Get the guillotines out
Theresa May's Conservatives
Jeremy Corbyn's Labour
Tim Farron's Liberal Democrats
Paul Nuttall's UKIP
2 people's Greens
Nicholas Durgeon's Scottish Nationalists
Satan's Sinn Fein
Dr Ian Paisley's DUP
Some other bunch of nonces
I'm foreign, but I wish I were an Englishman
Get the guillotines out
Is it bad that 'price-adjusted' things stay about the same over time?
What is the point of these useless cunts?
The tories will do a big giveaway budget next spring and labour will lose the election.
I'm not sure why people on 90k a year need free childcare to be fair. As long as they don't cut it to 20k or something I'm not really seeing the problem.
London is probably the answer.
The answer to London is "fuck 'em".
I guess the idea is to encourage people to stay in work (or at least make the choice financially viable).
Even for people earning decent money, childcare is so expensive that they are financially better off staying off work to look after the kids.
It absolutely is for people on normal wages and I fully support funded childcare, probably up to 50k. Beyond that they shouldn't need any help and the financial burden of giving up work has to be far beyond that of childcare.
One of the registrar's at work was saying their childcare for two kids (he's also a doctor) costs half her monthly wage. Financially, cutting her hours significantly would benefit them.
Having parents in full time work by subsidising child care is a no brainier.
Big Liz Truss wanted to make childcare cheaper by relaxing staffing ratios before the WEF nobbled her. Yet another government-induced shortage.
Are you talking about a single wage here? The 90k figure is household income. Two 45k a year earners in London (or the south east in general) really doesn't seem ridiculously wealthy.Originally Posted by Spikey M
But again, it all comes down to property prices in this stupid fucking country. They'd be well off if housing wasn't insanely expensive.
https://committees.parliament.uk/pub...97199/default/
The Partygate report has been published, with the last section being an absolute scandal. The bloke should go to jail, never mind prevented from returning to politics.
In the light of Mr Johnson’s further contempts, we put on record that if he had not
resigned his seat, we would have recommended that he be suspended from the service
of the House for 90 days for repeated contempts and for seeking to undermine the
parliamentary process, by:
• Deliberately misleading the House
• Deliberately misleading the Committee
• Breaching confidence
• Impugning the Committee and thereby undermining the democratic process
of the House
• Being complicit in the campaign of abuse and attempted intimidation of the
Committee.
In view of the fact that Mr Johnson is no longer a Member, we recommend that he
should not be granted a former Member’s pass.
Which he's obviously still doing. There's a level of desperation which suggests all is not well chez lui.
As with the US there seems to be a complete lack of proper process for taking people to task when they abuse the power of their office, which for my money should be punished as seriously as white collar crime. That seems to suggest "he's resigned, oh well".
He deserves to be finished for being a shit Prime Minister and all round waste of time, but it is a stitch-up that wouldn't pass any sort of actual legal standards. 'Impugning the Committee and thereby undermining the democratic process of the House' is like something from Turkey. As with America, if you start making this shit up on the spot to get people you don't like, it will eventually blow up in your own face - which is why normally you don't.
It's not the 'parties', it's the fact that he's lied about everything at every turn.
His client journo twats need to take a look at themselves. Tom Harwood, I'm looking at you, and your allegedly ravaged arsehole.
Yikes.
You shouldn’t be able to continually lie while being Prime Minister and the only ‘punishment’ be to lose that role and then your seat. Likewise in the US you shouldn’t be able to incite a riot. There’s no making things up here, it’s about as black and white as it gets.
It's shit all the way down as far as procedure goes, but there are instances where the police didn't find anything to sanction him for, but the committee has decided that they ought to have done, so they have instead. I know people don't like Boris Johnson, but if they can't picture how that precedent could come to be abused then they are stupid.
You’re disingenuously conflating the legal matter of gatherings and continually lying to parliament. They’re not the same thing.
Maybe because the Privileges Committee rules on contempt of parliament and the police rule on the law?
The committee has decided that he lied about things that the police were unable to pass a verdict on. Would you accept that in your job?
There is a higher evidential threshold for charging someone with a crime than there is for ruling that they lied to Parliament. Doesn't mean either set of people is wrong.
He lied and said ‘all rules were followed at all times’ and that he was assured of this, therefore the second anyone was found guilty of having attended a party he lied. Plenty were thus he lied.
Also he was never assured that the rules were followed and was actually told not to say that.
The police wouldn't have found him guilty of breaking Acoba's rules...
Rates rise to 5%, compare and contrast the response from the two opposition parties.
Labour:
Lib Dems:Today's rate rise creates an "incredibly worrying time" for many families, says Rachel Reeves.
Labour's shadow chancellor says increased mortgage repayments will "heap even more pain on ordinary working families".
Reeves says if she was chancellor she would instruct banks to support customers, for example by moving them onto interest-only products, extending their mortgage or by halting repossessions for six months.
