Sour Mash Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 3 hours ago, Si1 said: the establishment will always close ranks The establishment wants Starmer - he did a bang up job of completely excising populist Corbyn and maybe more importantly, his supporters in the Labour Party. Sunak is the placeholder and is there to make sure Starmer's Labour get in with a whopping majority which will be portrayed by the media as a massive mandate to do whatever he wants (which de facto, will be whatever the establishment decide to tell him to do). This 'mandate' will of course be nothing of the sort - chances are this will be one of the lowest overall turnouts ever with the least amount of actual support for the winner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishfinger Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 6 hours ago, Stewy said: I don't know how people end up in this situation. Living is really Cheap. Houses are very reasonable apart from in the London, Cornwall and Belfast hotspots. So the Home counties house prices are dirt cheap then? Really? Is it cheap to live in Oxford? How about Cambridge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Social Justice League Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 27 minutes ago, Sour Mash said: The establishment wants Starmer - he did a bang up job of completely excising populist Corbyn and maybe more importantly, his supporters in the Labour Party. Sunak is the placeholder and is there to make sure Starmer's Labour get in with a whopping majority which will be portrayed by the media as a massive mandate to do whatever he wants (which de facto, will be whatever the establishment decide to tell him to do). This 'mandate' will of course be nothing of the sort - chances are this will be one of the lowest overall turnouts ever with the least amount of actual support for the winner. No way I'm voting for that Nulabour Tory, Starmer. He can f4ck right off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreamcasting Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 2 minutes ago, Social Justice League said: No way I'm voting for that Nulabour Tory, Starmer. He can f4ck right off. He's the one getting in unfortunately whether we like it or not. And after a couple of years tops, people will be crying for the Tories to get back in next time. Rinse and repeat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 10 minutes ago, Social Justice League said: No way I'm voting for that Nulabour Tory, Starmer. He can f4ck right off. Lots of people will think the same but Sunak's tories have been so awful that even fewer will vote for them. I am gonna predict that Starmer gets a large parliamentary majority with about the same (or maybe even fewer) total votes than Corbyn got in 2017. Maybe even comparable to 2019 where the Tories annihilated Labour due to Boris' support for Brexit. 2017: 12,877,918 vs 13,636,684 (against May) 2019: 10,269,051 vs 13,966,454 (against Bozo the clown). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regprentice Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 2 hours ago, cdd said: Didn't they recently introduce a new benefits system that penalises people for saving money? Seems a powerful incentive to spend rather than save. you cant have more than £16k in the bank. for a family just scraping into the bottom 43% and having £100 a month after bills that would take more than 13 years to save In reality the bottom 43% of families try and save then get wiped out by a washing machine packing in, or a boiler packing in. What the 16k limit really does is penalise the middle classes for thinking "xxxx this, im going on the dole til i retire"... because years of savings will get eaten up in months until you only have 16k left Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownwardSlopingPlateau Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 3 hours ago, Stewy said: A lot of it is the typical playing-the-victim to get more handouts. I can assure you, those living on State handouts in this country have plenty of spare cash at the end of the month - and in the middle of it too. It's the poor buggers still working we need to think about.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Social Justice League Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 (edited) 25 minutes ago, regprentice said: you cant have more than £16k in the bank. for a family just scraping into the bottom 43% and having £100 a month after bills that would take more than 13 years to save In reality the bottom 43% of families try and save then get wiped out by a washing machine packing in, or a boiler packing in. What the 16k limit really does is penalise the middle classes for thinking "xxxx this, im going on the dole til i retire"... because years of savings will get eaten up in months until you only have 16k left Agree, the only real answer is to hold it in cash, but then it becomes like the Sopranos with how much money you can bury in your closet. Edited February 2 by Social Justice League Typo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnno1167 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 7 hours ago, Stewy said: I don't know how people end up in this situation. Living is really Cheap. Houses are very reasonable apart from in the London, Cornwall and Belfast hotspots. A healthy diet can be had for half an hour per day at minimum wage. People are just spending too much on beige crap takeaways and too-big cars. It is a little bit more complex than this. Average house prices in many regions are >10x local wage. It is not just confined to hotspots. I live in a terrace house, good area . Not a palace. Yours for 650K .Not a city either. Not in a hot spot. Access to fresh food : not viable for many people. If you read some of the Rowntree foundation studies, and others, you’ll find that many communities are miles from places selling fresh fruit/vegetables. Especially if you don’t have a car. Your local shopping options are very limited to low cost /frozen / fast food making up >90% of what is on offer. education : many people have not been educated to cook properly. Successive governments have removed nutrition and home economics from the school agenda. Time : people working 12-14 hours , long commutes, caring for elderly parents or relatives as the social care system has collapsed - they have no time to cook. Honestly, your analysis is reductive, it completely negates the paradigm in which many people have to live. Living is not cheaper, read the maths. Do the studies. Write the costs of things down. Heating costs / fuel costs / insurance costs / food costs/ travel costs / clothes costs - all massively outpaced average wage growth . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnno1167 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 23 minutes ago, DownwardSlopingPlateau said: I can assure you, those living on State handouts in this country have plenty of spare cash at the end of the month - and in the middle of it too. It's the poor buggers still working we need to think about.. Data ? Sources ? Analysis ? How do you substantiate your generalisation ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kzb Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 (edited) 3 hours ago, regprentice said: theres a thread on the same survey on mumsnet. They've read the statistics differently and that the total proportion of people with £100 or less, including people with zero or less than zero, is 43%. The research found that more than one in five (22%) families had no more than £100 spare a month by the end of last year – almost double the percentage in 2021 (13%). The percentage of families with no money left at all by the end of each month also increased nearly twofold, from 11 per cent in 2022 to 21 per cent in 2023. https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4997250-if-i-am-reading-this-right-about-43-of-families-had-either-no-money-or-less-than-ps100-spare-cash-at-the-end-of-each-month I've not managed to find the original report itself. I found this on the Nationwide site: Research from Nationwide shows how costs have soared for the typical British family since 2021 – from mortgage or rent payments to food, energy and fuel – with more than one in five households having less than £100 spare each month. The research found that more than one in five (22%) families had no more than £100 spare a month by the end of last year – almost double the percentage in 2021 (13%). The percentage of families with no money left at all by the end of each month also increased nearly twofold, from 11 per cent in 2022 to 21 per cent in 2023. Taken literally, this 2nd para could mean either of two things. 21% had zero money left and a further 1% had between zero and £100 left. OR 21% had zero money left and a further 22% had between zero and £100 left (i.e. 43% with <£100). But that 2nd option does not square with the first paragraph, where it says more than 1 in 5, which you wouldn't write if you were referring to 43%. But I notice the similarity between 21% and 22%, which could be rounding error. It could actually mean 22% of families had between zero and £100 (i.e. including families with zero in the same cohort as those who said between zero and £100). To be honest I assumed the latter, after reading the 1st paragraph, perhaps wrongly. We really need to see the original data to be sure what it means. Edited February 2 by kzb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnno1167 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 6 hours ago, Stewy said: Water is still very Cheap. Because they’re allowed to let sewage spill into the rivers and streams and seas : billions of Litres a year , because shareholder dividend has been prioritised vs infrastructure. Loads of my son’s school class got ill recently after a canoeing trip on a well known river. Several got independent tests and guess what., E-Coli, Strep-C found .. all from sewage. So water is cheap at the expense of environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewy Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 3 minutes ago, Johnno1167 said: Because they’re allowed to let sewage spill into the rivers and streams and seas : billions of Litres a year , because shareholder dividend has been prioritised vs infrastructure. Loads of my son’s school class got ill recently after a canoeing trip on a well known river. Several got independent tests and guess what., E-Coli, Strep-C found .. all from sewage. So water is cheap at the expense of environment. Shouldn't have swallowed any... 👍 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkHorseWaits-NoMore Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 7 minutes ago, Stewy said: Shouldn't have swallowed any... 👍 What are you doing on here, really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnno1167 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 4 minutes ago, Stewy said: Shouldn't have swallowed any... 👍 You’re either a wind up merchant, or showing your true beliefs. I’m sometimes unsure. I hope for your sake, it is the former, if it is the latter, then there is no point in even trying to discuss something rationally where it is simply not possible to have a reasoned debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Social Justice League Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 3 minutes ago, Johnno1167 said: You’re either a wind up merchant, or showing your true beliefs. I’m sometimes unsure. I hope for your sake, it is the former, if it is the latter, then there is no point in even trying to discuss something rationally where it is simply not possible to have a reasoned debate. Trolls gonna be trolls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sta100 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 8 hours ago, Stewy said: I don't know how people end up in this situation. Living is really Cheap. Houses are very reasonable apart from in the London, Cornwall and Belfast hotspots. A healthy diet can be had for half an hour per day at minimum wage. People are just spending too much on beige crap takeaways and too-big cars. It ain't cheap to live. A good night out at the weekend is a couple of grand these days. pff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insane Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 1 hour ago, Dreamcasting said: He's the one getting in unfortunately whether we like it or not. And after a couple of years tops, people will be crying for the Tories to get back in next time. Rinse and repeat. He might get in but he won't be PM for long, Labour will change their leader. Anyone fancy Sadiq Kan ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpg50000 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 45 minutes ago, Stewy said: Shouldn't have swallowed any... 👍 Another totemic contribution from the resident clown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkey Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 2 hours ago, regprentice said: you cant have more than £16k in the bank. for a family just scraping into the bottom 43% and having £100 a month after bills that would take more than 13 years to save In reality the bottom 43% of families try and save then get wiped out by a washing machine packing in, or a boiler packing in. What the 16k limit really does is penalise the middle classes for thinking "xxxx this, im going on the dole til i retire"... because years of savings will get eaten up in months until you only have 16k left And of course the 16k limit hasn’t been moved for years, should probably be 64k by now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkey Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 2 hours ago, DownwardSlopingPlateau said: I can assure you, those living on State handouts in this country have plenty of spare cash at the end of the month - and in the middle of it too. It's the poor buggers still working we need to think about.. Quite was always the same that people working and paying all there own bills were strapped while the council house brigade always had sky dishes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkey Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 1 hour ago, Insane said: He might get in but he won't be PM for long, Labour will change their leader. Anyone fancy Sadiq Kan ? Definitely can’t wait for that 20 mph zones everywhere , ulez rolled out all over what’s not to like Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Banner Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 3 hours ago, Social Justice League said: No way I'm voting for that Nulabour Tory, Starmer. He can f4ck right off. Maybe Starmer isn't left wing enough for your taste, but be careful that you don't end up with more of Sunak as the viable alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Social Justice League Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 Just now, Bruce Banner said: Maybe Starmer isn't left wing enough for your taste, but be careful that you don't end up with more of Sunak as the viable alternative. If voters had any brains at all they would never vote for either Tory or Nulabour. Both parties are establishment puppets and not fit to govern. There is no democracy while a small group of ugly wierdos are desperate for control over everyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChangeIsCast Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 5 hours ago, Stewy said: Give them another £500 and it'd be exactly the same the next month. Then can F.O. with their victim card. I actually agree with a fair amount of your posts to be fair, but it baffles me as to how you can genuinely think housing in this country is cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.