|
Post by yeokel on Jun 23, 2022 12:03:29 GMT
If that’s the case, how come it’s not working for the EU where the annual inflation rate is currently 8.8%? This includes notables such as Poland @ 12.8% Netherlands @ 10.2% Belgium @ 9.9% Germany @ 8.7% Spain @ 8.5% Ireland @ 8.3% And France with an almost respectable 5.8% link StatistaI don't think anyone is saying inflation is because of Brexit but as we have the worst inflation rate in the G7 I think it's worth entertaining the idea it's not helping especially when there is agreement that availability of labour is contributing to it. Oggy’s standard argument is that everything bad is because of Brexit, so I’ll stand by my post thanks.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jun 23, 2022 12:05:23 GMT
The most immediate and sensible way of reducing inflation would be to join the EEA and therefore the single market. If that’s the case, how come it’s not working for the EU where the annual inflation rate is currently 8.8%? This includes notables such as Poland @ 12.8% Netherlands @ 10.2% Belgium @ 9.9% Germany @ 8.7% Spain @ 8.5% Ireland @ 8.3% And France with an almost respectable 5.8% link StatistaEu inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 20%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor. However, put barriers to trade which increase costs for businesses who readily admit they have these increased costs and must pass them on to consumers, and you have price rises, or inflation. We import almost everything and the pound is weak so it costs more for us. So that increases costs for businesses and this is passed on to consumers, increasing prices and therefore inflation goes up. A lack of workforce means farmers have been complaining about food rotting and not being picked, increasing their losses and therefore they must increase prices to consumers, hence inflation. A lack of workforce means workers are in demand and can ask for higher pay to give them more spending power to increase inflation. Workers then costs more to businesses who then pass it on to consumers with increased prices, or inflation. It is very basic economics.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jun 23, 2022 12:06:31 GMT
I don't think anyone is saying inflation is because of Brexit but as we have the worst inflation rate in the G7 I think it's worth entertaining the idea it's not helping especially when there is agreement that availability of labour is contributing to it. Oggy’s standard argument is that everything bad is because of Brexit, so I’ll stand by my post thanks. No, you just don’t understand that making trade harder and more onerous increases costs, which is what inflation is! Brexit makes it worse than it otherwise would have been here
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jun 23, 2022 12:22:15 GMT
see the tin pot dictator is in Rwanda hope they keep him there
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Jun 23, 2022 12:23:41 GMT
see the tin pot dictator is in rewander hope they keep him there Or they may even move him to Rwanda
|
|
|
Post by essexstokey on Jun 23, 2022 12:28:01 GMT
Millions could lose free NHS prescriptions under government plans link
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jun 23, 2022 12:31:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Jun 23, 2022 12:40:32 GMT
If that’s the case, how come it’s not working for the EU where the annual inflation rate is currently 8.8%? This includes notables such as Poland @ 12.8% Netherlands @ 10.2% Belgium @ 9.9% Germany @ 8.7% Spain @ 8.5% Ireland @ 8.3% And France with an almost respectable 5.8% link Statista Eu inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor.However, put barriers to trade which increase costs for businesses who readily admit they have these increased costs and must pass them on to consumers, and you have price rises, or inflation. We import almost everything and the pound is weak so it costs more for us. So that increases costs for businesses and this is passed on to consumers, increasing prices and therefore inflation goes up. A lack of workforce means farmers have been complaining about food rotting and not being picked, increasing their losses and therefore they must increase prices to consumers, hence inflation. A lack of workforce means workers are in demand and can ask for higher pay to give them more spending power to increase inflation. Workers then costs more to businesses who then pass it on to consumers with increased prices, or inflation. It is very basic economics. " EU inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor." - Precisely...... Nail hit firmly on head! So, your argument that joining " the EEA and therefore the single market" would be an " immediate and sensible way of reducing inflation" is nothing more that wishful thinking without foundation on your part.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jun 23, 2022 12:46:40 GMT
Eu inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor.However, put barriers to trade which increase costs for businesses who readily admit they have these increased costs and must pass them on to consumers, and you have price rises, or inflation. We import almost everything and the pound is weak so it costs more for us. So that increases costs for businesses and this is passed on to consumers, increasing prices and therefore inflation goes up. A lack of workforce means farmers have been complaining about food rotting and not being picked, increasing their losses and therefore they must increase prices to consumers, hence inflation. A lack of workforce means workers are in demand and can ask for higher pay to give them more spending power to increase inflation. Workers then costs more to businesses who then pass it on to consumers with increased prices, or inflation. It is very basic economics. " EU inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor." - Precisely...... Nail hit firmly on head! So, your argument that joining " the EEA and therefore the single market" would be an " immediate and sensible way of reducing inflation" is nothing more that wishful thinking without foundation on your part. Not necessarily. I think his point is that it might help us as a specific action that would help our nation compared to where we are now. I mean we all know it's not going to happen, but the point is valid, if moot.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jun 23, 2022 12:50:17 GMT
