Boomer54

4 minutes ago, First_Lexus said:

I’ve only just discovered that Keir Starmer’s middle name is Rodney…

…might explain why he’s such a plonker!

I think you have been spelling his name wrong. Pretty sure it's Kare Starmer. (Sic)

1 hour ago, Malc1 said:

I did mention before about OAPs somehow aligning with the Rail Unions   ASLEF and the RMT 

Also I’m warming to the mentioned WARM AID concept 

At the weekend I did pop into our local Oxfam shop to ask if Bob Geldof had been around recently …… he would be my point of contact to get this ball rolling if others felt there was merit here

We did prior suggest Rolling Stones. Beatles  and  Queen  with Bob Geldof   atop Buckingham Palace maybe 🤔 

Thoughts ?? 

Malc 

 

 

 

I think they should be atop the Bank Of England. They play we tunnel !

I was thinking about OAP strike action, but I'm coming up short ! 😀

1 hour ago, Malc1 said:

Look here I’m only 74 and I’m thinking my Lexii should see me thru this next 30 years of sublime motoring 😂🤣🤞🤞🤞 

Malc 

477,202 up again in these last few minutes 

👍👍👍

Are you leaving me your LS ?

2 hours ago, Boomer54 said:

No worries. In 2024 Labour managed just 9.7 million votes. There are apparently 10 million OAP's plus lord knows how many more about to be OAPS in the next 4 years. Do the math ! If Starmer can't work it out for himself then he is too daft to be put in charge of a bacon slicer nevermind managing the future of a country. Like Forests mama used to say "Life is like a box of chocolates. Greedy people gonna puke eating the lot".

By the way how about an interesting fact. Question, why are Western economies particularly in Europe on such a poor trajectory for growth/productivity? Now I hope our politicians are listening given how many of them purport to want high growth. Answer, as our state bureaucracy grows bigger our overall economic growth and the productivty that fuels it diminishes. It's an inverse relationship ! You see you cannot have both an ever growing state AND a productive economy that grows. In the West only the US manages to come close and I think that will found to be entirely due to two factors. A system that allows for 'failure' at both an individual and corporate level. This tends to alleviate carrying 'dead weight' in the form of debt . Second, it's a resource rich country. Most of Europe is the antithesis of this. Relevance? If you can't get growth you end up making crap policy to buy people off in what is a stagnating economy. Enter such idiocy as the Winter Fuel policy etc etc.

8 hours ago, GMB said:

We are all interested but the problem is can we do anything about it any time soon. I doubt it too. Just accept the beating from your gracious elected leaders.

No worries. In 2024 Labour managed just 9.7 million votes. There are apparently 10 million OAP's plus lord knows how many more about to be OAPS in the next 4 years. Do the math ! If Starmer can't work it out for himself then he is too daft to be put in charge of a bacon slicer nevermind managing the future of a country. Like Forests mama used to say "Life is like a box of chocolates. Greedy people gonna puke eating the lot".

1 hour ago, GMB said:

Maybe Gordon Brown set the tone of plundering the pension pots, but now there is no pension pot so lets go for the pensioners.

 Let's just admit that we got the party that was voted for by default i.e. not conservative. It just turned out that we got a sh1tload of snakes who see pensioners as plums ripe for the picking who have no defence worth worrying about. Ah well, 5 yrs later and we will be voting against another load of shysters that we don't want. Anyone got the answer? I certainly haven't.

 

Yes, I have, but are enough people interested? I doubt it. 😕 

1 minute ago, LenT said:

Console Box.

And I claim my £5!

£5. See Malc my accountant.. ☺️

21 minutes ago, Phil xxkr said:

If you have been voting for politicians who promise to give you goodies at someone else's expense, then you have no right to complain when they take your money and give it to someone else, including themselves.”

― Thomas Sowell

On that basis the non voters are the heroes.

1 hour ago, Boomer54 said:

Let's try some interesting facts.

There are approx. 47 million voters reg in the UK.

Of these just;

9.7m voted Labour 

6.8m voted Tory

4.1m voted Reform

The rest are pretty much irrelevant, but allow 4 m to cover the rest and approx just 24/25 million of 47 million voters actually voted. So 'Democracy' was achieved by just over half the voters who could be bothered.

More;

Labours meagre 9.7m votes represented approx 34/35% of actual votes cast (and just 20% of the electoral register of voters), but under the current system that means they won 63% of the seats in parliament.

Torys even more  meagre 6.8m votes are approx 24% of votes cast , but won them just 19%of the seats in parliament (do the math and tell me where is the logic)

Reform come in with 4.1m votes, or 14% of votes cast, but get just 0.8% of the seats in parliament (that's not a typo it really is as stupid as it appears).

Do a little basic arithmatic the Tory/Reform took 10.9m votes (more than Labour), but that gets you barely 25% of the seats compared to 63% for Labour with fewer votes !!!

Come along guys. Does this look anything like Democracy?

Can any party come to govt with just 20% of the voting electorate really claim they are representative of the voters in this country and are empowered because of that to think they know what the people of this country want to see from it's govt?

It is all just as absurd as it's looks at first blush.

 

 

It occurs to me that something like 40% of voters opt not to vote. Some might suggest they have no right to complain. I do not. To me looking at the numbers above I am surprised that as much as 60% of voters do still choose to vote given that most of them are still not going to have any voice in the elected govt. On that basis it is not really surprising so many choose not to bother after all nearly 80% of eligible voters do NOT have any representation in govt.

Yes, truly Democracy in action (sic). A system so broken millions choose to opt out.

32 minutes ago, RONNIE W HODGEKINSON said:

NO... Keep Your Jump Start Unit In The Glovebox You Might Just not be able to open The Boot......!!! Think About it

That had also occurred to me. I carry mine in the central storage box between the seats. I bet this 'box' actually has a name if I could just remember it. Enlighten me anybody!

Let's try some interesting facts.

There are approx. 47 million voters reg in the UK.

Of these just;

9.7m voted Labour 

6.8m voted Tory

4.1m voted Reform

The rest are pretty much irrelevant, but allow 4 m to cover the rest and approx just 24/25 million of 47 million voters actually voted. So 'Democracy' was achieved by just over half the voters who could be bothered.

More;

Labours meagre 9.7m votes represented approx 34/35% of actual votes cast (and just 20% of the electoral register of voters), but under the current system that means they won 63% of the seats in parliament.

Torys even more  meagre 6.8m votes are approx 24% of votes cast , but won them just 19%of the seats in parliament (do the math and tell me where is the logic)

Reform come in with 4.1m votes, or 14% of votes cast, but get just 0.8% of the seats in parliament (that's not a typo it really is as stupid as it appears).

Do a little basic arithmatic the Tory/Reform took 10.9m votes (more than Labour), but that gets you barely 25% of the seats compared to 63% for Labour with fewer votes !!!

Come along guys. Does this look anything like Democracy?

Can any party come to govt with just 20% of the voting electorate really claim they are representative of the voters in this country and are empowered because of that to think they know what the people of this country want to see from it's govt?

It is all just as absurd as it's looks at first blush.

Just 'cos.

Yup her name is Rachel

Fuel,pah.

More  c/o of a new govt.

After events of recent days i was feeling a bit flat wondering exactly when did people just become so b...y discourteous and uncaring. Got me thinking I am glad to be this age so I don't have to up with a lifetime of this crap.

So, best thing to lift one, a bit of humour.

1 hour ago, Phil xxkr said:

Nice idea but does anyone recall a single instance when this happened? It won't happen, it's in their DNA, historically Conservatives raise taxes when they have too, Labour when they can 😱

Therefore I repeat given they don't do this, change their minds, all the more reason to canvas widely for a change to the system that takes away the scale of their power and puts it where it belongs back in the hands of the voters.

I am curious about the hood down situation. As anybody read anything previously to suggest prolonged hood down drains the Battery?

1 hour ago, Mossypossy said:

Car just about started today for garage shunting. Would not have taken a second startup though.

Proves however that battery is not being drained dry by a phantom load like when roof was left down.

How long had you had ut in charge for?

Does the charger have a crank test function?

19 minutes ago, Phil xxkr said:

Exactly so! Do you think smoke free will extend to wood burners and barbecues in the garden? 😱

I think that as usual they will find idea and execution are a galaxy apart. How in heavens name do you actually enforce this idea? 

As time goes by I have lost respect for govt and thus the rule of law THEY decide upon. Once upon a time I would have said "break a law", absolutely not. Nowadays I think if you make legal crapp I will ignore it and go my own way. That's what a loss of respect and credibility gets you.

8 minutes ago, Bob King said:

Money well spent 👍🏻

I see it’s next to the wine rack 😉

Agree money well spent, Rioja, and the chargers ok.😇

Actually appears very similar to my CTEK MXS5

10 minutes ago, Phil xxkr said:

And it doesn't end! 

Labour denied plans to restrict outdoor smoking are an attack on pubs after dire warnings struggling hospitality businesses will go to the wall.

Commons Leader Lucy Powell said the government wants to see a “smoke free country” as she dodged questions about the scale of the ban being planned.

Maybe she should have thought do the voters of this country want to see a "smoke free country"?. What the "govt" wants is irrelevant.

This of course will be lost upon them. They actually think voters want them to impose their views rather than consult with people as to their views. That's what happens when ideology has no control imposed on it.

45 minutes ago, Malc1 said:

464,670. Signatures till now 

AGE. UK.   Petition 

WINTER FUEL PAYMENT 

 

I am anticipating the 335 brand new MPs with zilch experience of front line politics might have the balls to stand-up and be counted and, given the opportunity, vote this down ……. their consciences just might kick in 🤔

Malc 

Malc, if they were the same beneficiaries of marginal swing seat from Tory to Labour they must be downright stupid not to understand the impact at the next election. You know the old adage "what has been given can be taken away". They should be thinking about that.

1 hour ago, Kevin Williams said:

If MPs want to scrap the Winter Fuel Allowance they should lose their own fuel allowance and share the pain with pensioners. Agree? Sign the petition today: https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/strip-mps-of-their-fuel-allowance?source=whatsapp-share-button&utm_campaign=blast53877&utm_medium=socialshare&utm_source=whatsapp&share=afbbe030-bd0a-417a-b7a0-8bf6b2ec60ea

This is 'difficult'. I have every and I do mean every sympathy with the thought process behind this. Unfortunately, the thinking does not meet my standard for good reasoning. I explain, If you have a job that requires a uniform then your employer might provide that for you and I don't think this idea is particularly contentious. Ergo if you are an MP and that job necessitates a second residence with it's attendant costs including fuel provision it fits the same logic. The whole argument of tying that provision to the isse of OAP's winter fuel allowance is to be frank nonsensical in rational terms. It is an emotional fed reasoning to people who are both angry and frustrated. The answer to the latter is not to compound one wrong with adding another wrong. The answer is to correct the original mistake. Change the logistical way in which the policy is applied, raise the means testing barrier. It's obvious, and it's right. The problem I suspect is that it is not as simple to execute as their current criteria and if you add in extra bureaucratic costs to the process the relatively small saving will evaporate completely. In summary, be the 'bigger man' , admit you got it wrong, apologise, cancel the policy and win a bit of public support back. Move on.