011 and 2015, the EU's jobless rate expanded from 1.3 percentage points higher than the UK to 4.6 percentage points above. Only after the Brexit vote did the situation reverse, with the EU's additional joblessness rate narrowing to 2.9 percentage points as its citizens secured employment at a faster rate than their UK counterparts.' So there seems to be evidence that Brexit has been harmful to the UK economy. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off. But would that GDP for the UK be even better if we were still in the EU? Would we now be no.1 ahead of Germany? Is the UK’s GDP performance because of Brexit or despite it? I genuinely don’t know but seems an interesting point? Maybe so, maybe not, who can tell? All we know is that there's no evidence of a downturn. So it's down to personal opinions. Which seems more likely - that Brexit hasn't done any significant harm to the economy - or that Britain is a powerhouse of innovation and would be doing incredibly well if it weren't for Brexit dragging us down to almost exactly where we were before it happened?" It is a conundrum that we will never be able to answer. Certainly feels like a lot of effort and disruption to stand still! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off. But would that GDP for the UK be even better if we were still in the EU? Would we now be no.1 ahead of Germany? Is the UK’s GDP performance because of Brexit or despite it? I genuinely don’t know but seems an interesting point? Maybe so, maybe not, who can tell? All we know is that there's no evidence of a downturn. So it's down to personal opinions. Which seems more likely - that Brexit hasn't done any significant harm to the economy - or that Britain is a powerhouse of innovation and would be doing incredibly well if it weren't for Brexit dragging us down to almost exactly where we were before it happened? It is a conundrum that we will never be able to answer. Certainly feels like a lot of effort and disruption to stand still!" We may not be able to answer it but lots of experts seem to be able to and they say it's not been positive, very poor actually, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off. But would that GDP for the UK be even better if we were still in the EU? Would we now be no.1 ahead of Germany? Is the UK’s GDP performance because of Brexit or despite it? I genuinely don’t know but seems an interesting point? Maybe so, maybe not, who can tell? All we know is that there's no evidence of a downturn. So it's down to personal opinions. Which seems more likely - that Brexit hasn't done any significant harm to the economy - or that Britain is a powerhouse of innovation and would be doing incredibly well if it weren't for Brexit dragging us down to almost exactly where we were before it happened? It is a conundrum that we will never be able to answer. Certainly feels like a lot of effort and disruption to stand still!We may not be able to answer it but lots of experts seem to be able to and they say it's not been positive, very poor actually, Mrs x" Your post before was very interesting. As I am not an economist I cannot comment. However, I still maintain Brexit was a mistake, for more than just economic reasons, as we were better being one of the big beasts inside the tent pissing out then being outside trying to piss in. Cameron should/could have used the referendum to secure far more concessions or to adjust our membership. But he ran away! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off. But would that GDP for the UK be even better if we were still in the EU? Would we now be no.1 ahead of Germany? Is the UK’s GDP performance because of Brexit or despite it? I genuinely don’t know but seems an interesting point? Maybe so, maybe not, who can tell? All we know is that there's no evidence of a downturn. So it's down to personal opinions. Which seems more likely - that Brexit hasn't done any significant harm to the economy - or that Britain is a powerhouse of innovation and would be doing incredibly well if it weren't for Brexit dragging us down to almost exactly where we were before it happened? It is a conundrum that we will never be able to answer. Certainly feels like a lot of effort and disruption to stand still!We may not be able to answer it but lots of experts seem to be able to and they say it's not been positive, very poor actually, Mrs x Your post before was very interesting. As I am not an economist I cannot comment. However, I still maintain Brexit was a mistake, for more than just economic reasons, as we were better being one of the big beasts inside the tent pissing out then being outside trying to piss in. Cameron should/could have used the referendum to secure far more concessions or to adjust our membership. But he ran away! " I totally agree with you, this has to be a first, feel a little giddy haha Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year." "That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off." "That's not according to Bloomburg, Sacha Goldman, the OBR and quite a few others who all claim we are 2.5% worse off by leaving the EU..." They get those figures by using GDP per capita. It's no secret that immigration has gone up hugely since Brexit, with around 600,000 arriving each year. Most of those are non-productive - students, family members of those already here, evacuees from Ukraine, etc. If production stays exactly the same, but you increase the number of people in the country, then GDP per capita will fall. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off. But would that GDP for the UK be even better if we were still in the EU? Would we now be no.1 ahead of Germany? Is the UK’s GDP performance because of Brexit or despite it? I genuinely don’t know but seems an interesting point? Maybe so, maybe not, who can tell? All we know is that there's no evidence of a downturn. So it's down to personal opinions. Which seems more likely - that Brexit hasn't done any significant harm to the economy - or that Britain is a powerhouse of innovation and would be doing incredibly well if it weren't for Brexit dragging us down to almost exactly where we were before it happened? It is a conundrum that we will never be able to answer. Certainly feels like a lot of effort and disruption to stand still!We may not be able to answer it but lots of experts seem to be able to and they say it's not been positive, very poor actually, Mrs x Your post before was very interesting. As I am not an economist I cannot comment. However, I still maintain Brexit was a mistake, for more than just economic reasons, as we were better being one of the big beasts inside the tent pissing out then being outside trying to piss in. Cameron should/could have used the referendum to secure far more concessions or to adjust our membership. But he ran away! " Whether Brexit is a good or bad thing is a moot point. The government certainly hasn't made the most of it, and it makes it harder for us to live in our house in France. Notwithstanding the above, I agree it is Cameron's fault for being weak in negotiation. He made a big deal about going to renegotiate our membership, then came back with nothing. Then he didn't believe that the voters would vote to leave. Similar blame must be allocated to the EU, who were (and still are) arrogant in their pursuit of ever closer integration (against the will of most of the population) and in their belief that the EU is so fantastic that nobody would vote to leave. A common market where movement of goods & services is free, and movement of people is easy, is a good thing. The EU project is not good. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off. That's not according to Bloomburg, Sacha Goldman, the OBR and quite a few others who all claim we are 2.5% worse off by leaving the EU... They get those figures by using GDP per capita. It's no secret that immigration has gone up hugely since Brexit, with around 600,000 arriving each year. Most of those are non-productive - students, family members of those already here, evacuees from Ukraine, etc. If production stays exactly the same, but you increase the number of people in the country, then GDP per capita will fall." These experts used data from over a decade and paint a bleak assessment for Brexit. Unless you can match their credentials I think I'll go with their assessment, no slur on your judgement it's just that I've quoted some big hitters on the field and not just some random off Twitter spouting nonsense, not that I'm saying you are but their are lots on here that do, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"These experts used data from over a decade and paint a bleak assessment for Brexit. Unless you can match their credentials I think I'll go with their assessment, no slur on your judgement it's just that I've quoted some big hitters on the field and not just some random off Twitter spouting nonsense, not that I'm saying you are but their are lots on here that do, Mrs x" Well, I'm not on Twitter, but I get your point. But the actual GDP figures don't match with the analysis of those guys. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"These experts used data from over a decade and paint a bleak assessment for Brexit. Unless you can match their credentials I think I'll go with their assessment, no slur on your judgement it's just that I've quoted some big hitters on the field and not just some random off Twitter spouting nonsense, not that I'm saying you are but their are lots on here that do, Mrs x Well, I'm not on Twitter, but I get your point. But the actual GDP figures don't match with the analysis of those guys." Not saying you don't know your stuff but when Goldman Sachs, Bloomsbury et al, quote stuff I'm more likely to be swayed by their evidence than by someone's opinion, just saying, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals "It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect? Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The elephant in the room that nobody talks about - brexit cost shit loads more than 22bn and does nothing more than make all of us worse off every year. That's not what the GDP stats say. The UK overtook France in 2014, moving into second place in Europe. Growth slowed down in 2016, which could have been Brexit uncertainty, but since 2020 the UK has been accelerating away from France, and keeping pace with first place Germany. We only have 4 years of stats, which might not be enough, but so far there's no evidence of Brexit making us financially worse off. That's not according to Bloomburg, Sacha Goldman, the OBR and quite a few others who all claim we are 2.5% worse off by leaving the EU... They get those figures by using GDP per capita. It's no secret that immigration has gone up hugely since Brexit, with around 600,000 arriving each year. Most of those are non-productive - students, family members of those already here, evacuees from Ukraine, etc. If production stays exactly the same, but you increase the number of people in the country, then GDP per capita will fall." It's different to many other measurements and means China and India are way way down the list. Luxemburg come out on top. They do show the GDP of the Uk consistently growing apart from the covid blip which is the same for everyone. On the population subject, do refugees from Ukraine count towards the population or even students? Seems odd if they are not permanent. I would assume those seeking asylum would not be counted until given permission to stay | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Stopping that strange "climate change" aid to other countries might sort this out...well it would be a good start." The obvious thing to do you mean? Use our money to get us back on our feet before giving it away? If we as a nation are healthy we can then help out, but not until. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x"All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you. Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man "That's your opinion, which you are entitled to but all the institutions you name are far more knowledgeable in their field than Joe Public. What I posted before was based upon the facts of such institutions, not just one in particular and it's not my opinion. In the absence of facts to the contrary I'll trust suck experts, just like I would take medical advice and legal advice from experts and not rely on others opinions on the matter in question. Brexit has been disastrous for the UK, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance " How painfully naive can you get. They'd just blow it on more unproductive state sector bs. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On the population subject, do refugees from Ukraine count towards the population or even students? Seems odd if they are not permanent. I would assume those seeking asylum would not be counted until given permission to stay" Anyone that is given leave to remain here counts as an increase to the population. Students get counted as immigrants one year, then emigrants three years later. I'm not sure about asylum seekers, but they are a pretty small number and wouldn't affect the figures much. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man "Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?"Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄 "Agreed and yet the lack of ethics in the pharmaceutical industry (which generally funds or lobbies the healthcare industry) is hand waved away by all those posters seemingly desperate to go down the private healthcare route in the UK and rid us of the NHS. I guess bad and unethical practices are only something to be concerned about if they don’t align with your ideology | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
Agreed and yet the lack of ethics in the pharmaceutical industry (which generally funds or lobbies the healthcare industry) is hand waved away by all those posters seemingly desperate to go down the private healthcare route in the UK and rid us of the NHS. I guess bad and unethical practices are only something to be concerned about if they don’t align with your ideology "This doesn't doesn't add up, how are you joining the dots of medicine discovery and manufacture, with healthcare practices? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄 "Oh no the dreaded concept of 'profit'. How dare people profit from their ideas and endeavours eh? Look, all medicines have side effects, they are toxic compounds we put into our bodies. But there is a risk vs benefit trade-off. Sadly, some drugs will have catastrophic consequences for some - as in Covid jabs. But the same jabs saved millions of lives. Take your pick. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
Agreed and yet the lack of ethics in the pharmaceutical industry (which generally funds or lobbies the healthcare industry) is hand waved away by all those posters seemingly desperate to go down the private healthcare route in the UK and rid us of the NHS. I guess bad and unethical practices are only something to be concerned about if they don’t align with your ideology
This doesn't doesn't add up, how are you joining the dots of medicine discovery and manufacture, with healthcare practices? "Lack of ethics in a joined up industry sector / healthcare ecosystem. Wasn’t me saying… “Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects” | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance And if they hadn't given ridiculous pay rises to the world and his wife the black hole would be half the size" Government and Government services cost money. Money taken from Taxes. When the NHS fails, the roads are full of pot holes, the armed forces are weakened because of low troop numbers and old equipment, police don't investigate small crimes, the judicial system is incredibly slow, prisoners are released early because of overcrowding, Migrants keep arriving at our shores, social services are failing, schools are struggling, etc etc we ALL complain. The solution to the problem is not to view civil servants as the problem. Underpaying them does not fix the issue. People can expect efficiency but if the want services that work they cannot be free or dirt cheap so the they can enjoy the luxuries their massive private sector incomes afford them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
Agreed and yet the lack of ethics in the pharmaceutical industry (which generally funds or lobbies the healthcare industry) is hand waved away by all those posters seemingly desperate to go down the private healthcare route in the UK and rid us of the NHS. I guess bad and unethical practices are only something to be concerned about if they don’t align with your ideology
This doesn't doesn't add up, how are you joining the dots of medicine discovery and manufacture, with healthcare practices?
