TheMiceInTheShed
VIP Member
Hear, hear.
Like Thatcher selling off council housing stock, and Britain's oil, this will produce a (very) short term spike in income and VERY long term national misery and deprivation.
Sir Keir Starmer #2
- Thread starter TheShire
- Start date
1
Like Thatcher selling off council housing stock, and Britain's oil, this will produce a (very) short term spike in income and VERY long term national misery and deprivation.
That under a supposed 'socialist' Government that didn't have issues with people becoming 'filthy rich'.
Labour 1997 - 2010 were responsible for average house prices considerably exceeding the £100k mark.
As I've already stated, in 1997 when they took power, house prices were on average £58,403.
When they left office, prices had risen by over £110,000, to £168,719.
How was Labour allowing that to happen, beneficial in helping to keep the housing market affordable for all?
If you also look at their treasured Minimum Wage, it did not rise in tandem with house prices.
Starting in 1999 at £3.60 per hour, rising to £5.80 by the time they left office.
(https://www.nibusinessinfo.co.uk/content/national-minimum-wage-previous-rates)
Average house prices were not far off being treble in 2010, to what they were in 1997.
Yet the NMW didn't even double.
Ndrangheta
VIP Member
Tbf, I think home buying rose by quite a significant amount, I believe the Blair family now own a fair few properties.
HelloStereo
VIP Member
TheMiceInTheShed
VIP Member
BIB. Agree - someone has written that. Starter is totally without a sense of humour
Last edited:
Theodore
VIP Member
The Guardian being The Guardian (aka embarrassing themselves)
conservativepost.co.uk
Guardian Offers ‘Therapy and Support’ to Staff Upset from Trump’s Win
It appears that the Guardian, in all its virtue-signalling glory, is pulling out the stops to manage what some would call an acute case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Guardian editor Katharine Vine…
conservativepost.co.uk
SkankHunt42
Active member
Keir is so unimpressive with his pre planned lines. He couldn't think on his feet and it's painfully obvious.
But the clapping seals for labour have something to praise him for. Embarrassing.
Ndrangheta
VIP Member
The Guardian being The Guardian (aka embarrassing themselves)
Guardian Offers ‘Therapy and Support’ to Staff Upset from Trump’s Win
It appears that the Guardian, in all its virtue-signalling glory, is pulling out the stops to manage what some would call an acute case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Guardian editor Katharine Vine…
I wrote in another thread that they should really be offering staff at The Observer therapy because they will all be out of a job soon.
Miss Begotten
VIP Member
But you think Badenoch can? Come on, seriously.
She’s nowhere near as clever as she thinks she is. She’s an extremely odd mix of wildly incompetent and unbelievably arrogant.Did you not see her reading from her script as well? ( Posting the proof because we all know how important facts are )
Miss Begotten
VIP Member
You OK hun?
You seem to have given the contents of Starmer’s pants way more thought than is healthy.
HelloStereo
VIP Member
HelloStereo
VIP Member
But you think Badenoch can? Come on, seriously.
Did you not see her reading from her script as well? ( Posting the proof because we all know how important facts are )
She can't even speak properly. Didn't she say at first his trip to COP29 will make our lives more experienced?
Miss Begotten
VIP Member
She can't even speak properly. Didn't she say at first his trip to COP29 will make our lives more experienced?
She’s so busy congratulating herself on what a clever clogs she is that she’s totally missed the fact she’s both thick and useless.
Honestly she made Starmer look assertive and dominant by comparison and he’s neither. He can at least just about read a sentence out loud, which is more than she can.
TheMiceInTheShed
VIP Member
Nice to see Farage has a razor-sharp, sparkling wit -- you don't hear scintillating repartee like that every day.
The point people seem to miss about the pensioners is that the pension isn’t supposed to simply keep them from freezing to death…it’s supposed to provide a sensible standard of living i.e. have some “spare cash”. That includes things like going out to coffee shops, buying plants for the garden and having sky tv…because otherwise what is a retired person supposed to do all day…just stare at the walls?
A person of working age claiming benefits is for the purpose of supporting them until they can support themselves. That is the part of the system that is broken. These are the people who shouldn’t have the “spare cash” for socialising, fake nails, new cars, sky tv, holidays etc. The problem is that there are people working the system too much, they either don’t work at all or work the magic 16hr week to maximise their benefits. They have children without thinking about how to pay for them and without even having suitable accommodation in place before planning a pregnancy. They push for the children to be diagnosed with ADHD/ASD etc as a way of avoiding the benefit cap and claiming disability and carer’s allowances. They then don’t spend the extra money on extra expenses related to their child’s health because it all goes on other things and they don’t actually have any disability-related expenses.
