The Labour Government

[hampshireblue]

I'm just totally against government needlessly meddling in our lives mate. I have no issue with them trying to sign trade deals - that's what they are supposed to be doing. (I'll park for the sake of this conversation the deal also including UK employers not having to pay employers' NI on Indian hires, whilst having to pay it on British hires, and that said Indian hire can also bring his spouse (possibly family, I can't recall) who will also be given a work permit. So much for steps to reduce immigration FFS).

I am not making a party political point here. It's applies to governments of all parties. I want them to keep us safe, keep us healthy, provide a good environment for businesses to thrive, and provide support for those in need of help. That's it. Everything else is bollocks.

According to the interviews this morning, only those on short term contracts will not pay NI as they will continue to pay such payments in their own country. It is a reciprocal agreement and is the case with 50 other countries already.

I don't consider a requirement for TV platforms having iPlayer preloaded "meddling" with my life. I can select it as I wish or not.

 

[Chippy_boy]

They are not forcing you to watch it? I hardly watch YouTube but the app is on our TV along with lots of others I don't look at. I genuinely dont see what the issue is here.

The issue is it's not of the government's effing business. That people can just not watch it is not the point. They are also mandating, BTW, that iplayer is "easily accessible". But it's just yet another example of the countless needless activities that governments do. How many committee members have been on this, conducting surveys, collating data and basically doing utter bollocks. Then there's the manufacturers who have to take on board legislation and potentially make changes at their costs. When in reality none of this should be happening.

This sort of rubbish is why we have such a bloated government costing the country a fortune it cannot afford.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

The issue is it's not of the government's effing business. That people can just not watch it is not the point. They are also mandating, BTW, that iplayer is "easily accessible". But it's just yet another example of the countless needless activities that governments do. How many committee members have been on this, conducting surveys, collating data and basically doing utter bollocks. Then there's the manufacturers who have to take on board legislation and potentially make changes at their costs. When in reality none of this should be happening.

This sort of rubbish is why we have such a bloated government costing the country a fortune it cannot afford.

I hear what you're saying, but I dont see it as a big issue in the scheme of things.

 

[Chippy_boy]

According to the interviews this morning, only those on short term contracts will not pay NI as they will continue to pay such payments in their own country. It is a reciprocal agreement and is the case with 50 other countries already.

I don't consider a requirement for TV platforms having iPlayer preloaded "meddling" with my life. I can select it as I wish or not.

And if you were so appalled by the BBCs continuous political campaigning, refuse to watch it and want to buy a TV that doesn't have iplayer on it? Soon you can't. Meddling by a government in something that doesn't need meddling in.

 

[Chippy_boy]

I hear what you're saying, but I dont see it as a big issue in the scheme of things.

It's FAR from a big issue in itself of course. Just one of many which in aggregate, is an issue.

 

[hampshireblue]

It's FAR from a big issue in itself of course. Just one of many which in aggregate, is an issue.

Big enough to make your blood boil. Now go and get some steps in!!

 

[Chippy_boy]

Big enough to make your blood boil. Now go and get some steps in!!

Perhaps "blood boil", was overstating it, LOL. "Annoying" might have been a better term.

You see my point though? I think we can all agree that the country is not in a great state right now, and that carrying on "business as usual" is not going to work. We need to make some radical changes, across many areas of activity: What exactly is the role of the NHS? How should services be delivered and what treatments should it be providing and not be providing. Just an example.

Another example is what exactly is the role of government? How many unelected quangos have we got, and what are they doing exactly. Can we get rid of some of them? Do we need others? How is it that amongst successes governments and ministers, a common theme is that they felt they could not get anything done and were hamstrung by the civil service? How can we make governments that the people choose, actually able to deliver what people voted for?

A rather bigger discussion than iPlayer availability. But that was a trigger for me.

 

[Brewster's millions]

A bit harsh. I haven't listened to all of this interview but he seems to have come from a poor background, done well for himself and is trying to highlight some of the inequalities in society.

