|
Post by supergas on Apr 26, 2024 10:02:48 GMT
I read the other day that the new President has just generated the first quarterly budget surplus in 16 years - his austerity plan to pay back the $44bn IMF loan seems to have started well...it turns out that you can fire a load of civil servants and things will actually improve... I wonder what the impact on the population has been? Or will be? These are not "single entry" decisions. He won 56% of the vote and has started to do exactly what he said he would do (and get the results he said he would get). But it's a difficult job - the country was in a complete state and needed huge economic reform - so whilst he's made a good start I guess it probably won't be smooth sailing over the next few years...
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Apr 26, 2024 10:11:12 GMT
You can judge her how you like. But it's one thing to judge and believe something, based on the story/evidence thus far, and another thing to then question whether she's the type of person you want in government, based on the situation. But then you can't talk about how you're always measured and considered in judgement and approach. Can't have it both ways. What type of politician do you want in office? Are you happy with the law breaking, racism, scandals and lying? I don't remember seeing your posts and/or research into the Tories at the time? It's the double-standards I have the biggest issue with. She has time and time again tried (and sometimes succeeded) to ruin the career of other politicians based on allegations of misconduct that often lead nowhere. She hounded Nadhim Zahawi for what HMRC concluded was a mistake (still her best defence but unlikely she can now fall back on it), as well as accusing him of avoiding the media to explain himself (and she is definitely guilty of that). Jill Mortimer (a Conservative candidate for MP in a Labour-held seat) is my favourite example...Rayner demanded Mortimer publish her full tax returns after reading about her "interests" in the Caymen Islands - but it seems Rayner mis-read her bio, Mortimer was working for the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority, effectively stopping tax avoidance/evasion and (unlike Rayner) has no aspirations of high office where her boss would force her to publish her tax returns.... There's no need for me to post on Conservatives breaking the rules. Plenty of others will jump at the chance to do that (although I will continue to call out any false accusations made) - and I will call out the deafening silence from the left when one of their own is accused of what now looks like a series of deliberate lies to personally profit to the tune of tens of thousands of pounds.... I'm surprised you're exaggerating so much tbh. "ruin careers"? Give me a break. She called out politicians for mistakes, as they all do to each other, so don't be daft. And that often lead to nowhere? Do you really consider Zahawi's £5m tax mistake "nothing"? The last part is interesting though. Because as stuart mentioned that earlier that at least 3 of us have agreed that she has questions to answer. And if she's proved to be 'guilty' then she should resign, as she has actually said she will. But you keep bringing it up, over and over. I'm not sure how much there is to discuss until the police come out with their findings? You have the biggest issue with double standards. But you've found her guilty before anything comes out, you admittedly refuse to post on Tories breaking the rules, and I noticed your deafening silence about the Tory criticism, which is ironic because you've just said how you'll call out the deafening silence from the left. But hey, I guess double-standards only count when its the other side right?
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Apr 26, 2024 10:33:39 GMT
I'm surprised you're exaggerating so much tbh. "ruin careers"? Give me a break. She called out politicians for mistakes, as they all do to each other, so don't be daft. And that often lead to nowhere? Do you really consider Zahawi's £5m tax mistake "nothing"? The last part is interesting though. Because as stuart mentioned that earlier that at least 3 of us have agreed that she has questions to answer. And if she's proved to be 'guilty' then she should resign, as she has actually said she will. But you keep bringing it up, over and over. I'm not sure how much there is to discuss until the police come out with their findings? You have the biggest issue with double standards. But you've found her guilty before anything comes out, you admittedly refuse to post on Tories breaking the rules, and I noticed your deafening silence about the Tory criticism, which is ironic because you've just said how you'll call out the deafening silence from the left. But hey, I guess double-standards only count when its the other side right? I'm not convinced it's exaggerating to call out Labour's attacker-in-chief when she is accused of breaking the rules herself. Incidentally she's also dodged many other things in the past (like beer-gate), as well as repeatedly verbally abusing political opponents, so I'm not worried about giving her a hard time over these far more serious accusations. The accusations she made against Mortimer were a baseless political attack because well before she was a political candidate she used to work in the Caymen Islands. The *only* accusation of tax avoidance came from Rayner and that was basically because she read "...Conservative candidate..." and "...Caymen Islands..." in the same news report... Also, I didn't refuse to post on Tories breaking the rules, I just pointed out plenty of others already do it so there's no point me doing so as well. For the record when serious accusations are made, I 100% agree that those in positions of power should answer the accusations and (if guilty of misconduct) resign and face any legal or financial penalties. This has become a story for a few reasons - mostly Rayner not following her own advice. If it was a mistake over Capital Gains Tax you admit it, pay the fine and move on. But instead we had six weeks avoiding the media, a couple of car-crash interviews and it was *only* at that point that mainstream media like the BBC/ITV/Sky (who must have already been aware) started to even cover it. If it was the Conservative Deputy Leader it would have been breaking news six weeks earlier....
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Apr 26, 2024 11:21:42 GMT
I'm surprised you're exaggerating so much tbh. "ruin careers"? Give me a break. She called out politicians for mistakes, as they all do to each other, so don't be daft. And that often lead to nowhere? Do you really consider Zahawi's £5m tax mistake "nothing"? The last part is interesting though. Because as stuart mentioned that earlier that at least 3 of us have agreed that she has questions to answer. And if she's proved to be 'guilty' then she should resign, as she has actually said she will. But you keep bringing it up, over and over. I'm not sure how much there is to discuss until the police come out with their findings? You have the biggest issue with double standards. But you've found her guilty before anything comes out, you admittedly refuse to post on Tories breaking the rules, and I noticed your deafening silence about the Tory criticism, which is ironic because you've just said how you'll call out the deafening silence from the left. But hey, I guess double-standards only count when its the other side right? I'm not convinced it's exaggerating to call out Labour's attacker-in-chief when she is accused of breaking the rules herself. Incidentally she's also dodged many other things in the past (like beer-gate), as well as repeatedly verbally abusing political opponents, so I'm not worried about giving her a hard time over these far more serious accusations. The accusations she made against Mortimer were a baseless political attack because well before she was a political candidate she used to work in the Caymen Islands. The *only* accusation of tax avoidance came from Rayner and that was basically because she read "...Conservative candidate..." and "...Caymen Islands..." in the same news report... Also, I didn't refuse to post on Tories breaking the rules, I just pointed out plenty of others already do it so there's no point me doing so as well. For the record when serious accusations are made, I 100% agree that those in positions of power should answer the accusations and (if guilty of misconduct) resign and face any legal or financial penalties. This has become a story for a few reasons - mostly Rayner not following her own advice. If it was a mistake over Capital Gains Tax you admit it, pay the fine and move on. But instead we had six weeks avoiding the media, a couple of car-crash interviews and it was *only* at that point that mainstream media like the BBC/ITV/Sky (who must have already been aware) started to even cover it. If it was the Conservative Deputy Leader it would have been breaking news six weeks earlier.... I'm not saying its exaggerating calling her out. I'm saying that it's exaggerating to accuse her of trying to ruin careers. Politicians call each other out and to resign pretty much daily - so I think your comment is warped. You kinda did refuse really. I asked for you to weigh in on what type of politician you'd want (considering you questioned whether Rayer is the type we'd vote for) whilst asking whether you were happy with the standards of the controversies from the party you vote for... I agree with you on her not following her own advice, but that's only really become a story for the right, who're desperate for any type of win at the moment. I don't think the majority really care (as backed up by the polls) whether a politician calls for someone to resign and then doesn't resign, especially when she has vowed to resign if found guilty, something you've all seemed to ignore. I'm not sure she'd been avoiding the media perse, she obviously did whilst she sought advice which is fair enough, and then she held an interview. Tbf, that interview hardly helped the situation, but its not like she's been hiding in a fridge. On the final note, you're not comparing apples with apples. One is in power, the other isn't. The one in power will (and should) always be the main story.