Eu inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor.However, put barriers to trade which increase costs for businesses who readily admit they have these increased costs and must pass them on to consumers, and you have price rises, or inflation. We import almost everything and the pound is weak so it costs more for us. So that increases costs for businesses and this is passed on to consumers, increasing prices and therefore inflation goes up. A lack of workforce means farmers have been complaining about food rotting and not being picked, increasing their losses and therefore they must increase prices to consumers, hence inflation. A lack of workforce means workers are in demand and can ask for higher pay to give them more spending power to increase inflation. Workers then costs more to businesses who then pass it on to consumers with increased prices, or inflation. It is very basic economics. " EU inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor." - Precisely...... Nail hit firmly on head! So, your argument that joining " the EEA and therefore the single market" would be an " immediate and sensible way of reducing inflation" is nothing more that wishful thinking without foundation on your part. Think carefully about what you are saying. Your position is that increasing the costs of trade with your biggest trading partner does not increase costs (or isn’t inflationary). Just think carefully about that and you will realise you are wrong. Inflation varies massively through the the EU and that shows that membership of the EU is not the only factor that impacts inflation. It doesn’t mean being a member of the EU has a neither negative nor positive impact on inflation as you seem to be suggesting!? Perhaps the inflation figures would be between 10 and 40% if none of those member states had the benefit of the single market. Who knows. There are many factors that impact inflation, including, crucially, the cost of doing business, which has increased for UK businesses trading with the EU because of brexit for the reasons I have outlined already, and it has increased wages due to work force shortages which again is inflationary.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jun 23, 2022 12:51:45 GMT
" EU inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor." - Precisely...... Nail hit firmly on head! So, your argument that joining " the EEA and therefore the single market" would be an " immediate and sensible way of reducing inflation" is nothing more that wishful thinking without foundation on your part. Not necessarily. I think his point is that it might help us as a specific action that would help our nation compared to where we are now. I mean we all know it's not going to happen, but the point is valid, if moot. Absolutely. It shouldn’t be moot but we have leaders who want to preserve power rather than admit they are wrong for the good of the country.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Jun 23, 2022 13:09:48 GMT
" EU inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor." - Precisely...... Nail hit firmly on head! So, your argument that joining " the EEA and therefore the single market" would be an " immediate and sensible way of reducing inflation" is nothing more that wishful thinking without foundation on your part. Think carefully about what you are saying. Your position is that increasing the costs of trade with your biggest trading partner does not increase costs (or isn’t inflationary). Just think carefully about that and you will realise you are wrong. Inflation varies massively through the the EU and that shows that membership of the EU is not the only factor that impacts inflation. It doesn’t mean being a member of the EU has a neither negative nor positive impact on inflation as you seem to be suggesting!? Perhaps the inflation figures would be between 10 and 40% if none of those member states had the benefit of the single market. Who knows. There are many factors that impact inflation, including, crucially, the cost of doing business, which has increased for UK businesses trading with the EU because of brexit for the reasons I have outlined already, and it has increased wages due to work force shortages which again is inflationary. Objection m'lud, I have stated no such position. Come on Oggy, I thought you were a lawyer or something? You can't go putting words into my mouth like that. All I was doing in my original reply to you was disputing something that you presented as a fact. It is neither a fact, nor have you presented any firm evidence to support this 'fact'. I fully accept that it is your opinion, and some of what you've written in reply I do not necessarily disagree with. Although I think there are other factors, one way or another, that you've not mentioned or brought to the table.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Jun 23, 2022 13:10:40 GMT
" EU inflation varies between member states from 5.8% to over 29%. Clearly being a member of the EU is not the determining factor." - Precisely...... Nail hit firmly on head! So, your argument that joining " the EEA and therefore the single market" would be an " immediate and sensible way of reducing inflation" is nothing more that wishful thinking without foundation on your part. Not necessarily. I think his point is that it might help us as a specific action that would help our nation compared to where we are now. I mean we all know it's not going to happen, but the point is valid, if moot. I dispute the word "valid" but agree with "moot".