Lack of ethics in a joined up industry sector / healthcare ecosystem. Wasn’t me saying…
“Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects”"We live in the UK, things are very different here, joining up the dots of others doesn’t necessarily = the same outcomes for us. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"On the population subject, do refugees from Ukraine count towards the population or even students? Seems odd if they are not permanent. I would assume those seeking asylum would not be counted until given permission to stay Anyone that is given leave to remain here counts as an increase to the population. Students get counted as immigrants one year, then emigrants three years later. I'm not sure about asylum seekers, but they are a pretty small number and wouldn't affect the figures much." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The FT requested through a FOI request a breakdown of the 22 billion hole from the treasury, they have refused. Considering labour have spent 9.5 billion on over the top public sector pay rises, increased the salaries of train drivers by approx 10k a year, cut fuel allowances for pensioners and are about to drop a budget that will be on the shoulders of those that can afford it, all based on the black hole! The sceptic in me would say………" The public sector pay increases were calculated by reference to private sector pay for similar jobs by an independent review body. We all suffered months of NHS, Schools and Train disruption because the Conservatives were trying to impose far lower pay settlements on government servants. What the Cons wanted to do was keep down costs so they could hand out Tax cuts before the election. Well, I want Burger King to cut their prices so I can supersize my burgers. BK should immediately cut their staff's wages so I can have this, it's only fair.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
Agreed and yet the lack of ethics in the pharmaceutical industry (which generally funds or lobbies the healthcare industry) is hand waved away by all those posters seemingly desperate to go down the private healthcare route in the UK and rid us of the NHS. I guess bad and unethical practices are only something to be concerned about if they don’t align with your ideology
This doesn't doesn't add up, how are you joining the dots of medicine discovery and manufacture, with healthcare practices?
Lack of ethics in a joined up industry sector / healthcare ecosystem. Wasn’t me saying…
“Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects”
We live in the UK, things are very different here, joining up the dots of others doesn’t necessarily = the same outcomes for us."Sorry for being sceptical about your posts on the topic of the NHS and healthcare privatisation, but with you working in M&A and (I am certain from past discussions) in the healthcare sector, I think your continued lobbying on here is clouded through personal gain. I have said above that for me to accept further privatisation of healthcare in the UK it will require law changes to ensure insurance companies cannot wriggle out of paying for treatment for pre-existing and hereditary conditions and that poor people who still could not afford the premiums should not be excluded. Also premiums should not increase with age and an increased risk profile. Otherwise it is a retrograde step. If you think big pharma is not already heavily involved, influencing, lobbying healthcare in the UK, then you are either surprisingly naive or being disingenuous. A simple comparison of the cost of the same drugs in the USA vs what the NHS will pay shows why the pharma industry have spent decades, and billions lobbying govt and driving an anti-NHS narrative in the media. It is ALL about money. You know this but won’t freely admit it because you are eyeing tasty privatisation pie for you to get your M&A consultant expertise teeth into (I don’t blame you BTW but there is an agenda). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“What do we want?” “Better public services” “How do we fund them?” “We don’t know!” “Increase your taxes?” “Fuck off!”" Get more people of benefits. Benefits are supposed to be a safety net, not a hammock. The abuse of benefits and council housing is rife | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals "Have a look at the quality and accuracy of their financial analysis and forecasts. That’s what’s relevant in this context. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The FT requested through a FOI request a breakdown of the 22 billion hole from the treasury, they have refused. Considering labour have spent 9.5 billion on over the top public sector pay rises, increased the salaries of train drivers by approx 10k a year, cut fuel allowances for pensioners and are about to drop a budget that will be on the shoulders of those that can afford it, all based on the black hole! The sceptic in me would say……… The public sector pay increases were calculated by reference to private sector pay for similar jobs by an independent review body. We all suffered months of NHS, Schools and Train disruption because the Conservatives were trying to impose far lower pay settlements on government servants. What the Cons wanted to do was keep down costs so they could hand out Tax cuts before the election. Well, I want Burger King to cut their prices so I can supersize my burgers. BK should immediately cut their staff's wages so I can have this, it's only fair. "So, huge pay rises for everyone then please, but no price increases … | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“What do we want?” “Better public services” “How do we fund them?” “We don’t know!” “Increase your taxes?” “Fuck off!” Get more people of benefits. Benefits are supposed to be a safety net, not a hammock. The abuse of benefits and council housing is rife " No argument there | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Goldman Sachs | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The FT requested through a FOI request a breakdown of the 22 billion hole from the treasury, they have refused. Considering labour have spent 9.5 billion on over the top public sector pay rises, increased the salaries of train drivers by approx 10k a year, cut fuel allowances for pensioners and are about to drop a budget that will be on the shoulders of those that can afford it, all based on the black hole! The sceptic in me would say……… The public sector pay increases were calculated by reference to private sector pay for similar jobs by an independent review body. We all suffered months of NHS, Schools and Train disruption because the Conservatives were trying to impose far lower pay settlements on government servants. What the Cons wanted to do was keep down costs so they could hand out Tax cuts before the election. Well, I want Burger King to cut their prices so I can supersize my burgers. BK should immediately cut their staff's wages so I can have this, it's only fair. "You are repeating the labour party spin that is allowing them to rob Peter to pay Paul. The bottom line here is they have rewarded their unions, paid big money for future votes at the expense of a lot people that they do not consider labour party voters and therefore do not deserve to be looked after. If that is something you can get behind, good for you, but it is not something I can support and never will. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The FT requested through a FOI request a breakdown of the 22 billion hole from the treasury, they have refused. Considering labour have spent 9.5 billion on over the top public sector pay rises, increased the salaries of train drivers by approx 10k a year, cut fuel allowances for pensioners and are about to drop a budget that will be on the shoulders of those that can afford it, all based on the black hole! The sceptic in me would say……… The public sector pay increases were calculated by reference to private sector pay for similar jobs by an independent review body. We all suffered months of NHS, Schools and Train disruption because the Conservatives were trying to impose far lower pay settlements on government servants. What the Cons wanted to do was keep down costs so they could hand out Tax cuts before the election. Well, I want Burger King to cut their prices so I can supersize my burgers. BK should immediately cut their staff's wages so I can have this, it's only fair.
You are repeating the labour party spin that is allowing them to rob Peter to pay Paul.
The bottom line here is they have rewarded their unions, paid big money for future votes at the expense of a lot people that they do not consider labour party voters and therefore do not deserve to be looked after.
