Do you want to discuss boring politics? (28 Viewers)

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Perhaps Denmarks approach to immigration has cheered the locals up
It’s got more to do with the good standard of work life balance that Denmark is famous for and a functioning NHS. Their approach to immigration is no different to ours really, in fact they’ve just passed a new act in parliament to make it easier for immigrants to work by rescinding the need for a Danish bank account and simplifying the process for a work permit.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
It’s got more to do with the good standard of work life balance that Denmark is famous for and a functioning NHS. Their approach to immigration is no different to ours really, in fact they’ve just passed a new act in parliament to make it easier for immigrants to work by rescinding the need for a Danish bank account and simplifying the process for a work permit.

Mmmmm

 

wingy

Well-Known Member
It’s got more to do with the good standard of work life balance that Denmark is famous for and a functioning NHS. Their approach to immigration is no different to ours really, in fact they’ve just passed a new act in parliament to make it easier for immigrants to work by rescinding the need for a Danish bank account and simplifying the process for a work


Why the need to rescind the requirement for a bank account,is it a cash in hand free for all or something other?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
I guess we've got to process them first, what's the reason for theirs?
The first thing is they haven’t rescinded every Syrian refugee status. I think it equates to about 100. The reason is because the part of Syria they’re from Denmark has deemed safe to return too. As we have in some cases.

It may also be the case that Denmark hasn’t had a government who created a deliberate backlog for political positioning of causing a problem so they can make out they’re the only ones who can deal with it. If we had been processing asylum claims for the last 5 years or so as we should have been we’d probably be returning people in numbers back to Syria (amongst other countries) for the same reason.
 

Ring Of Steel

Well-Known Member
It’s the principle that millionaires children would qualify when they could, according to some on here, surely afford to pay for it themselves. And isn’t yet another state intervention abrogating parents of their responibility?

you truly have no clue. Older generations create misery & hardship for those that follow, then try to stop kids getting fed.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
you truly have no clue. Older generations create misery & hardship for those that follow, then try to stop kids getting fed.
Who is trying to stop kids getting fed?

How have boomers created misery and hardship for those following?

Boomers will all be dead soon enough. Who will you blame for your woes then?
 

Nick

Administrator
you truly have no clue. Older generations create misery & hardship for those that follow, then try to stop kids getting fed.
How?

I don't get it, I had a child, I go to work and get paid money to feed, clothe, bring her up. Id work cleaning bogs in McDonald's if I had to to be able to do this.

I couldn't afford 5 children and to be fair probably couldn't afford 3 and be able to give them a comfortable life.

I do like that the breakfast clubs mean that people who work can drop kids off so it takes away an excuse that people can't work because of the school run. It means people can start work at 9 still without the stress of getting the kids to school.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
FSM - £1bn/year for universality


Apologies seems my initial source was out by 0.1bn its £1.5bn for universal WFP:

It’s £1bn per year for universality for primary school children only, the paper says £2.5bn per year for all pupils, trebling existing spending meaning universal wfp would be 60% of the cost.

What about the £22bn black hole?

Perhaps Starmer’s return of the sausages will bring the cost down.
 
Last edited:

Ring Of Steel

Well-Known Member
How?

I don't get it, I had a child, I go to work and get paid money to feed, clothe, bring her up. Id work cleaning bogs in McDonald's if I had to to be able to do this.

I couldn't afford 5 children for example.

I do like that the breakfast clubs mean that people who work can drop kids off so it takes away an excuse that people can't work because of the school run. It means people can start work at 9 still without the stress of getting the kids to school.

The comments were directed at Malc, who likes to talk about the lovely benefits he enjoys, while pouring scorn on people who suffer with depression and anxiety, and questioning whether meals should be provided for children or whether parents should be asked to pay, then suggesting that it’s absolving people of parental responsibility. While at the same time knowing full well (but refusing to acknowledge) the hardship that has been created for parents, and the sheer lengths that some have to go to in order to make ends meet.