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jun 23, 2022 13:19:04 GMT
Not necessarily. I think his point is that it might help us as a specific action that would help our nation compared to where we are now. I mean we all know it's not going to happen, but the point is valid, if moot. I dispute the word "valid" but agree with "moot". Quite right. Grammarly provide a good definition of moot point as follows… A moot point is a fact that doesn’t matter because it’s not relevant to the current situation. So, if something is moot it’s very hard to picture it as valid. Unless you live on planet Stupid.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jun 23, 2022 14:47:52 GMT
Millions could lose free NHS prescriptions under government plans linkI'm certainly no fan of this bunch of charlatans but I've wondered for a while at the wisdom of free prescriptions for the over 60s, I find it hard to imagine that the average 60 odd year old is badly enough off to need it and those that are will still get them free anyway.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 23, 2022 15:40:27 GMT
Huddy posted a tweet from the CER report on the Brexit thread on 10th June that stated Brexit is not a major cause of inflation. Believe me, if the CER could in anyway twist the statistics to show that Brexit caused inflation they would.
It is a fact that there is a shortage of labour. There is also a shortage of labour in the EU, notably Germany. There are various factors causing this such as >600,000 people in the UK choosing not to return to work after the pandemic. Another factor is the booming economy in Poland which has much higher inflation and load of jobs for Poles, so why leave Eastern Europe for the UK?
It quite amusing on here to see "left wingers" not happy to see the low paid getting significant wages rises for the first time in decades under a Tory government, and the lowest unemployment for over 50 years, something past Labour leaders only dreamed of creating. High labour costs will actually drive another industrial revolution and investment in robotics and automation instead of relying on cheap imported labour.
What is more worrying is seeing union after union choosing to use strike action to try and squeeze higher wages in industries that have just been bailed out with £billions of tax payers money and massive increase in national debt during the pandemic. I say worrying, because the last time we had lots of strike action during the "winter of discontent" the people swung to the right and voted in Thatcher. Do we want that again? Strike action will not bring Johnson down, the Tories will simply replace him with someone more electable when the time is right.
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Jun 23, 2022 15:51:45 GMT
Huddy posted a tweet from the CER report on the Brexit thread on 10th June that stated Brexit is not a major cause of inflation. Believe me, if the CER could in anyway twist the statistics to show that Brexit caused inflation they would. It is a fact that there is a shortage of labour. There is also a shortage of labour in the EU, notably Germany. There are various factors causing this such as >600,000 people in the UK choosing not to return to work after the pandemic. Another factor is the booming economy in Poland which has much higher inflation and load of jobs for Poles, so why leave Eastern Europe for the UK? It quite amusing on here to see "left wingers" not happy to see the low paid getting significant wages rises for the first time in decades under a Tory government, and the lowest unemployment for over 50 years, something past Labour leaders only dreamed of creating. High labour costs will actually drive another industrial revolution and investment in robotics and automation instead of relying on cheap imported labour. What is more worrying is seeing union after union choosing to use strike action to try and squeeze higher wages in industries that have just been bailed out with £billions of tax payers money and massive increase in national debt during the pandemic. I say worrying, because the last time we had lots of strike action during the "winter of discontent" the people swung to the right and voted in Thatcher. Do we want that again? Strike action will not bring Johnson down, the Tories will simply replace him with someone more electable when the time is right. What a contradictory post. In one paragraph you want high wages caused by labour shortages and the next you want people to take effective pay cuts. In one paragraph you say High wage costs will drive another industrial revolution and the next you say that we must not increase wage costs. Edit- and while we're at it you suggest people are getting significant wage rises, yes, a few are eg Finance , but you do realise UK real wages are falling at the fastest rate in two decades?
