• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

Even someone on minimum wage, having to take government handouts to make ends meet, can find someone in the world somewhere worse off than them.

All I can say is that I don't think the public perception of that salary matches reality. In the South East, the mortgage on a modest family home will take a large chunk of that. It's not enough to pay for decent schooling, holidays need to be saved for, cars bought with loans, etc. If something in the house breaks and needs fixing it still hits your finances and means missing out on other stuff.

At that salary, life isn't massively different than for most, just fewer financial concerns. Nicer house, cars and holidays, etc. but it's not fois gras and Ferarris. Back when our total household income was around £80k, my wife was a teacher in a rather poor area. Half of the kids there, living in council houses had parents with significantly more expendable income than we did. Consoles for Christmas, Florida holidays every year, etc.

Yet the impression our Shadow Chancellor would have you take home is that people on that salary are sitting on piles of cash, that they have excess income that isn't needed by them - so why not cycle it through the waste machine that is our government's grubby pockets? Why not take away the money they work so hard for and fritter it away on whatever pointless scheme some ladder climbing civil servant has dreamt up and made flavour of the month?

If Labour want to tax the rich, fine - it's the cost of people being stupid enough to vote in a Labour government. But their targets are set far too low - by more than half.

I get it. And agree 80k is not rich in today's world. It's very comfortable. But expenditure grows to meet whatever people earn generally. Still think its a galss half empty or full debate ultimately. Can either lament not being a Gazillionaire or use what you have well. Could go and make more money, but don't forget to have time to spend and enjoy it.
 
I get it. And agree 80k is not rich in today's world. It's very comfortable. But expenditure grows to meet whatever people earn generally. Still think its a galss half empty or full debate ultimately. Can either lament not being a Gazillionaire or use what you have well. Could go and make more money, but don't forget to have time to spend and enjoy it.
There's that assumption again - that people have spare income. That's not always the case at any salary level - not when you're talking about taxing average, working people.
 
I was in Lidl yesterday, and was trying to take note of potential issues in their stock.

A huge amount of it is from UK based producers, certainly enough that I dont think the shelves will be empty come April.
I posted on here a little while ago about what was in a Waitrose shopping basket and where it had come from. There's no need for any of that to be stopped or slowed by brexit.
 
I posted on here a little while ago about what was in a Waitrose shopping basket and where it had come from. There's no need for any of that to be stopped or slowed by brexit.

There are of course items we dont produce here, that would likely become more expensive, but so far as I can see thats not really a huge drama.

We could be forced into being prudent with luxury items like wines or cheeses.

We might find there are items that are more expensive.

Equally we might find some produce becomes cheaper as shops are forced to use local suppliers.

And, ultimately, if the "cost" is a seasonal diet for those who cant afford lettuce year round, is that so bad?
 
We might even get the nice-tasting Round Lettices back that you used to get in the 80s, but which don't keep well enough for long distribution chains; rather than the cardboard-tasting Iceberg crap we get now

Actually dont recal the last time I ate iceberg lettuce, let alone bought it. I usually go for the rocket/spinach type leaves.

Or we could buy them cheaper from the 85% of the world that doesn't then have to pay customs union tariffs. There will be cheaper lamb for instance, as all the worlds main lamb producers are outside the EU

Shhhh! Dont forget there can be no positives!
 
There's that assumption again - that people have spare income. That's not always the case at any salary level - not when you're talking about taxing average, working people.

Expenditure is not fixed! Therefore spare income is not fixed, and isn't a measure of wealth. People adapt to what they earn. You could make 3 million a year but spend it all and have no spare income. If you were taxed a millon of the 3 you made each year, you'd adapt wouldn't you?
 
Boris Johnson: Theresa May will win 'full-throated' support if she secures Brexit 'freedom clause' from Brussels

Theresa May is planning to fight for a "freedom clause" from Brussels in a move that will win the "full-throated" support of the entire nation if she succeeds, Boris Johnson says.

Writing in The Telegraph, the former Foreign Secretary says he has heard "from the lips of very senior
sources" that the Prime Minister is planning to go to Brussels and renegotiate the Northern Ireland customs backstop.

Describing the plans as "unadulterated good Brexit news", he says an exit mechanism or sunset clause will "defuse the booby trap" and give the UK a "way out" to negotiate a Canada-style trade deal with the EU.

He calls on the Prime Minister to now publicly confirm her "change of heart" and reveal "exactly what the Government has asked for", including the detail of the "freedom clauses" she is seeking to secure from Brussels.

The European Union has repeatedly insisted it will not renegotiate the backstop, while Ireland's Foreign Minister said it "isn't going to change".

However, Mr Johnson says: "That backstop is dead, rejected by the biggest ever parliamentary majority; and that is why I hope and pray that I am right about the intentions of Number 10.


"If we mean it, if we really try, I have no doubt that the EU will give us the Freedom Clause we need. So now is the time to stiffen the sinews and summon up the blood and get on that trusty BAE 146 and go back to Brussels and get it.

"And if the PM secures that change – a proper UK-sized perforation in the fabric of the backstop itself - I have no doubt that she will have the whole country full-throatedly behind her."

Since quitting Cabinet over the Prime Minister's Brexit strategy, Mr Johnson has been one of her most prominent critics.

His intervention is likely to be seen by Downing Street as a signal that other Eurosceptics are prepared to soften their position and back her deal if she can resolve the backstop issue. Mr Johnson and a number of senior Eurosceptics were invited into Number 10 in recent days to discuss the Prime Minister's plans.


He says in his article that "Team Freedom" - which includes Mrs May's husband Philip and Julian Smith, the Chief Whip - have won out over "Team Remain" in Downing Street.

The Government is expected to signal its intentions this week by supporting an amendment tabled by Sir Graham Brady, the chairman of the 1922 committee of backbenchers, which calls for the backstop to be scrapped and replaced with "alternative arrangements".


The Prime Minister is understood to believe that if the amendment passes it will give her the "mandate" that she needs to go back to Brussels and change the backstop.

However The Telegraph understands that Eurosceptics are pushing the Prime Minister to make a public statement about her approach in the Commons on Monday in order to secure their backing.


In giving his endorsement to the approach, Mr Johnson acknowledges that some will say he is "naive" and "point out that the backstop is not the only defect of the withdrawal agreement".

"They will say that we are all being gulled, and that there is a bait-and-switch plan to get MPs to back the deal on the condition that the backstop is removed," he says.

"And then somehow, alas, it will turn out that this condition was impossible to satisfy and all we will get, after weeks of talks, is another footling letter of “clarification” from Brussels.

"That is why we need to understand, now, what is behind these rumours of the PM’s change of heart. We need to know whether the Treaty really will be revised.

"We need to see the Freedom Clauses written down. We need to know exactly what the government is asking for – and we need to hear it directly from the Prime Minister herself."

However, Simon Coveney, Ireland's deputy prime minister, insisted there would be no changes to the Withdrawal Agreement.


Mr Coveney said the backstop was crucial in preventing a hard border.

He told the Press Association: "Peace and the Good Friday Agreement are more important than Brexit.

"Even in a no-deal Brexit situation every party and every MP in the UK will have a responsibility to ensure there is no return to a hard border and Northern Ireland is protected.

"That won't be easy and those who misrepresent the backstop don't have an alternative to it."

The Prime Minister will on Tuesday face a rebellion by around 20 Tory MPs - including ministers - over a back-bench amendment that will force her to request an extension of Article 50 if a deal cannot be reached.

In a bid to defuse the rebellion and ensure there are no resignations, Mrs May is considering making a commitment to holding a second meaningful vote on her Brexit deal within two weeks.

On Sunday night a dozen pro-European ministers including Amber Rudd, Greg Clark and David Gauke held a conference call in which they agreed the move would help defer a potential rebellion.

Rebels believe that a "hard commitment" to a second meaningful vote will mean there is still enough time for another backbench bill extending Article 50, effectively deferring the rebellion until later this month.


Downing Street sources warned that the backbench bill tabled by Yvette Cooper, a Labour MP, could see Brexit delayed for years or cancelled entirely.

Lord Bew, one of the architects of the Good Friday Agreement, warned that the Irish backstop would "turn the Good Friday Agreement on its head". He said it had enabled Ireland to "weaponise" the agreement and called for a sunset clause to ensure it is "time-limited".
 
Expenditure is not fixed! Therefore spare income is not fixed, and isn't a measure of wealth. People adapt to what they earn. You could make 3 million a year but spend it all and have no spare income. If you were taxed a millon of the 3 you made each year, you'd adapt wouldn't you?
If I made £3M per year I'd have spare income - that's a wealthy person. People earning anywhere around the amounts Labour want to tax the arse out of are not - they are normal working professionals.

Now, if Labour openly said "We want to heavily tax the hard working Middle Classes so as to redistribute their wealth to people who, through not having to pay mortgages etc. have a reasonably similar expendable income to those we are taxing" I'd at least credit them with honesty.

They'd still be thieving clams, but at least they'd be honest ones.
 
Back