When someone is working full time on a low wage and hasn’t chosen to have children to immediately be claiming tax credits because they know they can’t afford a child before even planning to have one, or someone is genuinely disabled enough that they can’t work at all…those people I would put in the same category as the pensioners…they deserve a benefit system that gives them a reasonable quality of life.
Everyone else needs a kick up the arse. The benefits system should be replaced for these people with vouchers that can only be spent on supermarket food, petrol or local buses, energy, childcare etc. People who are working age and capable or working full time shouldn’t be in a position where claiming benefits instead allows them to save up for holidays and takeaways twice a week.
It sounds very harsh, but the only way to break the cycle and push a next generation to be seeking good jobs and not scrounging is for the parents not to be able to provide everything without working for it. A child who sees their healthy parent not working or choosing to work little hours, then getting games consoles, holidays etc is not going to learn that these luxuries are supposed to come as a result of work. That’s why the pattern repeats itself in the next generation…they see having babies as a way of getting housed and having their life funded by the government.
The area where I live has a free program of activities for children whose parents are on means tested benefits throughout the entire summer break, it includes food every day and on some days quite expensive actives such as sailing and rock climbing. I have a friend who works full time but the family income is fairly low….but just above the line for receiving any means-tested benefits. Her child cannot do activities during the summer due to the cost…the program I’ve mentioned above doesn’t take payment so isn’t an option, the nearest thing to it is a childcare scheme in a sports hall (so no trips or special activities and the children have to bring their own lunch) which costs £35 a day, so would cost £175 a week. She can’t afford that so the child only gets booked in if there is no alternative…instead being dropped off with family or her/husband taking annual leave…with the main activities for the summer being playing at the local park or sitting indoors watching tv, with 1 or 2 proper days out which are planned and budgeted for. When her child goes back to school he hears from his friends who have unemployed mothers that they have been doing a lot more activities and having a lot more fun than he has. So presumably the other kids hear about his summer as a child of working parents being poor in comparison…so how does this incentivise those children to want to avoid entering the benefit system themselves?
A person of working age claiming benefits is for the purpose of supporting them until they can support themselves. That is the part of the system that is broken. These are the people who shouldn’t have the “spare cash” for socialising, fake nails, new cars, sky tv, holidays etc. The problem is that there are people working the system too much, they either don’t work at all or work the magic 16hr week to maximise their benefits. They have children without thinking about how to pay for them and without even having suitable accommodation in place before planning a pregnancy. They push for the children to be diagnosed with ADHD/ASD etc as a way of avoiding the benefit cap and claiming disability and carer’s allowances. They then don’t spend the extra money on extra expenses related to their child’s health because it all goes on other things and they don’t actually have any disability-related expenses.
When someone is working full time on a low wage and hasn’t chosen to have children to immediately be claiming tax credits because they know they can’t afford a child before even planning to have one, or someone is genuinely disabled enough that they can’t work at all…those people I would put in the same category as the pensioners…they deserve a benefit system that gives them a reasonable quality of life.
Everyone else needs a kick up the arse. The benefits system should be replaced for these people with vouchers that can only be spent on supermarket food, petrol or local buses, energy, childcare etc. People who are working age and capable or working full time shouldn’t be in a position where claiming benefits instead allows them to save up for holidays and takeaways twice a week.
It sounds very harsh, but the only way to break the cycle and push a next generation to be seeking good jobs and not scrounging is for the parents not to be able to provide everything without working for it. A child who sees their healthy parent not working or choosing to work little hours, then getting games consoles, holidays etc is not going to learn that these luxuries are supposed to come as a result of work. That’s why the pattern repeats itself in the next generation…they see having babies as a way of getting housed and having their life funded by the government.
The area where I live has a free program of activities for children whose parents are on means tested benefits throughout the entire summer break, it includes food every day and on some days quite expensive actives such as sailing and rock climbing. I have a friend who works full time but the family income is fairly low….but just above the line for receiving any means-tested benefits. Her child cannot do activities during the summer due to the cost…the program I’ve mentioned above doesn’t take payment so isn’t an option, the nearest thing to it is a childcare scheme in a sports hall (so no trips or special activities and the children have to bring their own lunch) which costs £35 a day, so would cost £175 a week. She can’t afford that so the child only gets booked in if there is no alternative…instead being dropped off with family or her/husband taking annual leave…with the main activities for the summer being playing at the local park or sitting indoors watching tv, with 1 or 2 proper days out which are planned and budgeted for. When her child goes back to school he hears from his friends who have unemployed mothers that they have been doing a lot more activities and having a lot more fun than he has. So presumably the other kids hear about his summer as a child of working parents being poor in comparison…so how does this incentivise those children to want to avoid entering the benefit system themselves?