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Jun 23, 2022 16:35:42 GMT
Millions could lose free NHS prescriptions under government plans linkA text book case of 'divide and conquer'. " The two options presented by the Department of Health in a public consultation focus on the implementation of this change. Option A would raise the free prescription age immediately to 66, while Option B would only introduce this for new over-60s.
In its plans, the Government state: “Option B is to raise the qualifying age for free prescriptions to the State Pension Age (currently 66), but with a period of protection, which would mean that people in the age range 60 to 65 would continue to receive free prescriptions. This would mean that anyone aged 60 and over when the changes to the charges regulations are implemented would continue to be exempt from prescription charges.
“Whereas those aged 59 and under when the changes to the Charges Regulations are implemented would have to pay for their prescriptions until they reach the SPA (currently 66)".
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jun 23, 2022 16:47:52 GMT
Millions could lose free NHS prescriptions under government plans linkA text book case of 'divide and conquer'. " The two options presented by the Department of Health in a public consultation focus on the implementation of this change. Option A would raise the free prescription age immediately to 66, while Option B would only introduce this for new over-60s.
In its plans, the Government state: “Option B is to raise the qualifying age for free prescriptions to the State Pension Age (currently 66), but with a period of protection, which would mean that people in the age range 60 to 65 would continue to receive free prescriptions. This would mean that anyone aged 60 and over when the changes to the charges regulations are implemented would continue to be exempt from prescription charges.
“Whereas those aged 59 and under when the changes to the Charges Regulations are implemented would have to pay for their prescriptions until they reach the SPA (currently 66)". Not really. The divide already exists, it’s a question of when the divide kicks in… 60 or 66. Seems fair enough to me that the free prescriptions kick in along with the state pension.
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Jun 23, 2022 17:02:38 GMT
A text book case of 'divide and conquer'. " The two options presented by the Department of Health in a public consultation focus on the implementation of this change. Option A would raise the free prescription age immediately to 66, while Option B would only introduce this for new over-60s.
In its plans, the Government state: “Option B is to raise the qualifying age for free prescriptions to the State Pension Age (currently 66), but with a period of protection, which would mean that people in the age range 60 to 65 would continue to receive free prescriptions. This would mean that anyone aged 60 and over when the changes to the charges regulations are implemented would continue to be exempt from prescription charges.
“Whereas those aged 59 and under when the changes to the Charges Regulations are implemented would have to pay for their prescriptions until they reach the SPA (currently 66)". Not really. The divide already exists, it’s a question of when the divide kicks in… 60 or 66. Seems fair enough to me that the free prescriptions kick in along with the state pension. No, this is a new divide. All those currently aged between 59 (60 by the time the govt goes ahead with it) and 66 will support continuing with their “free prescriptions”. – I’m alright Jack. All those younger than 59 will be shafted by having to pay the charges for an extra 6 or 7 years despite the fact that they have possibly already been paying in to the system for the whole of their working lives. And, as for my kids – it will be just another expense for them that their parents and grandparents never had. (I’ll declare an interest – I’m in the first group above) And, of course, the gov't might be able to announce that they are scrapping the planned prescription charge increase just before the next election.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jun 23, 2022 17:12:09 GMT