On state support for mortgage holders, Reeves says given the high rate of inflation, "lots of untargeted fiscal support from the government is not the right response".
You can tell which of these is a serious party aspiring to government and which is a childish fucking joke of an organisation.Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey has given his reaction to the interest rate rise.
He says it will "scar family finances for years to come - all because this Conservative government crashed the economy and sent mortgages spiralling".
He argues “homeowners are being treated as collateral damage".
“Rishi Sunak needs to provide targeted support to those hardest hit, instead of cruelly standing by as people worry about keeping a roof over their head," he says.
The Conservatives were fucked before but this could decimate them. Although it’s the BofE’s fuck up they’ve effectively left them to it when they should have been giving a steer in my opinion. Base rate at 6% will mean mortgage rates start at 7% and there is going to be a recession, making everyone skint a year before an election is not a good move.
Last edited by Luke Emia; 22-06-2023 at 05:44 PM.
Yeah, they're pretty much boned either way, unusually for them they've probably actually taken the right decision in the national interest to hit mortgage payers where it hurts with interest rates rather than hitting everyone including the destitute with runaway inflation. However, it's going to cost them more acutely at the ballot box as that's all their voters.
The thing is though if the bank had been more hawkish in mid 2021 a lot of this could have been headed off. Banging up the rate then to 3% would have caused short term pain but it would have meant rates would have had to go nowhere near as high as they will have to go now.
Instead they continued to print money and just chucked petrol on the fire.
There’s been other acts of self sabotage though. Brexit no matter what you think of it has meant that the £ has traded about 10% lower against the $ for the last 7 years. When everything is paid for in dollars that’s an issue and that’s without even taking into account Truss doing to her best to make it 1 to 1.
Furlough was far too generous for the majority of people it should have been capped at 50% of salary seeing as you couldn’t fucking spend any money and the money wasted on the energy guarantee is horrendous.
People have to learn that everytime there is an issue they can’t just be bailed out by the state but this course of action seems a strange time to decide to do it if you want to do any good in an election.
It's not just mortgage payers though, is it?
Furlough I don't think was political but was just the state as a whole shitting its pants. You'd have needed the very strongest and clearest-minded of leaders not to succumb to the emotional depth charges at the time.
Either way it's preferable to turbo-juicing food and energy prices to save mortgage holders.
No it’s not but this is another government caused situation as well. For years they didn’t want to be landlords so encouraged buy to let(this was a Labour thing as well). Now that interest rates are rising homeowners won’t rent a house out at a loss this rents increase.
I’m not saying here that lots of landlords aren’t pricks it’s just that the way housing has been managed for the past 30 years has created this rental market.
Shut up Boydy, it only affects everyone with a home, what's the problem?
Interest rates stay at 0% for 15 years to bail out the people who fucked everything over in the first place: I sleep. Normal people get a few grand: This has caused the greatest economic fiasco in the history of this country.
Genuine question: Why is the framing that everyone who owns a home is affected? Does everyone in the UK have a variable rate mortgage?
Surely, fixed rate mortgage holders don’t see any change. New mortgages drop as some entrants decide to defer until home values drop enough to make a mortgage worth it. Similar interest rate changes in the US have led to falling home values even in markets like Seattle and Phoenix.
So why is it being discussed as a given that all mortgage holders are suddenly paying more? I’m curious because it seems an odd framing but I won’t pretend to understand UK mortgage structures which could account for it.
Most people in the UK fix for 2 or maybe 5 years (some might do 10 but 2 and 5 are most common). That's a lot of people iver the this year and next that will be rolling off very low interest rate deals and having to renew on much higher rate deals.
We don't have fixed lifetime mortgages like the US has.
And some people will be on tracker rates or their lender's standard variable rate.
That’s the answer then, thanks. We have all of those products as well as fixed rates.
I just expect stories like this to be framed by the recession risk of business investment shifting to inventory, weak consumer demand, job cuts, and so on.
And infinite land and houses made of cardboard.
Meh, for all of us west of the Mississippi, we just get to blame everything on migrating Californians.
These people complaining about wages being too high (currently lower than 2008) need to be rounded up and killed. Would lower inflation by 2-3%
I genuinely think a recession is the least of our worries with this. With the way it's going, if the BoE keep doing this, they're going to crash the housing market.
Oh no.
If you think that's actually a good thing, I can't really help you.
It’s not going to crash per se. There isn’t enough housing stock to crash it.
Given that this inflation is not born from rampant consumer spending, why would putting them up to 3% have made any difference whatsoever? Unless the BoE actually want people to be priced out of buying food, I can't see how this strategy has a hope in hell of ever working.
As someone who moved into the working world the year of the largest recession in 100 years and saw the system not only do nothing about it but double down on exactly the same shit that got them into that position in the first place. I could not give one iota of a fuck. What are they going to do? Stagnate wages some more? Give more money to the people who already have it?
Bit like my view on PIF really, so fair, I guess.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote