The Labour Government

[blueish swede]

I'll await that with interest then.

You see the difference between me and you lot is that when I am wrong I usually say so. You'll find me saying I didn't know that, or fair enough or whatever.

By contrast, the more moronic ones on your side just side step questions or reply with crap like "Please get help".

It would be really refreshing if one of you - any of you - would respond to that video I posted of Starmer talking about the black hole in May, and then posted along the lines of "fair enough, on face value it does look like he's lying."

Or you could answer the question: How do you justify Starmer claiming he knew nothing about the black hole, when he is on video, talking about the black hole in Parliament in May of this year?

It's a simple question.

The fact that your reply is "Please seek help" tells the readers everything they need to know: You have no answer. There can be no other explanation other than he has been caught lying through his teeth. And you don't like to admit that, do you. That you cannot admit it, in the face of blatant evidence, I find rather sad. I thought you might have some principles, but clearly not.

The £46B black hole discussed in May was the predicted loss of Income when Rishi Sunak abolished National Insurance. If the incompetent, ignorant, idiotic idealogues in the Tory party had won the election and implemented this policy they would have had a £46B shortfall in income to address.

Labour claims chancellor will create a £46bn fiscal hole with pledge to scrap NI

Opposition party intends to go through ‘every pound’ in Tory spending plans to find savings

www.ft.com

This is nothing to do with the gap between the current income to the Inland Revenue and the cost of current commitments, which is estimated at £22B .This is the sum that the incompetent, ignorant, idiotic idealogues in the Tory Government lied about to the British voters by not declaring it (lying by omission is lying).

Your intellect seems to have been ovepowered by the use of the same noun "black hole" to describe the two seperate cases. This, despite the two being identified by different denominators, one being labelled a "£46B black hole" and the other a "£22B black hole".

If the incompetent, ignorant, idiotic lying idealogues in the Tory party had won the election and implemented their idiotic policy of abolishing NI the total discrepancy ("black hole"!) would have been £68 billion - the £46B lost from NI contributions plus the £22B shortfall that the Tories lied to the British public about.

 

[metalblue]

Yet insurance companies do it all the time, they call it the theory of probability.

Another unregulated sector that we need by law.

 

[TinFoilHat]

Or votes against Mein Keir

Removal of the Whip is Keith Stalin's versions of exile to Gdansk.

 

[I'm With Stupid]

Don’t some buy to let mortgages stipulate no benefits? If so they would need to legislate I suspect.

Rental in the UK needs an overhaul. Student rentals is another cluster fuck. When daughter was over at York uni her landlord charged north of £3500 per month per property and he had 5 student properties each with 5 or so students - he didn’t pay council tax as students exempt, students most reliable payers, landlord didn’t actually “work” but was getting £17,500 a month (no doubt paid mortgages out of it). He could easily add more to his portfolio. All student accommodation in York goes through one (or maybe two) letting agents as well so a complete stitch up.

Yeah, I struggle to have a lot of sympathy for someone buying a second, third or fourth property they can't really afford, and then expecting people much poorer than them to pay off the mortgage.

 

[metalblue]

Yeah, I struggle to have a lot of sympathy for someone buying a second, third or fourth property they can't really afford, and then expecting people much poorer than them to pay off the mortgage.

Succinctly put.

 

[stonerblue]

I'll await that with interest then.

You see the difference between me and you lot is that when I am wrong I usually say so. You'll find me saying I didn't know that, or fair enough or whatever.

By contrast, the more moronic ones on your side just side step questions or reply with crap like "Please get help".

It would be really refreshing if one of you - any of you - would respond to that video I posted of Starmer talking about the black hole in May, and then posted along the lines of "fair enough, on face value it does look like he's lying."

But unless I have missed it (sorry if I have) none of you have the basic humility to do so.

So what will your reply to this be?

(a) Avoid the question
(b) Throw an insult around
(c) No reply at all

Post the vid from a reputable non-biased source and not a right wing propaganda channel and i might have a gander.

 

[mexico1970]

Don’t some buy to let mortgages stipulate no benefits? If so they would need to legislate I suspect.

Rental in the UK needs an overhaul. Student rentals is another cluster fuck. When daughter was over at York uni her landlord charged north of £3500 per month per property and he had 5 student properties each with 5 or so students - he didn’t pay council tax as students exempt, students most reliable payers, landlord didn’t actually “work” but was getting £17,500 a month (no doubt paid mortgages out of it). He could easily add more to his portfolio. All student accommodation in York goes through one (or maybe two) letting agents as well so a complete stitch up.

Probably worked harder for his money than anyone else, or so he tells everyone.

 

[mexico1970]

If he was my MP I'd start a recall petition. That's the kind of shit you'd expect from a Tory.

Starmer will do fuck all unless he turns up to parliament wearing a Palestinian pin badge.

But he might be a good MP.

As long as you're not poor.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Don’t some buy to let mortgages stipulate no benefits? If so they would need to legislate I suspect.

No you're mistaken. We don't need to legislate for indirect discrimination against disabilities. Which is why it's unlawful.

Terms in contracts don't override the law. It's just simply unenforceable. I suspect you could count on one hand the number of times a mortgage was called back in because the mortgagee rented out to benefits claimants.

Rental in the UK needs an overhaul. Student rentals is another cluster fuck. When daughter was over at York uni her landlord charged north of £3500 per month per property and he had 5 student properties each with 5 or so students - he didn’t pay council tax as students exempt, students most reliable payers, landlord didn’t actually “work” but was getting £17,500 a month (no doubt paid mortgages out of it). He could easily add more to his portfolio. All student accommodation in York goes through one (or maybe two) letting agents as well so a complete stitch up.

Yep. And also makes nearby family homes unaffordable as they are snapped up by speculators.

Should be more dedicated student housing tbh. And at affordable rates or reasonable profits socialised towards councils, universities or local community.

 

[TinFoilHat]

But he might be a good MP.

As long as you're not poor.

This is why parliament is fucked.

All sides have lawyers and middle/upper class MPs representing S.Baldrick in their constituency of Shit hole by the sea.

Party rules preventing activists who do real jobs like wiping arses,cleaning streets, teaching assistants from standing because, like City a majority of them would shake up their cushy arrangements of self preservation.

It doesn't reflect the true spectrum of people who live and work in this country anymore.

Over hundred years ago we had commies/fascists and everyone in between winning seats because they represented their area well. Now we've got two parties of different colours but maintaining their status quo.