Not really. The divide already exists, it’s a question of when the divide kicks in… 60 or 66. Seems fair enough to me that the free prescriptions kick in along with the state pension. No, this is a new divide. All those currently aged between 59 (60 by the time the govt goes ahead with it) and 66 will support continuing with their “free prescriptions”. – I’m alright Jack. All those younger than 59 will be shafted by having to pay the charges for an extra 6 or 7 years despite the fact that they have possibly already been paying in to the system for the whole of their working lives. And, as for my kids – it will be just another expense for them that their parents and grandparents never had. (I’ll declare an interest – I’m in the first group above) And, of course, the gov't might be able to announce that they are scrapping the planned prescription charge increase just before the next election. As I said the divide already exists. They’ve just looking at changing where the divide occurs. It seems entirely rationale and fair to me in that free prescriptions kick in when you have a material change in circumstances ie become eligible for the state pension. As to unfairness compared to our predecessors, consider how the average age for pensioners has increased. Our grandparents used to get 5 or so years of pension before they shuffled off this mortal coil at the age of 70 odd; our parents 10 years. My generation that is likely to be 20+ years - I would expect to get close to 90. So we will be huge beneficiaries as pensioners, far in excess of earlier generations.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jun 23, 2022 19:39:27 GMT
Please don't play dumb If Boris carried out his intent to make Carrie Symonds his Mistress at the time his Cheif of Staff then he could and probably would have been investigated for Malfeasance in a Public Office. Fortunately for him Gascoigne has previously seen them "in flagrante" and threatened to resign if Boris proceeded Intent yes,actuality no, therefore no crime. It won't have escaped anyone's notice that Boris ducked a straightforward question on this today at PMs refusing to confirm or deny it was ever his intent Because Boris has left office of Mayor GLA no Longer has power to investigate or sanction so your bollocks about Sadiq Khan is just that The IOPC did investigate this matter previously and found no evidence, all the emails had been deleted. They fail to even interview Jennifer Arcuri Jennifer Arcuri has now come forward with contemporaneous diaries which she kept during her four years as Boris's Mistress including Boris volunteering to be her "throtle" to advance her career which he also funded with £126K of Public Monies These Diaries are now in the safe hands of Investigative Journalist John Ware so whether the IOPCs second investigation will attempt another cover up they will be published one way or another Boris should, but he can help himself, known better as he had previously been rebuked while Mayor and forced to go on a compulsory training course about acknowledging "personal relationships " This was after, I know its difficult to keep up, his failure to disclose a previous "advisor" and Mistress Helen McIntyre had produced a daughter out of that liason "Oh, what a tangled Web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!" Sir Walter Scott www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/assembly/assembly-responds-to-iopc-investigationPerhaps someone should tell the GLA ethics oversight committee Wannabee says they can't investigate although of course they might just tell you what bollocks he is talking like his imaginary 2nd IOPC investigation. "Events Dear Boy, Events " Macmillan You really need to catch up if you want to comment on this shit show The link you posted is VERY old news Since the first botched IOPC investigation Jennifer Arcuri has come forward with documentary evidence to support a charge of MALFEASANCE IN A PUBLIC OFFICE The GLA has no authority to prosecute that charge.only the IOPC The GLA Ethics Committee is collating the documtation to present to IOPC Which part of that are you failing to understand www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jan/29/fresh-revelations-about-jennifer-arcuri-affair-threaten-to-damage-boris-johnsonAn short extract commenting on what happened after the first IOPC investigation and what might now happen after Jennifer Arcuri new documentation may help you The IOPC left it to the Greater London Authority (GLA) to decide whether Mr Johnson’s failure to register his interest with Ms Arcuri breached its Code of Conduct.