If that is something you can get behind, good for you, but it is not something I can support and never will. "You keep banging on about 9bn spent on pay rises to the Railways but you do know they would have gotten ok ne even if the Tories had stayed in power. So instead of the less than 5% per year that the have recieved, how much do you think the Tories would have offered? You never mention this, why? Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The FT requested through a FOI request a breakdown of the 22 billion hole from the treasury, they have refused. Considering labour have spent 9.5 billion on over the top public sector pay rises, increased the salaries of train drivers by approx 10k a year, cut fuel allowances for pensioners and are about to drop a budget that will be on the shoulders of those that can afford it, all based on the black hole! The sceptic in me would say……… The public sector pay increases were calculated by reference to private sector pay for similar jobs by an independent review body. We all suffered months of NHS, Schools and Train disruption because the Conservatives were trying to impose far lower pay settlements on government servants. What the Cons wanted to do was keep down costs so they could hand out Tax cuts before the election. Well, I want Burger King to cut their prices so I can supersize my burgers. BK should immediately cut their staff's wages so I can have this, it's only fair.
You are repeating the labour party spin that is allowing them to rob Peter to pay Paul.
The bottom line here is they have rewarded their unions, paid big money for future votes at the expense of a lot people that they do not consider labour party voters and therefore do not deserve to be looked after.
If that is something you can get behind, good for you, but it is not something I can support and never will. You keep banging on about 9bn spent on pay rises to the Railways but you do know they would have gotten ok ne even if the Tories had stayed in power. So instead of the less than 5% per year that the have recieved, how much do you think the Tories would have offered? You never mention this, why?
Mrs x"I'm not going on about 9 billion to the railways, I mentioned the 10K they have been handed as well as the 9.5 billion they spent on JD's, police, armed forces etc. they had the choice to give such sums away, and they did it without creating a bilateral agreement / contract. They showed their true colours, and I'm not expecting you to agree with this as you are sharp focused on one aspect only, workers deserve paying well. there is more to this than throwing money at services, as the NHS not shown you this, Starmer himself has just said the same thing and here we are throwing money at problems. If you want to argue that people need a pay rise you are not going to get much of an argument against that, but if you change focus and ask the basic question of what did we actually get in terms of guarantees and future improvements you might find the labour deal to be a pure pay off to the unions and future voters. They used our money recklessly in my opinion. Anything to add on the refusal to breakdown the 22 billion black hole they keep brainwashing people with? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done "The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. "So the fantastic performance, service and travel experience of the last 14 years has been due to the Tories improving services and relations? If you are going to give us bollocks the least you can do is serve them up with a nice big cock on top of them... Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. So the fantastic performance, service and travel experience of the last 14 years has been due to the Tories improving services and relations?
If you are going to give us bollocks the least you can do is serve them up with a nice big cock on top of them... Mrs x"Stick to the point, which is the labour government gave away huge amounts with no guarantees or service improvements. Reckless | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done "Spot on, this agreeing malarkey is becoming a habit, we'll have people taking soon haha Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. "How do you know? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. So the fantastic performance, service and travel experience of the last 14 years has been due to the Tories improving services and relations?
If you are going to give us bollocks the least you can do is serve them up with a nice big cock on top of them... Mrs x
Stick to the point, which is the labour government gave away huge amounts with no guarantees or service improvements.
Reckless "Huge amounts??? They would have gotten a pay rise under the Tories but you never mention or even acknowledge this. Doesn't suit your narrative does it. Despite evidence, you know that, the irrefutable data and fact thing some people use, to prove a point rather than something made you that others seem to prefer on here. So it truth ALL Labour governments have borrowed less and repayed more than any Tory government. Seems to blow a hole in your opinion that... 'The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations.' Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations.
How do you know? "It's happening again, you are so right. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done Spot on, this agreeing malarkey is becoming a habit, we'll have people taking soon haha Mrs x"We agree on plenty and disagree on some. I just don’t bother commenting | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done Spot on, this agreeing malarkey is becoming a habit, we'll have people taking soon haha Mrs x
We agree on plenty and disagree on some. I just don’t bother commenting "That's because my forum crush is obviously unrequited... and a little painful 😭 Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. "Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x"You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up. Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? "Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details? So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to? As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x"Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context? Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them? Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄 "I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time. "I did | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did "You still helped them profit  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit "How did I? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?"You didn't have your vaccinations? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?"Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume "You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'."What makes you say that? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'."Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x"Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ? Apologies for acronyms in the last post | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. So the fantastic performance, service and travel experience of the last 14 years has been due to the Tories improving services and relations?
If you are going to give us bollocks the least you can do is serve them up with a nice big cock on top of them... Mrs x"What? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? "It’s a made-up number and they have overused it. They are trying to ride this excuse out til the October budget but they have worn it out already | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post "It’s a made-up number. They made it up before the election and have already worn it out. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post "I gave you my answer before, and I quote "As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details? So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?" No it's not to complicated, I'm saying that they have already said why they haven't released the details of this. I suspect you don't agree with this statement and are of the opinion they may not be telling the truth. However you offer no evidence of this and as such you are just talking about your unsubstantiated opinion. Or do you have actual evidence they might be lying and if so can you show this? Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post
It’s a made-up number. They made it up before the election and have already worn it out. "Can you say where you have seen any evidence which would back this statement up? Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post
It’s a made-up number. They made it up before the election and have already worn it out. Can you say where you have seen any evidence which would back this statement up?