|
|
|
Post by oldie on Apr 26, 2024 11:29:26 GMT
I wonder what the impact on the population has been? Or will be? These are not "single entry" decisions. He won 56% of the vote and has started to do exactly what he said he would do (and get the results he said he would get). But it's a difficult job - the country was in a complete state and needed huge economic reform - so whilst he's made a good start I guess it probably won't be smooth sailing over the next few years... A bit like Brexit with 52%> But that's avoiding my point. You celebrating the numbers but ignoring the social impacts
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Apr 26, 2024 14:35:35 GMT
"Rishi Sunak has hailed the arrival of pay day with a reminder his government's additional National Insurance tax cut kicks in this month for the first time. At last month's budget, the chancellor announced NI will be cut by a further 2p - so some workers will pay 8% of their earnings instead of the 12% if was before autumn. The prime minister has repeated his claim this will be worth £900 for someone on the average UK salary. While this additional cut - on top of the previous 2p cut in January - does equate to £900 for those on average full-time earnings of £35,000, there are two key issues with Mr Sunak's claim: Once the effect of all income tax changes since 2021 are taken into account, the Institute for Fiscal Studies reports an average earner will benefit from a tax cut of £340 - far less than £900; Moreover, anyone earning less than £26,000 or between £55,000-£131,000 will ultimately be worse off. In short, this is because NI cuts are more than offset by other tax rises." news.sky.com/story/money-latest-consumer-personal-finance-mortgages-sky-news-blog-13040934?postid=7588301#liveblog-body
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Apr 27, 2024 17:39:49 GMT
Just when Sunak thought he was getting through a difficult time. "Dr Poulter said he would sit as a Labour MP until the general election and then stand down." www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68913287
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Apr 27, 2024 18:45:06 GMT
Just when Sunak thought he was getting through a difficult time. "Dr Poulter said he would sit as a Labour MP until the general election and then stand down." www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68913287In before France & Super…. He was a sh** golfer anyway 🙄😂
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Apr 27, 2024 21:17:45 GMT
Just when Sunak thought he was getting through a difficult time. "Dr Poulter said he would sit as a Labour MP until the general election and then stand down." www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68913287I can sort of understand Tories defecting to Reform, and I expect those on the other forum can easily imagine Labour MPs defecting to the Workers Revolutionary Party, but I can never quite see how the bridge between Tory and Labour is crossed so easily. I suppose I'm old school and in reality the differences are not so great these days, despite the odd maverick like Corbyn or Truss still popping up.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Apr 27, 2024 23:01:44 GMT
Just when Sunak thought he was getting through a difficult time. "Dr Poulter said he would sit as a Labour MP until the general election and then stand down." www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68913287I can sort of understand Tories defecting to Reform, and I expect those on the other forum can easily imagine Labour MPs defecting to the Workers Revolutionary Party, but I can never quite see how the bridge between Tory and Labour is crossed so easily. I suppose I'm old school and in reality the differences are not so great these days, despite the odd maverick like Corbyn or Truss still popping up. It went on a lot in the past too, Churchill defected twice, and on my lifetime several in the 80s and 90s. There probably isn't a great deal between the left leaning One Nation Tories and the 'Blair' wing of Labour. If both parties could jettison the more loony fringe then we'd probably have a more pragmatic House of Commons.