At the time of writing the GLA has not yet ruled on this. But Ms Arcuri’s diary entries, which she has agreed to share with the GLA, raised possibility of the authority referring the whole issue back to the IOPC which could, in turn, trigger a criminal investigation into misconduct in public office. www.hickmanandrose.co.uk/will-the-publication-of-jennifer-arcuri-diaries-change-the-game-on-boris-johnson-misconduct-allegations/I have said several times I don't have confidence in IOPC doing a proper investigation 2nd time around but one way or another the whole gruby mess will come out via John Ware
|
|
|
Post by RipRoaringPotter on Jun 23, 2022 19:54:57 GMT
I dispute the word "valid" but agree with "moot". Quite right. Grammarly provide a good definition of moot point as follows… A moot point is a fact that doesn’t matter because it’s not relevant to the current situation. So, if something is moot it’s very hard to picture it as valid. Unless you live on planet Stupid. By that definition the original point is not moot as it is relevant to the issue being discussed (inflation) - the fact it won't happen doesn't mean it's moot.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Jun 23, 2022 20:21:46 GMT
The most immediate and sensible way of reducing inflation would be to join the EEA and therefore the single market. If that’s the case, how come it’s not working for the EU where the annual inflation rate is currently 8.8%? This includes notables such as Poland @ 12.8% Netherlands @ 10.2% Belgium @ 9.9% Germany @ 8.7% Spain @ 8.5% Ireland @ 8.3% And France with an almost respectable 5.8% link StatistaThe performance by France us worthy of some expansion. There are 3 reasons for its relatively low value: 1. The main driving force of world inflation is energy costs, notably gas and oil. Gas inflation also drives eldcticity cost in many countries, but in France 70% of electricity generation is from nuclear power. 2. Last year when world gas prices were rising Macron instructed the state owned power generators not to increase costs to industry. Consequently French consumers have been protected from most of the gas inflation costs. 3. French wage rises have, like a lot of European countries been very moderate in the last year. The UK has generally enjoyed larger pay rises that feed through to business costs and prices. The UK workers are experiencing "loss of earnings" with inflation higher than wage increases but many countries are worse off. See some of Europe's wage growth: tradingeconomics.com/country-list/wage-growth
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jun 23, 2022 20:36:19 GMT
Quite right. Grammarly provide a good definition of moot point as follows… A moot point is a fact that doesn’t matter because it’s not relevant to the current situation. So, if something is moot it’s very hard to picture it as valid. Unless you live on planet Stupid. By that definition the original point is not moot as it is relevant to the issue being discussed (inflation) - the fact it won't happen doesn't mean it's moot. It’s moot because we ain’t joining the single market because it needs us to sign up to freedom of movement which will not happen.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jun 23, 2022 21:14:17 GMT
Is it ok for a sex pest to be an MP?
No, not Boris Johnson squirming on this occasion, but the Lard of the Isles himself.
And he can’t find an answer to the above question.
A week ago, the Lard of the Isles was welcoming back a sex pest MP back into the fold but when that came became public the shut hit the fan.
Oh dear.
|
|
|
Post by wannabee on Jun 23, 2022 22:17:38 GMT
"Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six , result happiness.Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery" Dickens You have to put things into perspective and consider a series of events After the 2008 Financial Crash in 2008 there was massive upheaval in the workplace and people were grateful to have a job, many didn't or there terms and conditions were altered From 2010 the Conservative Government embarked on a decade of austerity where services were systematically stripped to the bone By 2016 under Teresa May The Jams (Just about managing families) began to raise their voices but had no leveredge Neither could she find a Magic Money Tree for the Nurses who hadn't had a pay rise for 8 years Fast forward a few years and Covid hit and for a two year period people generally reevaluated who were and were not key workers The results were surprising to some The next big event was the energy crisis where energy costs increased by 50%/100% with a knock-on effect to food prices far above the headline inflation number which is based on a basket of items but which consume a very high proportion of lower paid peoples budget. During this period Income relative to cost of living has remained below 2010 rates fullfact.org/economy/employment-since-2010-wages/You have to acknowledge the cost of Covid to the Treasury and also some targeted supports but they don't go near enough A large number of people are very fearful of what may happen as the next round of energy costs kick in plus interest rates rises effect on Mortgages The Government making an announcement that it is looking at relaxing Bankers bonus currently capped at 100% of Base Salary only adds petrol to the fire I'll declare relative disinterest, I'm comfortably retired without a Mortgage, I don't need a 10% increase in my State Pension but will happily accept it and use it at my discretion
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jun 23, 2022 22:36:09 GMT
Is this an actual real life Government minister or the national gurning champion?
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jun 23, 2022 22:43:17 GMT
Is this an actual real life Government minister or the national gurning champion? She had a comfortable night, sat back and said very little whist Fiona Bruce did all her donkey work................
|
|
|
Post by 828492 on Jun 23, 2022 22:51:47 GMT
Is this an actual real life Government minister or the national gurning champion? No problem for her. If she needs a bob or two she can just work an extra few hours or an extra day or two. That’s what she thinks happens away from Westminster. This is one up from the likes of Dave ‘Call me Dave’ Cameron and Gideon ‘Call me George’ Osborne who think you should just take a bit extra from the family trust if you are a bit short of cash. Johnson just gets someone else to pay.
|
|