|
Post by Northy on Jul 12, 2022 9:08:36 GMT
The more that Simple Suella shows her hand, the more unpleasant she reveals herself to be. “On taxpayers money; your money, my money” She missed a trick there. She could’ve mentioned those not declaring all their income, those with non-dom status (or close relatives with non-dom status) & those with off shore bank accounts that ‘support’ their finances. That would really show she meant business… Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle.
|
|
|
Post by knype on Jul 12, 2022 9:08:36 GMT
I disagree. And if I am a tory leader hopeful I would vote against Johnson, else you are a hypocrite. The country has no confidence in Johnson and want him gone asap. Starmer is doing what the public want. The tories are running scared from a general election despite having a massive majority. That shows how bad their government has been and why the country has no confidence in them. Starmer is doing the exact thing opposition should be doing. Also, you talk about time wasting. Almost every policy Johnson has had outside of covid has been a culture war policy. That’s time wasting, when the public are getting dramatically poorer and millions are struggling. Johnson needed to go, he's resigned, everyone knows he's going, the process has started, parliament shuts for recess a week on Friday, the Tories aren't going to vote with Labour as they know a change is happening, it's pathetic timewasting, I'd have more time for Starmer if he actually said something positive about what he would do, give a few details, something to mull over. Spot on, but that would mean him having valid policies instead of sitting on top of the fence and waiting see which way the Tory party go before going opposite if he thinks it will win him votes or backs them and demands more when it came to restrictions and lockdowns!
|
|
|
Post by thewonderstuff on Jul 12, 2022 9:32:59 GMT
“On taxpayers money; your money, my money” She missed a trick there. She could’ve mentioned those not declaring all their income, those with non-dom status (or close relatives with non-dom status) & those with off shore bank accounts that ‘support’ their finances. That would really show she meant business… Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle. 42% of all universal credit claimants are in full time work. Demonising those with the least in society in this current climate, really is beneath contempt but as Austerity seems to be the policy of at least 9 of the 11 candidates we can expect to see a lot more of it in the next few weeks. Meanwhile nothing on tax evasion, offshore accounts and nom dom status but as most of them have their hand in that honey pot, it's not really surprising is it.
|
|
|
Post by superjw on Jul 12, 2022 10:26:25 GMT
I disagree. And if I am a tory leader hopeful I would vote against Johnson, else you are a hypocrite. The country has no confidence in Johnson and want him gone asap. Starmer is doing what the public want. The tories are running scared from a general election despite having a massive majority. That shows how bad their government has been and why the country has no confidence in them. Starmer is doing the exact thing opposition should be doing. Also, you talk about time wasting. Almost every policy Johnson has had outside of covid has been a culture war policy. That’s time wasting, when the public are getting dramatically poorer and millions are struggling. Johnson needed to go, he's resigned, everyone knows he's going, the process has started, parliament shuts for recess a week on Friday, the Tories aren't going to vote with Labour as they know a change is happening, it's pathetic timewasting, I'd have more time for Starmer if he actually said something positive about what he would do, give a few details, something to mull over. This is the problem with Starmer, he doesn't have anything meaningful for us to mull over. So many open goals across the pandemic and up to now to show voters the other side of the coin and he has put every shot into the back of the boothen end.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 12, 2022 10:36:16 GMT
Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle. 42% of all universal credit claimants are in full time work. Demonising those with the least in society in this current climate, really is beneath contempt but as Austerity seems to be the policy of at least 9 of the 11 candidates we can expect to see a lot more of it in the next few weeks. Meanwhile nothing on tax evasion, offshore accounts and nom dom status but as most of them have their hand in that honey pot, it's not really surprising is it. There's always got to be somebody else to blame...
