Budget October 2024

[Boomer54]

6 hours ago, Linas.P said:

So is everything else - making false promises to get elected and then no following trough, lying when in government, misleading the public on meaning and results of changes you are doing etc. 

UK is representative democracy, not direct democracy - referendum is a tool of direct democracy, but under system in UK government is sovereign and therefore does not need to implement the results of referendum. Now sure... what does it means in practice? They will be voted out in next election. And that is how changes are achieved in British democracy - in elections, but not in referendums. Again - the whole point of referendum was a dirty ploy to distance themselves from decision, which they knew stinks from a far. The gave choice to the people who were not only poorly equipped to make it, but also actively mislead and deceived... 

Do you truly believe this is the case? Do you truly believe you have a say, we have a say, or would you rather agree that neither party gives a flying money about what electorate wants? I agree this is what it should be, government should only represent people, nothing else. But this is really idealistic belief, I do not personally agree that this is how it works in UK (and brexshaite by the way was not the will of the people). Especially under tories it was abundantly clear that they acted like fffing kings and felt no remorse openly stealing and lying...and brexshaite actually was one example of that.

Tell me one thing - was there a single brexshaite promise that was kept?

Okey - so I think we are getting confused with terminology here. 

Incompetent is somebody who set's out to do something, who has all tools and all possibilities to do it, but ultimately fails, for no other reason but their incompetence. That is incompetent.

Example of incompetent - tories promised to reduce immigration, they created so called "hostile environment", which hurt a lot of hardworking people and just destroyed the trust of those who are already here and are working hard to make this country a better place to live, but ultimately immigration has increased under their rule. They had all the tools, they controlled everything, they could have sent every single non-European immigrant home as soon as they arrived... and they failed. Well... that is incompetent. 

The response to covid was incompetent, the breaxshaite negotiations were incompetent, they said there will be enquiry in "grenfell fire and accountable people will face consequences", but they were incompetent at that, "eat out to help out" policy was incompetent, the "track an trace" system was incompetent (well that was actually beyond incompetent and criminal)... PPE contracts ... well okey - that was also criminal. The "christmas parties" during lockdown... damn... that was also criminal based on the rules they have created themselves. In short - competence is setting out the goals and achieving them, no matter if those goals were good, bad, moral, immoral or whatever else. 

Your argument is - chancellor is "evil" person for taking away subsidy from pensioners. I disagree with you about that, but even if I agreed that would only make her bad person, but not incompetent. What would make her incompetent would be to announce she will cut WFA, but then next year it turns out they paid more WFA then before she anounced it. That would be incompetent. But if she just says she will cut WFA and does it, then there is nothing incompetent about it. When ever it is good or bad decision this will obviously depend on your perspective, but I just can't see how is that incompetent. And how you can say she is incompetent based on single decision about policy. 

No, you don't get to do that with me. It's a very common client trick to deflect away from the issue. Let me make this very simple and direct. Do you believe that every vote is equal and the vote made or not is sacrosant  as to the wishes of the voter and by sacrosant I do mean binding and not to be wriggled out of ? That is the embodiment of Democracy, but as it stands it appears that you believe that some votes, your vote, is worth more ,because you somehow haver a superior ability and appear to be under the belief that if you can prove at least in your mind that you are 'right' that is sufficient to justify that your vote counts for more. Democracy does not work that way. Non Binding actually is a corruption of real Democracy trying to work. IQ does not make your vote worth more than the person cleaning the toilets. Surely you can see that? Or perhaps you would rather not.

Parliament ultimately works for the people. The people voted on Brexit (lies were told by both sides of the argument so zero sum). Representation was not and is not a factor on a national referendum as this is not MP's ,but voters responding on an issue. When it comes to parliament then yes representation might be considered, but actually on this point I doubt it was influential at all as most MP's fell into line with the wishes of their constituency voting. In that sense for once they were doing what their voters asked for.