I’m clueless about politics so have no idea who to ‘blame’, but my view is that the mammoth inequality & ‘service to self’ culture that’s been created over the last few decades is horrible.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
The comments were directed at Malc, who likes to talk about the lovely benefits he enjoys, while pouring scorn on people who suffer with depression and anxiety, and questioning whether meals should be provided for children or whether parents should be asked to pay, then suggesting that it’s absolving people of parental responsibility. While at the same time knowing full well (but refusing to acknowledge) the hardship that has been created for parents, and the sheer lengths that some have to go to in order to make ends meet.

I’m clueless about politics so have no idea who to ‘blame’, but my view is that the mammoth inequality & ‘service to self’ culture that’s been created over the last few decades is horrible.
What benefits have I talked about enjoying? I have been made redundant three times and yet never claimed unemployment benefit. I was extemely rarely off sick despite working in a stressful job and have never claimed sickness benefits. I have hardly made use of the NHS. The only state benefit I receive is the state pension, having contributed to NI for 45 years and paid a fortune in income tax for 50 years and counting.

I do think that today’s woke culture and the need for trigger warnings before fictional programmes indicates a general lack of mental robustness and resilience. I do recognise that most people off sick for whatever reason are genuine, but I do think that the relatively small percentage I suggested might return to work ( and I suspect Starmer has similar thoughts) is not entirely unreasonable.

Have parents whose children turn up not potty trained or knowing how to clean their teeth fulfilled their responsibility? I would suggest not. Should children be fed, of course they should. Is it ultimately the states responsibility to do so, I think not.

Who has created the hardships you refer to? Not the boomers but successive governments both Labour and Tory.
 
Last edited:

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Starmers conferance keynote is going well, this definitely won't be the only part anyone shares and remembers



It’s been a pretty shambolic start for the government to be honest. Even Rachel Reeves has had to dial down some of the rhetoric about the state of public finances because it’s almost talking the country into recession by decreasing confidence.

Sir John Curtice (an expert pollster) has already painted a pretty bleak picture for Labour’s future election chances.
 

Sbarcher

Well-Known Member
It’s been a pretty shambolic start for the government to be honest. Even Rachel Reeves has had to dial down some of the rhetoric about the state of public finances because it’s almost talking the country into recession by decreasing confidence.

Sir John Curtice (an expert pollster) has already painted a pretty bleak picture for Labour’s future election chances.
Can’t trust Reeves. She can’t clap properly.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Can’t trust Reeves. She can’t clap properly.
The first mistake anyone can make is to put their trust or faith in any politician.

The whole Labour ‘donor-gate’ wouldn’t be as big issue had they not played ‘holier than thou’ in Opposition. Specifically, just how hard Starmer went in on Boris Johnson for ‘wallpaper-gate’.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
It’s been a pretty shambolic start for the government to be honest. Even Rachel Reeves has had to dial down some of the rhetoric about the state of public finances because it’s almost talking the country into recession by decreasing confidence.

Sir John Curtice (an expert pollster) has already painted a pretty bleak picture for Labour’s future election chances.
Starmer’s approval rating is currently lower than Sunak’s.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Starmer’s approval rating is currently lower than Sunak’s.

Yep, buyers remorse has definitely started to kick in. That’s quite a statement given just how unpopular the Tory government was and in hindsight, how stupid it was for an early election.

It’s not out of the realms of possibility for Reform to have a breakthrough in the Red Wall at by-elections. Labour had some close calls without the unpopularity of being in government.
 

Ring Of Steel

Well-Known Member
What benefits have I talked about enjoying? I have been made redundant three times and yet never claimed unemployment benefit. I was extemely rarely off sick despite working in a stressful job and have never claimed sickness benefits. I have hardly made use of the NHS. The only state benefit I receive is the state pension, having contributed to NI for 45 years and paid a fortune in income tax for 60years and counting.

I do think that today’s woke culture and the need for trigger warnings before fictional programmes indicates a general lack of mental robustness and resilience. I do recognise that most people off sick for whatever reason are genuine, but I do think that the relatively small percentage I suggested might return to work ( and I suspect Starmer has similar thoughts) is not entirely unreasonable.