Mrs x"They can’t because if the Govt won’t release the data then it is all conjecture. I can say with utter confidence that several major govt depts have rather large spending commitments that never received a settlement from HMT. Can’t say what the total figures are but it does run into £billions. I don’t care if others on here believe me or not | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Regarding the budget black hole (if it's even true), cut the aid budget by not sending money to countries like China. Stop giving benefits to people who are not willing or don't want to work. Benefits was only ever designed to help people who fall on hard times, those who are unable to work due to a disability and pensioners who paid to the system during their working lifes. Green projects can be mostly be scrapped completely because they're too expensive to set up and no guarantees that they will be cheaper in the long term except for recycling schemes. This should close the the £22 billion black hole that Labour claim we have " Or simply reverse Sunak and Hunt’s NIC cut from earlier in the year. Job done! Funny that, you know, unfunded tax cuts! Not like the Tories tried that before now is it? 😉 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Regarding the budget black hole (if it's even true), cut the aid budget by not sending money to countries like China. Stop giving benefits to people who are not willing or don't want to work. Benefits was only ever designed to help people who fall on hard times, those who are unable to work due to a disability and pensioners who paid to the system during their working lifes. Green projects can be mostly be scrapped completely because they're too expensive to set up and no guarantees that they will be cheaper in the long term except for recycling schemes. This should close the the £22 billion black hole that Labour claim we have " The £22 billion deficit is indeed questionable, as are the initiatives to plug the gap. Stopping pensioners Winter Fuel Allowance saves around £1.4 billion. Contrast that with expenditure of £6.4 billion in supporting asylum seekers and £9 billion in lavish public sector pay awards. Then, yes, we have a huge benefits bill, much of it on 'lifestyle' long-term claimants. Then there's the NHS 'black hole' and wasteful defence procurement. Government after government squander our taxes, and the colour of their rosettes makes no difference at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x"I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else. Context here is important. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post I gave you my answer before, and I quote "As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?"
No it's not to complicated, I'm saying that they have already said why they haven't released the details of this. I suspect you don't agree with this statement and are of the opinion they may not be telling the truth. However you offer no evidence of this and as such you are just talking about your unsubstantiated opinion.
Or do you have actual evidence they might be lying and if so can you show this?
Mrs x"I will ask a different way….. Why won’t they release the details for scrutiny | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important. "I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post I gave you my answer before, and I quote "As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?"
No it's not to complicated, I'm saying that they have already said why they haven't released the details of this. I suspect you don't agree with this statement and are of the opinion they may not be telling the truth. However you offer no evidence of this and as such you are just talking about your unsubstantiated opinion.
Or do you have actual evidence they might be lying and if so can you show this?
Mrs x
I will ask a different way…..
Why won’t they release the details for scrutiny "I do not know, maybe it's for the reasons they have stated. Unless that is of course if you have any evidence to the contrary. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Regarding the budget black hole (if it's even true), cut the aid budget by not sending money to countries like China. Stop giving benefits to people who are not willing or don't want to work. Benefits was only ever designed to help people who fall on hard times, those who are unable to work due to a disability and pensioners who paid to the system during their working lifes. Green projects can be mostly be scrapped completely because they're too expensive to set up and no guarantees that they will be cheaper in the long term except for recycling schemes. This should close the the £22 billion black hole that Labour claim we have Or simply reverse Sunak and Hunt’s NIC cut from earlier in the year. Job done! Funny that, you know, unfunded tax cuts! Not like the Tories tried that before now is it? 😉" If they did that then they would be breaking their pledge to not increase National Insurance | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Regarding the budget black hole (if it's even true), cut the aid budget by not sending money to countries like China. Stop giving benefits to people who are not willing or don't want to work. Benefits was only ever designed to help people who fall on hard times, those who are unable to work due to a disability and pensioners who paid to the system during their working lifes. Green projects can be mostly be scrapped completely because they're too expensive to set up and no guarantees that they will be cheaper in the long term except for recycling schemes. This should close the the £22 billion black hole that Labour claim we have Or simply reverse Sunak and Hunt’s NIC cut from earlier in the year. Job done! Funny that, you know, unfunded tax cuts! Not like the Tories tried that before now is it? 😉 If they did that then they would be breaking their pledge to not increase National Insurance" I know
The Tory Tax Trap - Labour were so naive to make that pledge. Now they have to fiddle around the edges.
The Tories knew they were toast so left a shitstorm for next Govt to solve.
That isn’t me supporting Labour or feeling sorry for them. They deserve time to get things sorted but so far it feels a strategic mess. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Regarding the budget black hole (if it's even true), cut the aid budget by not sending money to countries like China. Stop giving benefits to people who are not willing or don't want to work. Benefits was only ever designed to help people who fall on hard times, those who are unable to work due to a disability and pensioners who paid to the system during their working lifes. Green projects can be mostly be scrapped completely because they're too expensive to set up and no guarantees that they will be cheaper in the long term except for recycling schemes. This should close the the £22 billion black hole that Labour claim we have Or simply reverse Sunak and Hunt’s NIC cut from earlier in the year. Job done! Funny that, you know, unfunded tax cuts! Not like the Tories tried that before now is it? 😉 If they did that then they would be breaking their pledge to not increase National Insurance I know
The Tory Tax Trap - Labour were so naive to make that pledge. Now they have to fiddle around the edges.
The Tories knew they were toast so left a shitstorm for next Govt to solve.
That isn’t me supporting Labour or feeling sorry for them. They deserve time to get things sorted but so far it feels a strategic mess."It's was the same with the strikes, they knew that by kicking it down the road they were just leaving a mess for Labour to sort out, one they couldn't win no matter what they did. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Regarding the budget black hole (if it's even true), cut the aid budget by not sending money to countries like China. Stop giving benefits to people who are not willing or don't want to work. Benefits was only ever designed to help people who fall on hard times, those who are unable to work due to a disability and pensioners who paid to the system during their working lifes. Green projects can be mostly be scrapped completely because they're too expensive to set up and no guarantees that they will be cheaper in the long term except for recycling schemes. This should close the the £22 billion black hole that Labour claim we have Or simply reverse Sunak and Hunt’s NIC cut from earlier in the year. Job done! Funny that, you know, unfunded tax cuts! Not like the Tories tried that before now is it? 😉 If they did that then they would be breaking their pledge to not increase National Insurance I know
The Tory Tax Trap - Labour were so naive to make that pledge. Now they have to fiddle around the edges.
The Tories knew they were toast so left a shitstorm for next Govt to solve.
That isn’t me supporting Labour or feeling sorry for them. They deserve time to get things sorted but so far it feels a strategic mess.It's was the same with the strikes, they knew that by kicking it down the road they were just leaving a mess for Labour to sort out, one they couldn't win no matter what they did.
Mrs x"To be fair, according to some on here the Govt should offer a 1% pay rise over five years and tell all those public sector workers if they don’t like it leave. That’ll show ‘em the greedy bastards! Don’t they realise it is an honour to work for us the taxpaying general public? It should be their vocation and to ask for a catch up after years of pay freezes is just plain greedy and simply not on! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post I gave you my answer before, and I quote "As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?"