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Apr 28, 2024 8:45:56 GMT
I'm not convinced it's exaggerating to call out Labour's attacker-in-chief when she is accused of breaking the rules herself. Incidentally she's also dodged many other things in the past (like beer-gate), as well as repeatedly verbally abusing political opponents, so I'm not worried about giving her a hard time over these far more serious accusations. The accusations she made against Mortimer were a baseless political attack because well before she was a political candidate she used to work in the Caymen Islands. The *only* accusation of tax avoidance came from Rayner and that was basically because she read "...Conservative candidate..." and "...Caymen Islands..." in the same news report... Also, I didn't refuse to post on Tories breaking the rules, I just pointed out plenty of others already do it so there's no point me doing so as well. For the record when serious accusations are made, I 100% agree that those in positions of power should answer the accusations and (if guilty of misconduct) resign and face any legal or financial penalties. This has become a story for a few reasons - mostly Rayner not following her own advice. If it was a mistake over Capital Gains Tax you admit it, pay the fine and move on. But instead we had six weeks avoiding the media, a couple of car-crash interviews and it was *only* at that point that mainstream media like the BBC/ITV/Sky (who must have already been aware) started to even cover it. If it was the Conservative Deputy Leader it would have been breaking news six weeks earlier.... I'm not saying its exaggerating calling her out. I'm saying that it's exaggerating to accuse her of trying to ruin careers. Politicians call each other out and to resign pretty much daily - so I think your comment is warped. You kinda did refuse really. I asked for you to weigh in on what type of politician you'd want (considering you questioned whether Rayer is the type we'd vote for) whilst asking whether you were happy with the standards of the controversies from the party you vote for... I agree with you on her not following her own advice, but that's only really become a story for the right, who're desperate for any type of win at the moment. I don't think the majority really care (as backed up by the polls) whether a politician calls for someone to resign and then doesn't resign, especially when she has vowed to resign if found guilty, something you've all seemed to ignore. I'm not sure she'd been avoiding the media perse, she obviously did whilst she sought advice which is fair enough, and then she held an interview. Tbf, that interview hardly helped the situation, but its not like she's been hiding in a fridge. On the final note, you're not comparing apples with apples. One is in power, the other isn't. The one in power will (and should) always be the main story. If you think she has never tried to ruin careers over petty political points scoring then maybe go back and look at who she has accused over the last six years since she became a senior Labour Party figure (and what she has accused them of). My comment about the 'type of person we want in government' wasn't me suggesting I have a better idea for getting better quality in there - it was me pointing out that politicians on all sides should be held to the same standards and that's clearly not happening in her case. If she's still in position when Labour win the General Election she gets elected by 25,000-ish people in Ashton-under-Lyne but immediately becomes one of the most powerful people in the UK government. Yes, she was avoiding the media. On average until January this year she would average serious 3-4 media interviews and a variety of photo-ops every week on a variety of topics across her portfolio. For her to go six weeks without a single scheduled appearance is definitely her hiding. The tax advice she sought is basically irrelevant anyway - it will tell her what she should have done, not what she actually did so the real work was figuring out how those two things overlap... She is apples. She's being prepared to take high-office in the government of one of the world's leading countries. You can do that after making mistakes, but it's much harder to justify if there was a huge cover-up to make a personal financial gain...
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Apr 28, 2024 18:11:11 GMT
I'm not saying its exaggerating calling her out. I'm saying that it's exaggerating to accuse her of trying to ruin careers. Politicians call each other out and to resign pretty much daily - so I think your comment is warped. You kinda did refuse really. I asked for you to weigh in on what type of politician you'd want (considering you questioned whether Rayer is the type we'd vote for) whilst asking whether you were happy with the standards of the controversies from the party you vote for... I agree with you on her not following her own advice, but that's only really become a story for the right, who're desperate for any type of win at the moment. I don't think the majority really care (as backed up by the polls) whether a politician calls for someone to resign and then doesn't resign, especially when she has vowed to resign if found guilty, something you've all seemed to ignore. I'm not sure she'd been avoiding the media perse, she obviously did whilst she sought advice which is fair enough, and then she held an interview. Tbf, that interview hardly helped the situation, but its not like she's been hiding in a fridge. On the final note, you're not comparing apples with apples. One is in power, the other isn't. The one in power will (and should) always be the main story. If you think she has never tried to ruin careers over petty political points scoring then maybe go back and look at who she has accused over the last six years since she became a senior Labour Party figure (and what she has accused them of). My comment about the 'type of person we want in government' wasn't me suggesting I have a better idea for getting better quality in there - it was me pointing out that politicians on all sides should be held to the same standards and that's clearly not happening in her case. If she's still in position when Labour win the General Election she gets elected by 25,000-ish people in Ashton-under-Lyne but immediately becomes one of the most powerful people in the UK government. Yes, she was avoiding the media. On average until January this year she would average serious 3-4 media interviews and a variety of photo-ops every week on a variety of topics across her portfolio. For her to go six weeks without a single scheduled appearance is definitely her hiding. The tax advice she sought is basically irrelevant anyway - it will tell her what she should have done, not what she actually did so the real work was figuring out how those two things overlap... She is apples. She's being prepared to take high-office in the government of one of the world's leading countries. You can do that after making mistakes, but it's much harder to justify if there was a huge cover-up to make a personal financial gain... It's your accusation of the career wrecker, not mine. The two examples you gave were in no way career wrecking, she called people out. One she was right to and the other she got wrong. If you want your point proved correct, the burden of proof is on you. As for politicians being held by the same standards, the is nonsense. Those in government should absolutely be held to a higher standard, and I will gladly hold Labour to even higher standards when/if they win the election. On the other hand the Tories, particularly under Boris' leadership, have not been held to anywhere near the same standards of any previous government IMO. What they're been allowed to do, say, and get away with is an absolute farce. But let me test your logic on "politicians on all sides". Would you be as outraged and posting so much on here if this was the leader of the monster raving loony party? I very much doubt it, which proves my point that the higher you go in power, the more serious it should be taken. Yes, we should take Rayner seriously. And we are. I've said before she should go if proven guilty and she needs to clear this up. But you cannot compare (IMO) a party in power Vs a party not in power. Your 2nd paragraph is kind of pointless really, she's said she'll resign if found guilty. So either she did nothing wrong and becomes deputy PM (so what's the problem) or she is proven wrong and resigns. On your final point, again, as above. She said she'll resign if she's proven wrong. You seemed to be more bothered by this than the Sun newspaper tbh.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Apr 28, 2024 18:19:07 GMT
So, July then? 🤔
Favourite amongst pundits seems to still be the Autumn with the week after the US elections most likely.
I guess so much depends on how Sunak reacts to the probable fallout from Tuesday's local elections.
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Apr 28, 2024 18:44:43 GMT
So, July then? 🤔 Favourite amongst pundits seems to still be the Autumn with the week after the US elections most likely. I guess so much depends on how Sunak reacts to the probable fallout from Tuesday's local elections. How many seats do you think they’ll lose ? 400 seems to be the guess but that in its self would surely be curtains for him 🤔
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Apr 28, 2024 19:09:05 GMT
So, July then? 🤔 Favourite amongst pundits seems to still be the Autumn with the week after the US elections most likely. I guess so much depends on how Sunak reacts to the probable fallout from Tuesday's local elections. How many seats do you think they’ll lose ? 400 seems to be the guess but that in its self would surely be curtains for him 🤔 1000 seats for each Labour and the Conservatives, isn't it? Depends on turnout, 400 could be a good shout. There are several metro mayor elections in the North, that could be interesting in terms of rebuilding the Red Wall.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Apr 29, 2024 8:23:19 GMT
Scottish First minister to resign shortly.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Apr 29, 2024 8:23:56 GMT
"More than three million disabled people are facing an overhaul to benefit payments, under plans that will be unveiled by the government later. Reforms to personal independence payments (PIP) could include stopping cash payments, and instead offering claimants one-off grants for things like home adaptations. The government says the benefits bill is rising at an "unsustainable rate" and needs to be overhauled to ensure help gets to the people who need it most. The disability charity Scope described it as a "reckless assault on disabled people". PIP is a non-means-tested benefit paid to working-age people to help with extra living costs caused by long-term disabilities or ill health. The most recent statistics, external say more than 3.3 million people in Britain receive PIP to help with the extra cost of living with a health condition or disability. How much people are given depends on how difficult they find everyday tasks and getting around. The maximum weekly payment is £184.30. The cash can be used for things like special diets, clothing, additional laundry or cleaning and accessible taxis or fuel to get to hospital appointments. The government has said spending on PIPs was expected to grow by 52% from 2023/24 to £32.8bn by 2027/28." www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0ry09d50wo
|
|
|
Post by yattongas on Apr 29, 2024 9:47:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by DrFaustus on Apr 29, 2024 10:28:43 GMT
Scottish First minister to resign shortly. SNP has been in turmoil ever since the "missing money" scandal. For a few years before, all was going well, post Salmond and his wayward behaviour. Labour must be loving all this.
|
|
|
Post by stuart1974 on Apr 29, 2024 10:32:10 GMT
They spent a fortune converting an RAF plane to do this. 🤔
|
|