Have parents whose children turn up not potty trained or knowing how to clean their teeth fulfilled their responsibility? I would suggest not. Should children be fed, of course they should. Is it ultimately the states responsibility to do so, I think not.

Who has created the hardships you refer to? Not the boomers but successive governments both Labour and Tory.

I would humbly invite you to not talk about things you clearly don’t understand. Linking ‘woke culture’ to depression and anxiety and a ‘lack of resilience’ is beyond insulting. But sadly quite typical of people of a certain vintage.
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
What benefits have I talked about enjoying? I have been made redundant three times and yet never claimed unemployment benefit. I was extemely rarely off sick despite working in a stressful job and have never claimed sickness benefits. I have hardly made use of the NHS. The only state benefit I receive is the state pension, having contributed to NI for 45 years and paid a fortune in income tax for 50 years and counting.

I do think that today’s woke culture and the need for trigger warnings before fictional programmes indicates a general lack of mental robustness and resilience. I do recognise that most people off sick for whatever reason are genuine, but I do think that the relatively small percentage I suggested might return to work ( and I suspect Starmer has similar thoughts) is not entirely unreasonable.

Have parents whose children turn up not potty trained or knowing how to clean their teeth fulfilled their responsibility? I would suggest not. Should children be fed, of course they should. Is it ultimately the states responsibility to do so, I think not.

Who has created the hardships you refer to? Not the boomers but successive governments both Labour and Tory.
Nobody has said the state should be feeding every meal for every child for every day of the year. There are so many benefits of a free school meal programme beyond just children not being hungry or reliant on crap for a small cost in the grand scheme of the budget.

We could be callous and say that the pensioners should have saved more money in their working lives to prepare for retirement. That would be a dick move, so is finding an excuse not to do something that we know helps with educational outcomes.

FSM is a hand up, not a hand out.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
Nobody has said the state should be feeding every meal for every child for every day of the year. There are so many benefits of a free school meal programme beyond just children not being hungry or reliant on crap for a small cost in the grand scheme of the budget.

We could be callous and say that the pensioners should have saved more money in their working lives to prepare for retirement. That would be a dick move, so is finding an excuse not to do something that we know helps with educational outcomes.

FSM is a hand up, not a hand out.
TBH it’s the way they went about the winter fuel allowance that has pissed me off. Frankly, I don’t need it although it was nice to have.

Had they addressed it in the budget, with a proper impact assessment, made clear it was a choice acknowledging it flew in the face of what they were saying pre election, introduced the change next financial year allowing those pensioners who were never in a position to save more money for their retirement during their working lives time to adjust and/ or make the necessary applications for additional qualifying benefits, not tried to blame it on a mythical £22bn black hole and not suggested that keeping it would have crashed the economy - then I wouldn’t have been so angry. Told the truth and stood accountable in other words.

In my view they should stop the £10 Christmas payment and have a double lock for pensions - inflation or average.pay increase would be entirely reasonable (i.e, drop the minimum 2.5%).
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
TBH it’s the way they went about the winter fuel allowance that has pissed me off. Frankly, I don’t need it although it was nice to have.

Had they addressed it in the budget, with a proper impact assessment, made clear it was a choice acknowledging it flew in the face of what they were saying pre election, introduced the change next financial year allowing those pensioners who were never in a position to save more money for their retirement during their working lives time to adjust and/ or make the necessary applications for additional qualifying benefits, not tried to blame it on a mythical £22bn black hole and not suggested that keeping it would have crashed the economy - then I wouldn’t have been so angry. Told the truth and stood accountable in other words.
You won’t see me disagreeing with this. I’m just trying to get you to see the argument for universal FSM which is a high impact, low cost idea.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
You won’t see me disagreeing with this. I’m just trying to get you to see the argument for universal FSM which is a high impact, low cost idea.
I just don’t see £2.5bn as low cost, and that’s excluding the breakfast clubs. I suppose we will see how it will be funded in the budget, but if the £22bn black hole is real (ha ha)and the wfp not affordable, how can the fsm be?
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
TBH it’s the way they went about the winter fuel allowance that has pissed me off. Frankly, I don’t need it although it was nice to have.