No it's not to complicated, I'm saying that they have already said why they haven't released the details of this. I suspect you don't agree with this statement and are of the opinion they may not be telling the truth. However you offer no evidence of this and as such you are just talking about your unsubstantiated opinion.
Or do you have actual evidence they might be lying and if so can you show this?
Mrs x
I will ask a different way…..
Why won’t they release the details for scrutiny I do not know, maybe it's for the reasons they have stated. Unless that is of course if you have any evidence to the contrary. Mrs x"How can I or anyone else know what is in the black hole or if there is a 22 billion black hole at all, if they wont share the detail. Strange that they are quick to point fingers and start brainwashing the public to the point that every labour minister or MP starts their monologue with, we have inherited a 22 billion black hole. You would think they would be straight out of the blocks, hanging the tory party out to dry with hard facts not hearsay. And here we are, their supporters lapping up every word and throwing their trust behind Starmer and his cohorts with no evidence to substantiate the claims. Ever had a feeling that the fiscal rules that we promised wouldn't be broken were broken within a month. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post I gave you my answer before, and I quote "As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?"
No it's not to complicated, I'm saying that they have already said why they haven't released the details of this. I suspect you don't agree with this statement and are of the opinion they may not be telling the truth. However you offer no evidence of this and as such you are just talking about your unsubstantiated opinion.
Or do you have actual evidence they might be lying and if so can you show this?
Mrs x
I will ask a different way…..
Why won’t they release the details for scrutiny I do not know, maybe it's for the reasons they have stated. Unless that is of course if you have any evidence to the contrary. Mrs x
How can I or anyone else know what is in the black hole or if there is a 22 billion black hole at all, if they wont share the detail.
Strange that they are quick to point fingers and start brainwashing the public to the point that every labour minister or MP starts their monologue with, we have inherited a 22 billion black hole. You would think they would be straight out of the blocks, hanging the tory party out to dry with hard facts not hearsay.
And here we are, their supporters lapping up every word and throwing their trust behind Starmer and his cohorts with no evidence to substantiate the claims.
Ever had a feeling that the fiscal rules that we promised wouldn't be broken were broken within a month. "You really do only have opinion don't you. At least when I don't know something I say so. Also you still haven't answered the 9bn question. So I'll ask it again, how much of the 9bn it cost Labour to settle the pay disputes would the Tories have spent to settle it? Eventually, if they'd stayed in power they'd have to have settled this, so not all of the 9bn was an over spend by Labour. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post I gave you my answer before, and I quote "As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?"
No it's not to complicated, I'm saying that they have already said why they haven't released the details of this. I suspect you don't agree with this statement and are of the opinion they may not be telling the truth. However you offer no evidence of this and as such you are just talking about your unsubstantiated opinion.
Or do you have actual evidence they might be lying and if so can you show this?
Mrs x
I will ask a different way…..
Why won’t they release the details for scrutiny I do not know, maybe it's for the reasons they have stated. Unless that is of course if you have any evidence to the contrary. Mrs x
How can I or anyone else know what is in the black hole or if there is a 22 billion black hole at all, if they wont share the detail.
Strange that they are quick to point fingers and start brainwashing the public to the point that every labour minister or MP starts their monologue with, we have inherited a 22 billion black hole. You would think they would be straight out of the blocks, hanging the tory party out to dry with hard facts not hearsay.
And here we are, their supporters lapping up every word and throwing their trust behind Starmer and his cohorts with no evidence to substantiate the claims.
Ever had a feeling that the fiscal rules that we promised wouldn't be broken were broken within a month. You really do only have opinion don't you.
At least when I don't know something I say so. Also you still haven't answered the 9bn question.
So I'll ask it again, how much of the 9bn it cost Labour to settle the pay disputes would the Tories have spent to settle it? Eventually, if they'd stayed in power they'd have to have settled this, so not all of the 9bn was an over spend by Labour.
Mrs x"You’re asking me a question that I can’t answer, for what reason? You’ve discussed everything except the actual question I asked, I will assume you blindly accept whatever comes out of Starmers mouth without question | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nortyair @NotMe your exchanges are starting to feel like I am watching some kind of interpretive dance! " Was, I’ve got nothing else to say | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nortyair @NotMe your exchanges are starting to feel like I am watching some kind of interpretive dance! Was, I’ve got nothing else to say "Aw shame, I wanted an encore | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nortyair @NotMe your exchanges are starting to feel like I am watching some kind of interpretive dance! Was, I’ve got nothing else to say
Aw shame, I wanted an encore "You had it at least 6 times, you’re being greedy 🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Tories had no incentive to solve public sector pay disputes because they knew they were toast. So just kicked it into the long grass to be the next (almost certain to be Labour) Govts problem. Job done
The tories would not give away that amount UK equity without guarantees to protect the tax payer and improve services / relations. Missed this one so that's the reason for the late entry... PPE anyone?, c"mon you have to agree that's another thorn in your opinion, it's almost comical if it didn't actually cost lives. Mrs x
You swerve the RCA and have avoided the question of why the labour party will not disclose how the 22 billion is made up.
Any ideas why they are keeping it a secret? Can you tell me what RCA means, having a blonde moment maybe. As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?
As for swerving, think it's a bit cheeky coming from someone who seems adept at 'drifting' round all the issues put to you but judging from your possible allegiences you will admire how the Tories are adept at this too,
Mrs x Are you ever going to say what you'd consider a fair pay rise, one the Tories would have agreed to, for the Railways or do you just have a hard on for saying 9bn without any further context?
Woul 8.5, 7.5, 2 bn or nothing at all have been acceptable to you? What about the Railways paying the Tories for the privilege of working for them?
Just in case you're missing it I'll say it for you 9bn lol, swerve that.
Mrs x
Is the answer to my question: why are the Labour Party refusing to supply the details of the 22 billion black hole, to complex a question, or are you not comfortable thinking about it ?
Apologies for acronyms in the last post I gave you my answer before, and I quote "As for the details of the 'hole' haven't Labour already said why they are mot going to release the details?
So if they have is it just their reasoning you object to?"
No it's not to complicated, I'm saying that they have already said why they haven't released the details of this. I suspect you don't agree with this statement and are of the opinion they may not be telling the truth. However you offer no evidence of this and as such you are just talking about your unsubstantiated opinion.
Or do you have actual evidence they might be lying and if so can you show this?
