Do you want to discuss boring politics? (40 Viewers)

Grendel

Well-Known Member
But not on the very thing we are discussing.

Or do they only have to pay tax on some things and pay no tax on other things because...they're rich?

Did you go to a non selective comp?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
You've got this weird obsession with my background, my upbringing and my parents. Like fuck am I telling you any more.

oh dear Tarquin - hypocrite alert.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
And I told you I'm not giving you any more information on my background because you're a creepy weirdo.

No it’s because it will expose you as someone who’s benefited from a selective system. I openly admit mine all went as the comp was a dump. I could have having passed the 11 plus but no one else in my school did.
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
1. Again, it's weird that you already know what school I went to
2. What difference does it make, it's not like I was campaigning for VAT on private school fees when I was 11 years old nor did I have any say in what school I went to
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
1. Again, it's weird that you already know what school I went to
2. What difference does it make, it's not like I was campaigning for VAT on private school fees when I was 11 years old nor did I have any say in what school I went to

I find people.who benefit from selection the worst of the lot - including your mate Starmer of course
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Of course you do.

Well Starmer still had a freebie in a private school - most people in private schools aren’t rich - the education minister is a cretin and Starmer just a man who will take all that comes to him and play the socialist card when it suits
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Well Starmer still had a freebie in a private school - most people in private schools aren’t rich - the education minister is a cretin and Starmer just a man who will take all that comes to him and play the socialist card when it suits

Jim Carrey Idk GIF



Just garbled rambling nonsense.

As usual you've got zero point other than some sort of dig at my upbringing.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Jim Carrey Idk GIF



Just garbled rambling nonsense.

As usual you've got zero point other than some sort of dig at my upbringing.

No my point is most people who send children to private school are not rich - a claim you made
 

chiefdave

Well-Known Member
This made me laugh, hello pot, meet kettle.
London Mayor Sadiq Khan has received a knighthood, one among a number of politicians named in the New Year Honours list.

Senior Conservatives labelled the three-time mayor's knighthood as a "reward for failure".

Also on the honours list are former Conservative West Midlands Mayor Andy Street and Nick Gibb, the former long-serving schools minister.
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
No my point is most people who send children to private school are not rich - a claim you made

Oh right, that's why you started off by asking me what school I went to and mentioned your apparent point zero times then. Makes sense.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
No it’s because it will expose you as someone who’s benefited from a selective system. I openly admit mine all went as the comp was a dump. I could have having passed the 11 plus but no one else in my school did.
Private schools are not meritocratic or academically selective to anywhere near the same extent as a grammar as you well know of course.
 

Nick

Administrator
Why do people get honours and knighthoods just for doing their jobs, even if they don't do it very well?
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
How much of the nations gold did Brown sell at a rock bottom price? Mate.
Labour ideology only really works if they have got enough of someone else’s family silver to sell to pay the bills.
once the rich get fed up with that, they will do what they did before and fuck off abroad, taking their tax liabilities with them and funding some other nations debt.
The nation's gold 😂 how much of it were you entitled to? Honestly, the nation is not a household and does not need to sell bonds, gold or anything else to raise £.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
The nation's gold 😂 how much of it were you entitled to? Honestly, the nation is not a household and does not need to sell bonds, gold or anything else to raise £.
As the nation is not a household, tell the government to fuck off and leave my income for me manage and use then. Fuck collectivism Which seems like a one way street to me. Why should anyone else me entitled to any of my income?

The Nation‘s assets‘ could and should have been better managed and utilised for the nation’s and citizens benefit By governments of all political persuasions.
 
Last edited:

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
As the nation is not a household, tell the government to fuck off and leave my income for me manage and use then. Fuck collectivism Which seems like a one way street to me. Why should anyone else me entitled to any of my income?

The Nation‘s assets‘ could and should have been better managed and utilised for the nation’s and citizens benefit By governments of all political persuasions.
Always
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
I see energy prices are going to be heading in the opposite direction to those promised by the Labour government.

Fan fucking tastic. Conned and lied to again by a bunch of charlatans.

A couple of things.

You’ve been hyped up on a pledge dating back to 2022 where Labour said that if they were in government they’d have fixed the rate for the upcoming winter period into 2023 at an average of £1970.00. They didn’t make that pledge in their election manifesto so no one lied to you other than various Tories who have been doing the rounds claiming otherwise, specifically referring back to that pledge. You’re getting wound up over a lie. Don’t believe me? Here’s a conservative backed think tank telling you that the Tories are lying to you



Secondly as the article you linked tells you the raise is 1%. Inflation is currently running at 2.6%. This is a below inflation rate and if you want to be pedantic about it that means in real terms it is a cut. Also worth pointing out that this keeps the price cap below half of what it peaked at under the tories.

So in essence, you are being conned and lied to by a bunch of charlatans. You just don’t seem to understand who the charlatans are in this case.
 

Ian1779

Well-Known Member
Why’s that?
Her claims around the reform of OFSTED for example are nothing but cosmetic. The one word overall ‘judgment’ doesn’t appear on a website as a header, but the same judgements by category are still there.
The culture of judgements and the practice of the organisation has not changed one bit - it’s still toxic as ever, just not as obvious to outsiders.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
A couple of things.

You’ve been hyped up on a pledge dating back to 2022 where Labour said that if they were in government they’d have fixed the rate for the upcoming winter period into 2023 at an average of £1970.00. They didn’t make that pledge in their election manifesto so no one lied to you other than various Tories who have been doing the rounds claiming otherwise, specifically referring back to that pledge. You’re getting wound up over a lie. Don’t believe me? Here’s a conservative backed think tank telling you that the Tories are lying to you



Secondly as the article you linked tells you the raise is 1%. Inflation is currently running at 2.6%. This is a below inflation rate and if you want to be pedantic about it that means in real terms it is a cut. Also worth pointing out that this keeps the price cap below half of what it peaked at under the tories.

So in essence, you are being conned and lied to by a bunch of charlatans. You just don’t seem to understand who the charlatans are in this case.
Only a cut if real terms pay rises are greater than 1% across the board.

Maybe the Labour Party should have been explicit about the expiry of the pledge. When I have some time I will do some more research but I’m sure I’ve seen reference to it more recently than 2022. But then, its like a lot of what they said pre election, all to protect the mythical “Ming vase”.
It is so easy, and so empty, to tell the world what you would do when you don’t have the power to actually do it. So misleading not to clearly admit that.

I think this makes the chicanery even more obvious. Duplicitous Cunts the lot of them.

 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
This whole “it’s about the kids” line doesn’t add up. The money raised from the VAT on private education has been pledged to go directly into state education. There’s just over 10 million children in state education, there’s about 500k in private (around 6 percent of who are foreign). If it’s about “the kid’s” then surely you should support this policy. An extra estimated £1.5 billion into state education on 10 million children vs tax breaks for the parents of 500k in private education some of who aren’t even UK citizens so tax breaks to foreigners.

Hold on - aren’t about 50% of private students foreign?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top