Election 2024
- Thread starter brb
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
I’m not advocating euthanasia for fat slobs but if they did have a policy that 1 in 100 fat slobs would be euthanised on the first day of each year at random we’d be a fitter nation. Fewer sick days, reduced burden on the NHS, higher productivity. But I’m not advocating that.
Stopping the boats is the first step of course.
umm some of those are basically the same things renamed
I always understand what I call banking abbreviations.
My serious idea would be UBI or Universal Basic Income for brb. Would, as always, put a high tax burden on higher earners but takes a lot of the massive admin cost out of the equation.
Also a small thing that could be tweaked is peak rail fares which are a huge hindrance to people bettering themselves and impact almost entirely working people. It’s something like £55 for a peak return from here to London now. I think if you can prove you’re commuting you should be able to claim the difference from an off peak ticket back.
Also an even smaller thing, if I’m getting the 6am train that’s not ****ing peak time because I’m one of the few ****s on it so peak services should be trains getting into major cities 8-10 or something.
Also a small thing that could be tweaked is peak rail fares which are a huge hindrance to people bettering themselves and impact almost entirely working people. It’s something like £55 for a peak return from here to London now. I think if you can prove you’re commuting you should be able to claim the difference from an off peak ticket back.
Also an even smaller thing, if I’m getting the 6am train that’s not ****ing peak time because I’m one of the few ****s on it so peak services should be trains getting into major cities 8-10 or something.
Semantics -
Yes I'll have had child benefit and yes I will have used the NHS - and no, my kids didn't go to private school - they got to Uni without any advantages ... of which I'm pretty proud...
... but
I've worked in my profession since 1986 and never had a day off on the sick (I was on gardening leave at the time of my heart surgery) - I've paid higher rate tax on my wages for over 25 years - and I've paid for (and been taxed on - benefit in kind) family private medical care for about the same time.and that has paid for my heart op, MRIs (and subsequent treatments) for the missus and 2 of my girls ....
So in terms of 'net spend' I've contributed vastly more than I have ever 'benefited' or received support for.. now I wholly accept that not everyone can do that - for health and other reasons - but I don't have a great deal of sympathy for those that have had a lifetime of relying on the state when they could have contributed to it but just preferred not to - yet continued taking ...
What makes me laugh mate, sorry but I can only have a sense of humour with this whole idea of Lammy's, is that they want to rush trials though but they got no prisons to put them in, so what's the ****ing point.
I heard yesterday this was originally a Tory idea that Lammy was outspoken against, funny old world eh. The guy is a twat and shouldn't be taken seriously, he's the Labour version of Boris Johnson.
I think he thinks he means well but is generally a bit of a blunderbuss hence my likeness of him to Boris.
My main concern with the idea, whether it was the Tories idea or David Lammy's it would put trials into the hands of a selected few, so for me it steps into the realms of authoritarianism.
On a totally seperate matter, I'd heard something that they are still pushing forward with this digital id.
On the flip side, I’m not sure the average person is bright enough to be on a jury based on my one experience of jury service. If anything the most serious, emotional and complex cases would be the ones better without jurors IMO.
This, I’m a bit confused. I remember getting something for our first and then slightly less for our second. I also thought that if you earned above a certain amount you didn’t get it anyway or am I confused with something else?
Seem to remember the means tested bit being towards the end?
yeah most for the first then less for the others . Think you're thinking of this
Child Benefit payments themselves are not taxable. However, a tax charge known as the High Income Child Benefit Charge (HICBC) applies if you or your partner has an individual "adjusted net income" over a certain threshold.
I know my lad and his partner don't get anything for my grandson, never have done because of their earnings, they are over the threshold.
I missed it today as well, so had to catch up, not sure what they done with pension maybe Solid or someone might remember.
Edit: I had a google...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd9zx8z5d1no
Last edited: