The Labour Government

The Future’s Blue! said:
Oh, sorry. So, not current?

Fuck me, mate. Is Ric paying you for clicks?
Click to expand...
No, I have an only fans page for that. The point of posting the Rayner thing (which I think is less than a year old) is to point out yet another example of the lies, hypocrisy and broken pledges of the govt. The tendancy to say one thing to get power and do another once they have it.
I believe Rayner was sincere at the time actually, but this sort of thing just undermines public trust and opens the door to the likes of reform.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
No, I have an only fans page for that. The point of posting the Rayner thing (which I think is less than a year old) is to point out yet another example of the lies, hypocrisy and broken pledges of the govt. The tendancy to say one thing to get power and do another once they have it.
I believe Rayner was sincere at the time actually, but this sort of thing just undermines public trust and opens the door to the likes of reform.
Click to expand...

The pictures of Starmer and Reeves amongst others with the WASPI women promising fair compensation are deep fakes planted by the R/W media mate.

Meanwhile, inflation up to 2.6% from 2.3%.

Nothing to do with the budget though ok.
 
law74 said:
You seem to have missed the children of "ordinary people" who currently pay £5,500 a term to give their children the connections required to get rich in monetary terms.
Click to expand...

I don’t disagree with the elite private schools like Eton (they pay significantly more the £5,500 for those) but in the vast vast majority that is not why people send their kids to private school. They send them to give them the best education they can - parents trying to do the best for their kids eh? It always puzzles me why people rage against private schools with more passion than they rage for the improvements in state schools.
 
metalblue said:
I don’t disagree with the elite private schools like Eton (they pay significantly more the £5,500 for those) but in the vast vast majority that is not why people send their kids to private school. They send them to give them the best education they can - parents trying to do the best for their kids eh? It always puzzles me why people rage against private schools with more passion than they rage for the improvements in state schools.
Click to expand...

The answer is politics of envy.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
No, I have an only fans page for that. The point of posting the Rayner thing (which I think is less than a year old) is to point out yet another example of the lies, hypocrisy and broken pledges of the govt. The tendancy to say one thing to get power and do another once they have it.
I believe Rayner was sincere at the time actually, but this sort of thing just undermines public trust and opens the door to the likes of reform.
Click to expand...
Rayner probably does want to pay them out but the likes of Starmer and Reeves, once they had all the information, would be looking at it differently.

All MPs can be cunts, today these are anti-WASPI cunts.
 
blueinsa said:
The pictures of Starmer and Reeves amongst others with the WASPI women promising fair compensation are deep fakes planted by the R/W media mate.

Meanwhile, inflation up to 2.6% from 2.3%.

Nothing to do with the budget though ok.
Click to expand...
I know that Labour governments always end up with the economy in recession, much higher inflation and a ballooning deficit, but even I didn’t expect them to achieve all that inside the first six months.
 
I do worry where we are heading, inflation remains high (not helped by the recent budget), which will increase pressure on public spending, growth remains stagnant, yet departments are being asked to make cuts which impacts what they can do.

Unemployment is rising across multiple sectors and the mood within most private businesses is to cut recruitment and look at rightsizing (i.e driving profit through making roles redundant).

It wasn't a bowl of cherries this year but next year looks like an absolute nightmare scenario.
 
Brewster's millions said:
I know that Labour governments always end up with the economy in recession, much higher inflation and a ballooning deficit, but even I didn’t expect them to achieve all that inside the first six months.
Click to expand...
I am an advocate of giving any new government time, we should all want any government to do well, I certainly do.

But it is evident that there hasn't been any new government economic bounce. And I am concerned that the Autumn budget will do more harm than good certainly in the short to medium term.
 
Churchlawtonblue said:
I am an advocate of giving any new government time, we should all want any government to do well, I certainly do.

But it is evident that there hasn't been any new government economic bounce. And I am concerned that the Autumn budget will do more harm than good certainly in the short to medium term.
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing Governments with football managers :)
 
bluenova said:
It's always looked a really odd campaign to me. As far as I can see, the oldest women affected when it changed in 1995, 44 at the time, and that group would have expected to retire at 60, but would now retire at 61.

Anyone losing the full five years would have been 40 or under. It's hard to believe that something so momentous passed anyone by for around two decades.

The 2011 changes brought the move to 65 forward by 2 years, to 2018, but the group affected were contacted directly to let them know it was happening, and would have had 7 years notice of a 1 year change.

I also, never understood the poverty situation if people were having to retire later. Is the argument that they gave up work at 60 without realising the pension wouldn't come?

Am I missing something obvious?
Click to expand...
Same I’m missing the poverty angle. changes to the state retirement age brought out a riot and protest in France it made no difference the changes are still law.
In the UK we accept the change and retirement means young people will have to work 8 years longer.
The State Pension age for both men and women to age 66 between 2024 and 2026, age 67 between 2034 and 2036 and age 68 between 2044 and 2046
We have accepted the change of five years for women with little public protest and another three years for young people to work until they are 68yrs.
“Private pensions”
The angle for me is on health grounds, are women as healthy as men at 65yrs ? and again at 68yrs. plus the government doesn’t want to pay state pension, not everyone has a private retirement pot.
 
Kirkstall Blue said:
Same I’m missing the poverty angle. changes to the state retirement age brought out a riot and protest in France it made no difference the changes are still law.
In the UK we accept the change and retirement means young people will have to work 8 years longer.
The State Pension age for both men and women to age 66 between 2024 and 2026, age 67 between 2034 and 2036 and age 68 between 2044 and 2046
We have accepted the change of five years for women with little public protest and another three years for young people to work until they are 68yrs.
“Private pensions”
The angle for me is on health grounds, are women as healthy as men at 65yrs ? and again at 68yrs. plus the government doesn’t want to pay state pension, not everyone has a private retirement pot.
Click to expand...
Well if women live longer I’d suggest they are healthier,.
 
Just to get some facts out there - the report was published in March - Jeremy **** said the Govt were not going to compensate the WASPI women but Labour have let them down? Even GeeBeeBee's reported on it in March

www.gbnews.com

15,000 Waspi women demand action as Hunt confirms triple lock but refuses to commit to compensation

The Government have been urged to compensate thousands of women, including Waspi (Women Against State Pension Inequality) campaigners, who were affected by short notice changes to their state pension age
www.gbnews.com www.gbnews.com
 
bluethrunthru said:
Just to get some facts out there - the report was published in March - Jeremy **** said the Govt were not going to compensate the WASPI women but Labour have let them down? Even GeeBeeBee's reported on it in March

www.gbnews.com

15,000 Waspi women demand action as Hunt confirms triple lock but refuses to commit to compensation

The Government have been urged to compensate thousands of women, including Waspi (Women Against State Pension Inequality) campaigners, who were affected by short notice changes to their state pension age
www.gbnews.com www.gbnews.com
Click to expand...
Says he was confident of raising the money through growth not that he wasn't paying it unless I have missed something in your attachment?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top