G
G
ganganvince
Guest
You seen how many retail giants have gone under?
The Labour Government
- Thread starter SkyBlueFlux
- Start date
stonerblue
Well-Known Member
Right, the only way to settle this one is to get the name of the company off @SamTheGuru )
Brewster's millions
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Messages
- 5,242
I see that Reeves is now targeting welfare cuts and a crackdown on nebulous ‘public sector waste’ as a means to meet her fiscal rules and help calm the gilt market.
Cuts in expenditure which may or not exist at all, the size and timescale of which are greatly uncertain, and which numerous other governments have failed to deliver. These are now expected to make the overall fiscal arithmetic add up and get the gilt market back onside.
So in other words, it all now depends on what can only be described as a genuine fiscal black hole. Who said irony was dead?
It’s not often you see somebody as genuinely out of their depth as she is.
Cuts in expenditure which may or not exist at all, the size and timescale of which are greatly uncertain, and which numerous other governments have failed to deliver. These are now expected to make the overall fiscal arithmetic add up and get the gilt market back onside.
So in other words, it all now depends on what can only be described as a genuine fiscal black hole. Who said irony was dead?
It’s not often you see somebody as genuinely out of their depth as she is.
The main thrust of his point is incorrect. I see this a lot - increased costs from NI means the consumer pays more. Thats wrong.
Consumers have purchasing choices because we live in a competitive capitalist economy. One of the important factors in purchasing decisions is cost.
If you pass all the costs directly into the consumer then they will move to products/companies who don't.
hilts
Well-Known Member
I know a lot of posters on here were very much in the not a lot of waste to be found camp. Paper clips etc.....
I think this will not be wildly popular.
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
This is good. I was thinking of things like the extra funding to Breakfast clubs and things like this at schools as well.
Everything you need to know about free school breakfast clubs – The Education Hub
The Education Hub is a site for parents, pupils, education professionals and the media that captures all you need to know about the education system. You’ll find accessible, straightforward information on popular topics, Q&As, interviews, case studies, and more.
educationhub.blog.gov.uk
One of the things that New Labour did that made such a huge difference to the country were somewhat unlauded or under-recognised at the time like Sure Start centres which the Tories consistently closed.
I do like evidence based politics but that evidence has to be properly put into context and Sure Start closures were a result of poorly contextualised evidence. These little things are the things that make differences on the ground and in the community much more than whatever drama is currently on the front pages.
They're taking on a lot of loopholes in employment rights and taking the steps to transition away from zero hour contracts. Not by outright banning them because that's dramatic and not fair on businesses, but slowly introducing guaranteed hours to certain workers with a baby steps approach to removing them altogether in the medium term. More on that Bill that's in Committee Stage here
What’s in the Employment Rights Bill?
Our latest dashboard breaks down what’s in the Employment Rights Bill and what’s not, showing how these reforms could transform employment law.
They're pushing a Bill through called PRMB about Product Regulation. This is something I've personally been banging a drum on for a while, in terms of that consumer safety and product regulation is working on a 20th Century model and to align with the EU and emergent markets such as AI and other newtech as well as the drop shipping generation then we needed to take another look at this from the ground up which the UK now seems to be doing. This is going to allow much more agility in legislation than a rather rigid system we currently have.
I know that the headlines who try to look at the "big" Labour policies at the moment will focus on immigration reform or the strategic defence review or NHS funding or whatever. And they're important, of course they are, but these little bits of legislation that aren't particularly controversial or have billions of column inches written about them are the things that ACTUALLY make a difference to people's lives on the ground. They're not glamorous and they're not sexy and they're not something Elon Musk will be furiously tweeting 40 times a day about, but they have real effects on people's lives for the better in small ways that helps take the financial burdens off the poorest in society.
I love politics with a passion because people in these great and historic democratic institutions can sit around a committee without party politics 99% of the time and all work out how to balance all of these conflicting issues to put forward positive proposals. And that's actually how the massive massive majority of British politics works - people form all sides who "publicly hate each other" are actually great colleagues behind the scenes and work together to drive Bills through. I believe in our system, I believe in our democracy and Government no matter who is in power, something which apparently makes me a minority now. It really does change your life, my life, everybody's lives. I just hate what the media thinks politics is because they've taken a great positive thing that could be proud of and turned it into WWE. And as a WWE fan, I know a work when I see one and politics in the media is a work. Brother.
hilts
Well-Known Member
Good stuff
Sorry for clipping so much of your post, but I wonder how many front pages will cover the ever tightening rules on outside earnings and lobbying (something that differentiates Labour from the Tories and Reform), compared with the articles about freebies (something that has been going on with every party for years).
bluethrunthru
Well-Known Member
misses out because of her teachers pension and being scammed out of £300k ( yes £300k ) not because of Labours budget decision?
BrianW
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Mar 2006
- Messages
- 6,558
- Team supported
- There's Only One City
I find it odd that a former teacher does not have a teacher's pension putting her way more than £3 above the line.
Her loss of 200k is, of course, unfortunate. These scams really need to be pursued with far more vigour.
Her loss of 200k is, of course, unfortunate. These scams really need to be pursued with far more vigour.
I think this is the more humane response rather than 'She's a Daily Telegraph reader, fuck her'. There's often talk of youngsters being groomed by 'gangs' but these days it seems that more and more people have just voluntarily joined their own political 'gangs' and all we have is gang warfare.
G
G
ganganvince
Guest
At 72 guess she will be on the old pension rates max of £160 a week
BrianW
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 6 Mar 2006
- Messages
- 6,558
- Team supported
- There's Only One City
I'm 72 and I'm on the new state rate, albeit diminished somewhat because of some years of being contracted out.
Teachers normally have a separate pension by virtue of their employment. The only thing I can think of is that she taught in the private sector, had a private-sector pension, drew it down and lost it. But I am guessing. It would be very hard for someone in a state school teaching position not to have quite a substantial pension, unless - and I am not sure of this - teachers are able to opt out of the scheme. Most teachers would not be so ill-advised.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
It’s not incorrect at all.
To your point firms may go out of business I suppose if people no longer buy their products. Not really an ideal outcome for the workers or anyone really but especially a chancellor determined to see growth - I’d hate to see her come up with a budget that wasn’t focused on growth.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
Of course she misses out because of labours decisions. Her circumstances are entirely irrelevant to that.
It’s staggering how quickly the “caring left” have turned in to nasty spiteful fuckers.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
It's 'odd' because it's not true.
"Ms Emm receives the full new state pension, which is £221.20 a week, just £3 above the cut-off for winter fuel allowance. She is also in receipt of a teacher’s pension. However, in 2023 she lost her life savings after being targeted online. She lost a staggering £200,000."
They go on to say "Ms Emm only just misses out on the £200 support." and "She lives off her state pension, which goes almost entirely on bills and food.", both of which would appear to be untrue.
What's truly bizarre is that the Telegraph couldn't find someone who is just on the state pension for this article. There clearly are people who don't have private pensions, and who haven't lost £200k in a scam. It's a bit like the family who can't afford to retire because of their 60 houses, or the woman last week who sends her kids to private school, because in a state school they'll be bullied for being poor.
I wonder if they do it deliberately, because their readership wants to relate to the article, but also feel hard done to?