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jul 12, 2022 10:39:58 GMT
I disagree. And if I am a tory leader hopeful I would vote against Johnson, else you are a hypocrite. The country has no confidence in Johnson and want him gone asap. Starmer is doing what the public want. The tories are running scared from a general election despite having a massive majority. That shows how bad their government has been and why the country has no confidence in them. Starmer is doing the exact thing opposition should be doing. Also, you talk about time wasting. Almost every policy Johnson has had outside of covid has been a culture war policy. That’s time wasting, when the public are getting dramatically poorer and millions are struggling. Johnson needed to go, he's resigned, everyone knows he's going, the process has started, parliament shuts for recess a week on Friday, the Tories aren't going to vote with Labour as they know a change is happening, it's pathetic timewasting, I'd have more time for Starmer if he actually said something positive about what he would do, give a few details, something to mull over. I agree that Starmer needs to set out his policies. I guess one of the reasons opposition tend not to do so until closer to an election is in case the governing party then steals them. See Starmer's position of locking down a couple of times, that the government then followed a week or so later, and the windfall tax on energy companies that the tories stole. Also, a policy now for Starmer may be different when it comes to an election, and then people accuse him of breaking promises etc. He should be setting out what he would do right now to tackle inflation and the cost of living crisis though. And he should be saying that unless Johnson goes immediately, the tories cannot do anything to help the public between now and 5 September, which is harmful to the public. The real reason you do not like Starmer's move is because you prefer the tories and this is going to make them look bad as they will vote for confidence in Johnson (after heavily briefing against having confidence in him over the last few weeks) which is contradictory, or they face a general election which they are currently terrified of.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 12, 2022 10:40:42 GMT
Johnson needed to go, he's resigned, everyone knows he's going, the process has started, parliament shuts for recess a week on Friday, the Tories aren't going to vote with Labour as they know a change is happening, it's pathetic timewasting, I'd have more time for Starmer if he actually said something positive about what he would do, give a few details, something to mull over. This is the problem with Starmer, he doesn't have anything meaningful for us to mull over. So many open goals across the pandemic and up to now to show voters the other side of the coin and he has put every shot into the back of the boothen end. Every Opposition leader does the same at this point in the election cycle. If the Tories come up with policies other than "I'll cut your taxes (and your public services, but shush about that)" then he'll have to outline what Labour will do differently. But other than that it's standard Opposition - as the election draws nearer, more gets revealed. Why risk having vote-winning policies stolen by government? They won't care if it looks shabby, it's one less thing the Opposition will have to offer as a difference at election time. Win for the govt, lose for the Opposition.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jul 12, 2022 10:41:41 GMT
“On taxpayers money; your money, my money” She missed a trick there. She could’ve mentioned those not declaring all their income, those with non-dom status (or close relatives with non-dom status) & those with off shore bank accounts that ‘support’ their finances. That would really show she meant business… Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle. I would not want the lifestyle of someone on benefits. Would you? Tax avoiders and non-doms cost the government far more than benefit fraudsters.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jul 12, 2022 10:43:24 GMT
Johnson needed to go, he's resigned, everyone knows he's going, the process has started, parliament shuts for recess a week on Friday, the Tories aren't going to vote with Labour as they know a change is happening, it's pathetic timewasting, I'd have more time for Starmer if he actually said something positive about what he would do, give a few details, something to mull over. Spot on, but that would mean him having valid policies instead of sitting on top of the fence and waiting see which way the Tory party go before going opposite if he thinks it will win him votes or backs them and demands more when it came to restrictions and lockdowns! if what you say his true and starmer has just done the opposite of the tories, then the tories must be adopting Labour policy constantly with the farcical amount of U turns we have seen
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Jul 12, 2022 12:05:35 GMT
“On taxpayers money; your money, my money” She missed a trick there. She could’ve mentioned those not declaring all their income, those with non-dom status (or close relatives with non-dom status) & those with off shore bank accounts that ‘support’ their finances. That would really show she meant business… Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle. Last year I helped someone with a life limiting illness who had been self employed and had to permanently close their business apply for a Personal Independence Payment. What they had to go through to get it was actually quite distressing and what they got at the end of it was barely enough to live on. It just about covers a trip to Lidl so forget Sky TV or Louis Vuitton accessories or anything else you might have read in The Mail. I got lot of advice on the application from MacMillan - perhaps you'd like to slag them of for encouraging benefit claimants. I don't know you but I really hope you or yours never find yourselves in that position