What followed after Brexit is neither here nor there to this core issue of Democracy, Referendum and Brexit. They are after the fact issues, but yes it all turned into a betrayal of voters. Indeed, ultimately the Tory party paid the price for all that. They lost power and they fragmented into what has become two parties. That won't change now until the Tory party recognise the valid issues that underpin the Reform party. The latter rightly won't change back into Tories until that party addresses their wrongs and becomes something recognisable as a party that has some vestige of belief in being British. They need to get their priorities right.

[GMB]

From someone who failed O-level history, mainly because I thought the 17th Century was actually the 1700s. Now I know better, my wife explained it to me last year. At risk of withering contempt by the earlier contributors after having attempted to read the previous diatribes, here is my authoritative final word on this subject, putting an end to it.   We do have a democracy i.e freely vote in our leaders. It ends there.  The leaders are either corrupt or just plain useless.  They have all made mistakes or wronged the people in some way. We need leaders with intelligence, honesty, foresight, compassion, economic wisdom and selflessness. Such as ...... Err.... can't think of any! ???  BTW Is Jesus due back any time soon?     Nuff said.

[Phil xxkr]

2 minutes ago, GMB said:

From someone who failed O-level history, mainly because I thought the 17th Century was actually the 1700s. Now I know better, my wife explained it to me last year. At risk of withering contempt by the earlier contributors after having attempted to read the previous diatribes, here is my authoritative final word on this subject, putting an end to it.   We do have a democracy i.e freely vote in our leaders. It ends there.  The leaders are either corrupt or just plain useless.  They have all made mistakes or wronged the people in some way. We need leaders with intelligence, honesty, foresight, compassion, economic wisdom and selflessness. Such as ...... Err.... can't think of any! ???  BTW Is Jesus due back any time soon?     Nuff said.

Final word? Is that you acknowledging your position being one of a definite possibility of a very firm maybe. 😅

[Boomer54]

12 minutes ago, GMB said:

From someone who failed O-level history, mainly because I thought the 17th Century was actually the 1700s. Now I know better, my wife explained it to me last year. At risk of withering contempt by the earlier contributors after having attempted to read the previous diatribes, here is my authoritative final word on this subject, putting an end to it.   We do have a democracy i.e freely vote in our leaders. It ends there.  The leaders are either corrupt or just plain useless.  They have all made mistakes or wronged the people in some way. We need leaders with intelligence, honesty, foresight, compassion, economic wisdom and selflessness. Such as ...... Err.... can't think of any! ???  BTW Is Jesus due back any time soon?     Nuff said.

Final word , that stings.

[Phil xxkr]

6 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

Final word , that stings.

Here, have a couple of paracetamol, you'll feel better in the morning. 🍻

[GMB]

I dunno, just like the trouble and strife always has to have the last word!

This is the final, final word  (s)  Rachel Reeves is on telly justifying her cruel decisions.

Right, so this is the new final word -  We're doomed I tell you - DOOMED.

[Phil xxkr]

28 minutes ago, GMB said:

I dunno, just like the trouble and strife always has to have the last word!

This is the final, final word  (s)  Rachel Reeves is on telly justifying her cruel decisions.

Right, so this is the new final word -  We're doomed I tell you - DOOMED.

 

This may explain things to you Gray. 

Psychologist Susan Krauss Whitbourne explains, “Wanting to have the last word is very much related to the attack-mode mentality central to destructive conflict resolution, in which you take on your partner rather than the difference in viewpoints the two of you have.”

🤯😱

[GMB]

Right. This is my final final final word -  Attack mode?  Sounds like fun to me.

BTW I have no need for a psychologist, but a psychiatrist ??  Hmm?  I think I'll get the bike out and go for a burn-up.  Flippin cold though innit?

[GMB]

I just want to put the record straight about my academic career. Yes, I failed history but did OK in maths because I got this difficult question right. What is the geometric name of this shape:

 

Answer: It's a polygon.   Do I need to explain?

[Mr_Groundhog]

On 11/1/2024 at 8:26 AM, Phil xxkr said:

It's hard not to conclude that this is out of the Marxist handbook first control food then the means of production then the people. 😱

That has nothing to do with Marx, and either you know it (and are being disingenous) or you don't and need to open a book for once, instead of coming here to prove you never did. 

Marx's ideas were more in line with you being the owner of the fruit of your labour, and the control of the means of production as a way to snatch them away from the ruling class (those exploiting working people, getting rich without working). 

That's rather at odds with your point. Unless ofc you live in a parallel universe where we are on track to own the means of production collectively, thus owning the profits too. You know: "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs". That's Marx and not what you saw in that Daily Mail tik tok video

If you have the keys to that parallel universe, please let me in. Because what I'm experiencing is we work more and more and obtain less and less for it.

[GMB]

I had no idea Marx was such a deep thinker.

[Boomer54]

30 minutes ago, GMB said:

Right. This is my final final final word -  Attack mode?  Sounds like fun to me.

BTW I have no need for a psychologist, but a psychiatrist ??  Hmm?  I think I'll get the bike out and go for a burn-up.  Flippin cold though innit?

Do you know the difference between a Psychologist and a Psychiatrist?. Many people think they are the same thing by a different name.

[Malc1]

I’m going to be quite intrigued by the Chancellor’s thoughts to “ capture “ the value of Public Sector Pensions pots/values/assets to enable her to use them to borrow in the Markets for UK infrastructure and “ other” projects

Financial Innovation for the benefit of Society ……… maybe not for the Public Sector Pensions tho’ maybe  😂🤣

Wonder what the Unions will be thinking 🤔 

Malc 

 

[GMB]

 

7 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

the difference between a Psychologist and a Psychiatrist

No, but google does ( and psychiatrist has more "t" s in it. )

[Boomer54]

8 minutes ago, Mr_Groundhog said:

That has nothing to do with Marx, and either you know it (and are being disingenous) or you don't and need to open a book for once, instead of coming here to prove you never did. 

Marx's ideas were more in line with you being the owner of the fruit of your labour, and the control of the means of production as a way to snatch them away from the ruling class (those exploiting working people, getting rich without working). 

That's rather at odds with your point. Unless ofc you live in a parallel universe where we are on track to own the means of production collectively, thus owning the profits too. You know: "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs". That's Marx and not what you saw in that Daily Mail tik tok video

If you have the keys to that parallel universe, please let me in. Because what I'm experiencing is we work more and more and obtain less and less for it.

 "Because what I'm experiencing is we work more and more and obtain less and less for it." Or we work more and more and get less choice about it is spent as more is taken at source and expended on things many of us do not want ,or in ways that many of us find to be ineffective and inefficient in value terms. I really would like to see a law passed that puts a cap on centrally collected revenue as a % of GDP. A referendum for that number might be revealing. For example 35% of GDP and no more. Budget everything Goovt want or need to do within that figure and if it does not balance out then you will need to cut something out. If the remaining 65% is left to the individual to spend how they see fit I suspect we might find people do a rather better job of using it than Govt ever will. Who knows may be we might get some real productive growth.

[GMB]

4 minutes ago, Malc1 said:

Wonder what the Unions will be thinking

Now we are talking about the people who really run the country under a labour gov't.

[Boomer54]

4 minutes ago, Malc1 said:

I’m going to be quite intrigued by the Chancellor’s thoughts to “ capture “ the value of Public Sector Pensions pots/values/assets to enable her to use them to borrow in the Markets for UK infrastructure and “ other” projects

Financial Innovation for the benefit of Society ……… maybe not for the Public Sector Pensions tho’ maybe  😂🤣

Wonder what the Unions will be thinking 🤔 

Malc 

 

Hoho, I can hear echos of that stupendous idea that local councils had that they would invest in commercial property etc. Just in time for them to lose their 'shirt'.

[Boomer54]

3 minutes ago, GMB said:

 

No, but google does ( and psychiatrist has more "t" s in it. )

Mostly the last item on the list these days.

[GMB]

2 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

Unless ofc you live in a parallel universe

Can you get there by easyjet from Manchester airport. It sounds nice.

[Boomer54]

1 minute ago, GMB said:

Can you get there by easyjet from Manchester airport. It sounds nice.

I know for a fact the flight has a huge overnight stop in the Middle East. Indeed, they keep 70 seats empty for you know what.

[steve2006]

Just now, GMB said:

Can you get there by easyjet from Manchester airport. It sounds nice.

You can but since the passenger tax was increased in the budget getting there will now cost you more.

[Mr_Groundhog]

As for the budget: my two cents:

1. Clearly this Red-Tory government is more of the same Tatcherist-neoliberal-BS that's destroyed our health, dismantled Democracy's power to drive significant change, and handed the keys over to the super-rich to run everything. We are just collateral damage to them. 
2. They don't believe in the UK: only in their donors, and will barely keep the show on the road for their donors to accumulate more wealth, at our expense. 
3. They are way too scared of the billionaire-run media to help working people and think ethically & strategically (those who do get sacked from the party). 
4. We need proportional representation and some sort of common-market deal with the EU.

[GMB]

1 minute ago, Mr_Groundhog said:

As for the budget: my two cents:

1. Clearly this Red-Tory government is more of the same Tatcherist-neoliberal-BS that's destroyed communities and solidarity, dismantled Democracy's power to drive significant change, and handed the keys over to the super-rich to run everything. Our lives and health are just collateral damage to them. 
2. They don't believe in the UK: only in their donors, and will barely keep the show on the road for their donors to accumulate more wealth, at our expense. 
3. They are way too scared of the billionaire-run media to help working people and think ethically & strategically (those who do get sacked from the party). 
4. We need proportional representation and some sort of common-market deal with the EU.

TBH that sounds like both Tories and Labour.

 

 

BTW I just found the parallel universe on google and EasyJet do fly there but only from Liverpool.

[Malc1]

Gentlemen …… fear not, this Labour Govt has the intelligence and sense to use these billions of Public Sector Pension Pots for good and well thought out benefits for Society ……. Reeves has shown she has this Nation at heart and these monies WILL be used well and meaningfully AND with the Labour MP majority in the House  she has Carte Blanche ……. just so long as no-one comes running to me to bail out future impoverished Public Sector Pensions BUST recipients ………, from my personal pension pot that is hopefully well out of reach of Reeves thieving grasp ( I think Black Rock might well tell this Labour Govt to simply f…ck Off ) 

Malc 

[Mr_Groundhog]

11 minutes ago, Boomer54 said:

 "Because what I'm experiencing is we work more and more and obtain less and less for it." Or we work more and more and get less choice about it is spent as more is taken at source and expended on things many of us do not want ,or in ways that many of us find to be ineffective and inefficient in value terms. I really would like to see a law passed that puts a cap on centrally collected revenue as a % of GDP. A referendum for that number might be revealing. For example 35% of GDP and no more. Budget everything Goovt want or need to do within that figure and if it does not balance out then you will need to cut something out. If the remaining 65% is left to the individual to spend how they see fit I suspect we might find people do a rather better job of using it than Govt ever will. Who knows may be we might get some real productive growth.

We cannot solve everything with growth. Particularly growth-for-growt's-sake as we do in our society. It's proven not to work as a metric, and it will eventually lead us all to a dark place.

We have sovereignty over the currency and the money supply in the UK (unlike countries in the EU), and we could do lots of things if there was political will to do so.
Think how for some things there is never a shortage of money. For those things the tap is always open and flowing...

I urge to look up "modern monetary theory" and give it a chance.