I’m actually being kind to him.

He claims to have been the best trader in the world, where in fact he wasn’t even the most profitable trader on his desk.

He claims to have uniquely forecast a subpar economic recovery post-2008 - although that was a minority view, hundreds, probably thousands of investors were positioned the same way as him.

He only decided to be a lefty once he’d made his money, left his job and decided to write a book.

He betrayed the confidence of many of his colleagues, and caused them significant stress on their personal and professional lives; the same people who he relied on when he started his job.

His misuse and miscomprehension of economic terms and statistics in order to support his arguments is off the scale.

His Oliver Twist, cor blimey Govnor demeanour is an embarrassing, over the top fabrication.

There’s lots of things he could have done to help working class kids get on in the City but he decided to write a book and pocket the cash instead.

I think that’s a fair but incomplete summary.

 

[hampshireblue]

I’m actually being kind to him.

He claims to have been the best trader in the world, where in fact he wasn’t even the most profitable trader on his desk.

He claims to have uniquely forecast a subpar economic recovery post-2008 - although that was a minority view, hundreds, probably thousands of investors were positioned the same way as him.

He only decided to be a lefty once he’d made his money, left his job and decided to write a book.

He betrayed the confidence of many of his colleagues, and caused them significant stress on their personal and professional lives; the same people who he relied on when he started his job.

His misuse and miscomprehension of economic terms and statistics in order to support his arguments is off the scale.

His Oliver Twist, cor blimey Govnor demeanour is an embarrassing, over the top fabrication.

There’s lots of things he could have done to help working class kids get on in the City but he decided to write a book and pocket the cash instead.

I think that’s a fair but incomplete summary.

You must really hate Charlie Mullins then.

Are the rest of your claims facts, heresay or just your opinion? It sounds like you may have actually read his book(I haven't).

 

[stonerblue]

In other news, this is EXACTLY the sort of shite that makes my blood boil : the government about to legally require TV manufacturers to put BBC iPlayer on their TVs.

Ofcom names the 14 connected TV platforms that must carry broadcaster VOD

Ofcom has published details of the Television Selection Services (TSS) or connected TV platforms that will be designated by the Secretary of State to be required to ensure that BBC iPlayer and othe…

www.broadbandtvnews.com

It's the government behind this. Ofcom are merely implementing the government directive.

There's millions of people who have no interest in iPlayer and many who refuse to watch BBC propaganda at all. Surely there are plenty of TVs and devices that do offer iPlayer so if anyone wants to watch it, it's simple enough. Even if your TV doesn't have it, a smart TV stick is cheap enough. Or any smartphone. But now people are going to forced to have iPlayer whether they want it or not? Disgusting, and worse, NEEDLESS meddling in people's freedoms.

hahahahaha

 

[Jimmieblue]

When you say spent all of it, you mean we used it to lower everyone's taxes.

That’s the dilemma, I agree. I really am conflicted now with how previous Governments have distributed the massive tax revenues. There is now such a gap between rich and poor. We seem to be living on debt.

 

[Craig]

What about the 80% of their pay that was paid to millions of people in furlough payments? Of course those people had that didn't they.

I'm really not motivated to jump on any PPE scandal bandwagon. Doubtless some bad decisions were taken but the vast majority have to be seen in the context of the fact that the UK was in panic mode. We were desperate to buy PPE and respirators from anywhere we could get them and it's obvious we couldn't go through the usual, drawn out procurement processes that would have taken months at least. Hospital staff were desperate for any PPE they could get. I am sure some things were done that should not have been. I am equally sure that most MPs and ministers are decent and honest and that most of the noise is fuelled by political opposition milking the story as much as possible.

And a minor point, this still doesn't explain how TinFoilHat has his money taken off him by rich people. The money the government paid out was not his money.

Your first paragraph is what i was referring to. Forgetting the abomination that was PPE. If the government gave everyone was it 16 or 20k? No working class people i know have ended up 20k better off as it all went on food and bills. Ok, some might have over indulged on cheap booze too from the supermarkets during that time.