Mrs x
I will ask a different way…..
Why won’t they release the details for scrutiny I do not know, maybe it's for the reasons they have stated. Unless that is of course if you have any evidence to the contrary. Mrs x
How can I or anyone else know what is in the black hole or if there is a 22 billion black hole at all, if they wont share the detail.
Strange that they are quick to point fingers and start brainwashing the public to the point that every labour minister or MP starts their monologue with, we have inherited a 22 billion black hole. You would think they would be straight out of the blocks, hanging the tory party out to dry with hard facts not hearsay.
And here we are, their supporters lapping up every word and throwing their trust behind Starmer and his cohorts with no evidence to substantiate the claims.
Ever had a feeling that the fiscal rules that we promised wouldn't be broken were broken within a month. You really do only have opinion don't you.
At least when I don't know something I say so. Also you still haven't answered the 9bn question.
So I'll ask it again, how much of the 9bn it cost Labour to settle the pay disputes would the Tories have spent to settle it? Eventually, if they'd stayed in power they'd have to have settled this, so not all of the 9bn was an over spend by Labour.
Mrs x
You’re asking me a question that I can’t answer, for what reason?
You’ve discussed everything except the actual question I asked, I will assume you blindly accept whatever comes out of Starmers mouth without question "Because if you cannot answer it you don't know how much Labour overpaid. It's just another opinion on your behalf, yet you state 9bn as if that's the total over payment. You keep on about lots of stuff you don't have much evidence for, that's the reason I ask to hear you say you don't know. Anyway hurry up and we can move onto some Soft Shoe Shuffle now we've finished this interpretive dance, unless Birldn wants to cut in???? Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?"I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ. "Interesting. Just shows you…?!?!?! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ.
Interesting. Just shows you…?!?!?!"I've had both AZ and Pfizer, is something going to happen to me, do you know something I don't? Worried now... Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn't like starmer and didn't vote for him he's even worse than I thought and he's only been in 12 weeks?" Well a week is a long time in politics, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn't like starmer and didn't vote for him he's even worse than I thought and he's only been in 12 weeks?Well a week is a long time in politics, Mrs x" Well it's something I would have thought a labour government would have done Cringing at the thought of the October budget | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn't like starmer and didn't vote for him he's even worse than I thought and he's only been in 12 weeks?Well a week is a long time in politics, Mrs x" I mean I felt that he looked dodgy about being a bastard with the vulnerable in society so didn't vote for him but what he's done so far is fucking impressive in a really bad way | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger" Yep  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger" Wasn’t part of the argument for the rise being pay catch up (27% mentioned at one point) after three years of public sector pay austerity | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger Yep "If only the Tories hadn't done such a shit job with the economy, Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn't like starmer and didn't vote for him he's even worse than I thought and he's only been in 12 weeks?Well a week is a long time in politics, Mrs x Well it's something I would have thought a labour government would have done Cringing at the thought of the October budget " It’s a rob Peter pay Paul budget. I can’t see they can raise enough money for the big policy promises. Who’s paying for 300,000 council houses at £200k each | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger Yep If only the Tories hadn't done such a shit job with the economy,
Mrs x"The proof will be seen in time and it is looking pretty poor right now, labour have already spent billions they haven’t got on demands of unions that are now threatening further consequences if they don’t have their demands met. Broken their fiscal promise within 2 weeks of taking power, building firms pulling plans because of the governments attempt to force them into making 50% of houses affordable / social. Let’s see where we are in 5 years, he won’t be in power, the left wing are already undermining him, and his strong arm vote my way tactics will also backfire on him, enjoy while you can | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger" Nobody could see that coming could they! The naivety and resentment of this government and its supporters are breathtaking | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn't like starmer and didn't vote for him he's even worse than I thought and he's only been in 12 weeks?Well a week is a long time in politics, Mrs x Well it's something I would have thought a labour government would have done Cringing at the thought of the October budget It’s a rob Peter pay Paul budget. I can’t see they can raise enough money for the big policy promises. Who’s paying for 300,000 council houses at £200k each " It almost looks as though there was no real plan behind some of their big headline policies … | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger Yep If only the Tories hadn't done such a shit job with the economy,
Mrs x"It’s alright, the baddies are gone and your heroes are in power now, free clothes man will fix everything with a magic wand. Will probably get someone else to pay for the wand too. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ. "The vast vast majority of adults in this country were vaccinated. So it’s not exactly the scoop of the century to suggest that an individual was vaccinated, exact opposite in fact. And of zero relevance to this thread. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger Nobody could see that coming could they! The naivety and resentment of this government and its supporters are breathtaking " The strikes cost more to the country than giving big pay rises apparently and this was the reasoning for giving into the union's. Problem is that, with that information what is to stop them striking every year if they don't get inflation busting pay rises. I seem to remember a headline soon after the pay offers of SKS saying the union's should not expect this as the normal thing. Looks like the union's and the government could be on a collision course | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ.
The vast vast majority of adults in this country were vaccinated. So it’s not exactly the scoop of the century to suggest that an individual was vaccinated, exact opposite in fact. And of zero relevance to this thread. "Except to be fair, it was a slightly tangential set of posts related to Big Pharma and their involvement in healthcare and ethics and an assumption that, in this case me, those who had the covid vaccine funded big pharma. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ.
The vast vast majority of adults in this country were vaccinated. So it’s not exactly the scoop of the century to suggest that an individual was vaccinated, exact opposite in fact. And of zero relevance to this thread. "In the context of the discussion it has relevance, try reading. The person I was speaking to didn't seem to take any exception with me taking that line of discussion. Why do you think that is? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ.
The vast vast majority of adults in this country were vaccinated. So it’s not exactly the scoop of the century to suggest that an individual was vaccinated, exact opposite in fact. And of zero relevance to this thread.