Had they addressed it in the budget, with a proper impact assessment, made clear it was a choice acknowledging it flew in the face of what they were saying pre election, introduced the change next financial year allowing those pensioners who were never in a position to save more money for their retirement during their working lives time to adjust and/ or make the necessary applications for additional qualifying benefits, not tried to blame it on a mythical £22bn black hole and not suggested that keeping it would have crashed the economy - then I wouldn’t have been so angry. Told the truth and stood accountable in other words.

In my view they should stop the £10 Christmas payment and have a double lock for pensions - inflation or average.pay increase would be entirely reasonable (i.e, drop the minimum 2.5%).

Additionally, the optics is terrible. They stated just how bad public finances were, chose a universal benefit that cost £1bn (or so) but in the same breath ‘pay off’ their trade union masters with inflation busting pay rises worth 4 or 5 times that. Then, targeting pensioners is the least popular group to go after because they’ve done the responsible thing to save over years and have earned their retirement.

There is a case for removing the winter fuel allowance but as you say, it was abrupt without an impact assessment. A better way would’ve been to combine the benefit with pension credit or something similar to soften the blow in the short term.

Apparently, briefings in the press suggest that it was a recommendation from the treasury that Reeves just went along with. Just how poor is that political judgement?!
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Additionally, the optics is terrible. They stated just how bad public finances were, chose a universal benefit that cost £1bn (or so) but in the same breath ‘pay off’ their trade union masters with inflation busting pay rises worth 4 or 5 times that. Then, targeting pensioners is the least popular group to go after because they’ve done the responsible thing to save over years and have earned their retirement.

There is a case for removing the winter fuel allowance but as you say, it was abrupt without an impact assessment. A better way would’ve been to combine the benefit with pension credit or something similar to soften the blow in the short term.

Apparently, briefings in the press suggest that it was a recommendation from the treasury that Reeves just went along with. Just how poor is that political judgement?!
Or an excuse for her/him for convenience?
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Or an excuse for her/him for convenience?
An excuse for Rachel Reeves? Nah, it’s worse than that. In terms of the economy, she is about as establishment as you can get (literally an ex-banker) and won’t really challenge the orthodoxy at the treasury (I.e. higher public spending and increasingly higher or new taxes) or have any original ideas.
 

The Reverend Skyblue

Well-Known Member
What I do like about Starmer , and as a Manager at National Grid, is his total commitment that to have energy security and cheaper electricity we need to upgrade our 60 year old 400/275 kV voltage transmission system, which will include new circuits/pylons, come what may
All the new offshore wind/solar and nuclear generation cant be transmitted on existing infrastructure so he knows only new circuits can do this , which will upset a lot of people but we can’t do it any other way. We will do a lot of new circuits offshore but some have to be done onshore and he knows that and he’s fully committed to it
I’m not a labour voter and really dislike this donor shite regarding clothes etc, but he’s doing OK in my book, so far
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
What I do like about Starmer , and as a Manager at National Grid, is his total commitment that to have energy security and cheaper electricity we need to upgrade our 60 year old 400/275 kV voltage transmission system, which will include new circuits/pylons, come what may
All the new offshore wind/solar and nuclear generation cant be transmitted on existing infrastructure so he knows only new circuits can do this , which will upset a lot of people but we can’t do it any other way. We will do a lot of new circuits offshore but some have to be done onshore and he knows that and he’s fully committed to it
I’m not a labour voter and really dislike this donor shite regarding clothes etc, but he’s doing OK in my book, so far
You've done well mate I remember you retraining for that industry a while back?
 

Brighton Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
I just don’t see £2.5bn as low cost, and that’s excluding the breakfast clubs. I suppose we will see how it will be funded in the budget, but if the £22bn black hole is real (ha ha)and the wfp not affordable, how can the fsm be?
It would amount to under 0.25% of government spending.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top