The government are worse off for giving that money out. The working class are no better off and to be honest probably worse off. Meanwhile inequality has never grown so fast. Stocks, shares and gold have all reached all time highs. So you don’t have to be a detective to see who’s hands the trillion pounds or whatever it was has ended up in.

 

[Jimmieblue]

Its not really a straightforward comparison in fairness. The UK certainly did gain financially from its oil and gas like Norway did, but the UK had a population 14 times larger than Norways so any financial benefit gained would be spread more thinly so to speak and less noticeable.

Yes, I hadn’t taken that into consideration, fair point. I did watch the Simon Reeves programme, before I cancelled my BBC licence, on Scandinavia and that was very interesting regarding the Norwegian Wealth Fund.

 

[BobKowalski]

In other news, this is EXACTLY the sort of shite that makes my blood boil : the government about to legally require TV manufacturers to put BBC iPlayer on their TVs.

Ofcom names the 14 connected TV platforms that must carry broadcaster VOD

Ofcom has published details of the Television Selection Services (TSS) or connected TV platforms that will be designated by the Secretary of State to be required to ensure that BBC iPlayer and othe…

www.broadbandtvnews.com

It's the government behind this. Ofcom are merely implementing the government directive.

There's millions of people who have no interest in iPlayer and many who refuse to watch BBC propaganda at all. Surely there are plenty of TVs and devices that do offer iPlayer so if anyone wants to watch it, it's simple enough. Even if your TV doesn't have it, a smart TV stick is cheap enough. Or any smartphone. But now people are going to forced to have iPlayer whether they want it or not? Disgusting, and worse, NEEDLESS meddling in people's freedoms.

You’re going to fret yourself into an early grave at this rate.

 

[Craig]

Absolutely loads of people I know who run small businesses hammered the covid loans. 2 of them (both rags!) built extensions on their houses with it!

I remember plenty of people got a bar in the garden done etc. We’re still talking about a minority here though

 

[Jimmieblue]

I hear what you're saying, but I dont see it as a big issue in the scheme of things.

“I hear what you are saying” have you been in therapy!

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

“I hear what you are saying” have you been in therapy!

What do you mean? Its just a turn of phase, which means I understand what you're saying.

 

[hampshireblue]

The issue is it's not of the government's effing business. That people can just not watch it is not the point. They are also mandating, BTW, that iplayer is "easily accessible". But it's just yet another example of the countless needless activities that governments do. How many committee members have been on this, conducting surveys, collating data and basically doing utter bollocks. Then there's the manufacturers who have to take on board legislation and potentially make changes at their costs. When in reality none of this should be happening.

This sort of rubbish is why we have such a bloated government costing the country a fortune it cannot afford.

Having just read the article, you, as you often are, have been very selective. It is not just the BBC ( of which you have an issue) but other Public Sector Broadcasters:

The PSB players likely to be given prominence include BBC iPlayer, ITVX, Channel 4 stream, 5, STV player and S4C Clic.

So basically the terrestrial channels.

As it is, at least 5 of the platforms mentioned already have a link to the apps pre-installed, allowing the consumer to activate or not at their leisure.

If you look elsewhere on the Broadband site where the article originates, there is an article suggesting the government needs to get involved as viewing habits chnage and move towards IPTV based viewing.

 

[Craig]

You must really hate Charlie Mullins then.

Are the rest of your claims facts, heresay or just your opinion? It sounds like you may have actually read his book(I haven't).

I have read his book, really enjoyed it. Reminds me a bit of Neil Woods (good cop, bad war). Who was an undercover cop in the drugs war and who now campaigns for major change in UK drug policy. Suppose you’ve got to live these things directly to truly see how fucked up they’re.

 

[Jimmieblue]

What do you mean? It’s just a turn of phase, which means I understand what you're saying.

Just being fascecious really, apologies. It’s a phrase that annoys me.