Except to be fair, it was a slightly tangential set of posts related to Big Pharma and their involvement in healthcare and ethics and an assumption that, in this case me, those who had the covid vaccine funded big pharma."Cheers | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger Nobody could see that coming could they! The naivety and resentment of this government and its supporters are breathtaking The strikes cost more to the country than giving big pay rises apparently and this was the reasoning for giving into the union's. Problem is that, with that information what is to stop them striking every year if they don't get inflation busting pay rises. I seem to remember a headline soon after the pay offers of SKS saying the union's should not expect this as the normal thing. Looks like the union's and the government could be on a collision course " However, much of the UK population had some degree of sympathy for public sector workers who had endured below inflation pay rises and pay freezes, so coupled with inflation a real terms pay cut. Now that has been addressed, if they strike again they will have lost the sympathy of pretty much everyone! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger Nobody could see that coming could they! The naivety and resentment of this government and its supporters are breathtaking The strikes cost more to the country than giving big pay rises apparently and this was the reasoning for giving into the union's. Problem is that, with that information what is to stop them striking every year if they don't get inflation busting pay rises. I seem to remember a headline soon after the pay offers of SKS saying the union's should not expect this as the normal thing. Looks like the union's and the government could be on a collision course " That logic trains unions that all they have to do is hold up a convincing loaded gun, threaten sever disruption, and they can have whatever they want. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ.
The vast vast majority of adults in this country were vaccinated. So it’s not exactly the scoop of the century to suggest that an individual was vaccinated, exact opposite in fact. And of zero relevance to this thread.
In the context of the discussion it has relevance, try reading.
The person I was speaking to didn't seem to take any exception with me taking that line of discussion. Why do you think that is?"Why not just say what you think instead of these “why do you think that is?” - type questions? Just say what you think. Saves time | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ.
The vast vast majority of adults in this country were vaccinated. So it’s not exactly the scoop of the century to suggest that an individual was vaccinated, exact opposite in fact. And of zero relevance to this thread.
In the context of the discussion it has relevance, try reading.
The person I was speaking to didn't seem to take any exception with me taking that line of discussion. Why do you think that is?
Why not just say what you think instead of these “why do you think that is?” - type questions? Just say what you think. Saves time "Or you could ignore the posts that you are not interested in and leave others to discuss as they see fit? It works for me | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I didn't like starmer and didn't vote for him he's even worse than I thought and he's only been in 12 weeks?Well a week is a long time in politics, Mrs x Well it's something I would have thought a labour government would have done Cringing at the thought of the October budget It’s a rob Peter pay Paul budget. I can’t see they can raise enough money for the big policy promises. Who’s paying for 300,000 council houses at £200k each It almost looks as though there was no real plan behind some of their big headline policies … " This one in particular is laughable. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger Nobody could see that coming could they! The naivety and resentment of this government and its supporters are breathtaking The strikes cost more to the country than giving big pay rises apparently and this was the reasoning for giving into the union's. Problem is that, with that information what is to stop them striking every year if they don't get inflation busting pay rises. I seem to remember a headline soon after the pay offers of SKS saying the union's should not expect this as the normal thing. Looks like the union's and the government could be on a collision course However, much of the UK population had some degree of sympathy for public sector workers who had endured below inflation pay rises and pay freezes, so coupled with inflation a real terms pay cut. Now that has been addressed, if they strike again they will have lost the sympathy of pretty much everyone! " Possibly, but the reasons they gave were around the maths of the situation. Those maths will be the same at the next pay negotiations. Hopefully as you say, now the under payments have been addressed they will not use this again but the BMA have already stated that they expect above inflation rises in the future or there will be consequences. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Goldman sacks? Are you having a laugh, have a look at the corruption and dodgy deals It's not just them but other major financial institutions that agree Brexit is a shit show. Individual cases of misconduct don't change tge fact they are an internationally renowned firm within the financial sector. Or is that incorrect?
Mrs x
All depends on how you look at things, sacks, Blackstone, Pfizer etc if you think there reputable then upto you.
Me personally, think there a shower of shit, making wars, hands in governments and generally not doing anything for the common man
Apart from researching, developing and manufacturing life-changing medicines you mean?
Or making large profits selling dodgy goods knowing they have life changing side effects 🙄
I'll bet my house you didn't question covid 'vaccines', nor Pfizer or AZ at the time.
I did
You still helped them profit
How did I?
You didn't have your vaccinations?
Maybe, maybe not. But you should never assume
You had your vaccines for certain. Call it an 'educated guess'.Id that a bad thing? We have had all ours, Mrs x
I didn't say it was a bad thing. Birldn jumped in to answer something I posed to someone else.
Context here is important.
I thought you’d left this hanging. Genuinely interested why you came to the conclusion that I must have had the Covid vaccines. Based on what?
I came to the conclusion knowing your posts over a period of time. Whether correct or not, it gives me an impression of people. I get the impression you would've had your AZ.
The vast vast majority of adults in this country were vaccinated. So it’s not exactly the scoop of the century to suggest that an individual was vaccinated, exact opposite in fact. And of zero relevance to this thread.
In the context of the discussion it has relevance, try reading.
The person I was speaking to didn't seem to take any exception with me taking that line of discussion. Why do you think that is?
Why not just say what you think instead of these “why do you think that is?” - type questions? Just say what you think. Saves time "2 days in a row you've needed ahit explaining to you, it's not going very well is it? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The junior doctors have accepted the 22% pay rise. However the BMA have said that they expect above inflation pay rises in future years and threaten consequences if that does not happen. That black hole might be getting bigger Nobody could see that coming could they! The naivety and resentment of this government and its supporters are breathtaking The strikes cost more to the country than giving big pay rises apparently and this was the reasoning for giving into the union's. Problem is that, with that information what is to stop them striking every year if they don't get inflation busting pay rises. I seem to remember a headline soon after the pay offers of SKS saying the union's should not expect this as the normal thing. Looks like the union's and the government could be on a collision course That logic trains unions that all they have to do is hold up a convincing loaded gun, threaten sever disruption, and they can have whatever they want. " Was not having a pay rise for years what they really wanted, because that's what they got from the Tories. Labour has just redressed the situation, don't you think? Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance Or not send over 11 billion abroad or stop millipede spaffing 8 billion on wind farms for private investors to make money out of
What is the £11b sent overseas..?
For so called climate emergency
Just reading up on that. The money was pledged by Boris Johnson at the Cop summit in Glasgow. "just because the idiot Johnson promised it, doesn’t mean to say you have to act on it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If labour taxed the top 1% by another 1% that woul bring in 25bn = black hole gone without taking the winter fuel allowance And if they hadn't given ridiculous pay rises to the world and his wife the black hole would be half the size" People deserve to be paid, and if you want a country to succeed you need a transport system. It's fairy straight forward economics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