|
|
|
Post by questionable on Jul 12, 2022 13:26:54 GMT
Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle. 42% of all universal credit claimants are in full time work. Demonising those with the least in society in this current climate, really is beneath contempt but as Austerity seems to be the policy of at least 9 of the 11 candidates we can expect to see a lot more of it in the next few weeks. Meanwhile nothing on tax evasion, offshore accounts and nom dom status but as most of them have their hand in that honey pot, it's not really surprising is it. Don’t forget about the 26 MP’s who between them earn £2,6 million pa by renting out their homes whilst claiming for their London pads,
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Jul 12, 2022 13:52:40 GMT
“On taxpayers money; your money, my money” She missed a trick there. She could’ve mentioned those not declaring all their income, those with non-dom status (or close relatives with non-dom status) & those with off shore bank accounts that ‘support’ their finances. That would really show she meant business… Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle. Or those heating their horse stables at the taxpayers response. Expenses were brought in to help you do your job, not fund a lifestyle. Etc. etc.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jul 12, 2022 16:02:26 GMT
Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle. Last year I helped someone with a life limiting illness who had been self employed and had to permanently close their business apply for a Personal Independence Payment. What they had to go through to get it was actually quite distressing and what they got at the end of it was barely enough to live on. It just about covers a trip to Lidl so forget Sky TV or Louis Vuitton accessories or anything else you might have read in The Mail. I got lot of advice on the application from MacMillan - perhaps you'd like to slag them of for encouraging benefit claimants. I don't know you but I really hope you or yours never find yourselves in that position I've run the London marathon for Macmillan and know what they do, my own dad had been self employed with his own business for years, went under because large companies took so long to pay him he couldn't get stock, he ended up being cared for by Macmillan as he slowly passed away with cancer. I think you know what type of person I meant, and as I said, it was brought in for the most needy of which the person you are on about is, perhaps if there wasn't so much piss taking from others there would be more to go around. I don't need to read the Daily Mail, my Mrs worked in social housing for many years and knows the real needy people from those idle ones just on the take. There was one 2 years ago wo was caught on twitter complaining to Sky Sports with Gary Neville that he was paying £100 a month to Sky so shouldn't have to pay £15 to watch live games (proposed during the covid) he was then found to be complaining that Universal Credit wasn't enough to get by on.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jul 12, 2022 16:03:11 GMT
Or those on benefits having Sky Sports contracts and great mobile phone deals, funding decent clothing shopping trips, meals out etc. Welfare was brought in to help the most needy, not fund a lifestyle. Or those heating their horse stables at the taxpayers response. Expenses were brought in to help you do your job, not fund a lifestyle. Etc. etc. Oh I agree, there's too much piss taking from all types of people
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jul 12, 2022 16:56:14 GMT
Last year I helped someone with a life limiting illness who had been self employed and had to permanently close their business apply for a Personal Independence Payment. What they had to go through to get it was actually quite distressing and what they got at the end of it was barely enough to live on. It just about covers a trip to Lidl so forget Sky TV or Louis Vuitton accessories or anything else you might have read in The Mail. I got lot of advice on the application from MacMillan - perhaps you'd like to slag them of for encouraging benefit claimants. I don't know you but I really hope you or yours never find yourselves in that position I've run the London marathon for Macmillan and know what they do, my own dad had been self employed with his own business for years, went under because large companies took so long to pay him he couldn't get stock, he ended up being cared for by Macmillan as he slowly passed away with cancer. I think you know what type of person I meant, and as I said, it was brought in for the most needy of which the person you are on about is, perhaps if there wasn't so much piss taking from others there would be more to go around. I don't need to read the Daily Mail, my Mrs worked in social housing for many years and knows the real needy people from those idle ones just on the take. There was one 2 years ago wo was caught on twitter complaining to Sky Sports with Gary Neville that he was paying £100 a month to Sky so shouldn't have to pay £15 to watch live games (proposed during the covid) he was then found to be complaining that Universal Credit wasn't enough to get by on. Anecdotal evidence is fine, but it’s largely meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Everyone knows someone who takes the piss…..
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Jul 12, 2022 17:00:51 GMT
Last year I helped someone with a life limiting illness who had been self employed and had to permanently close their business apply for a Personal Independence Payment. What they had to go through to get it was actually quite distressing and what they got at the end of it was barely enough to live on. It just about covers a trip to Lidl so forget Sky TV or Louis Vuitton accessories or anything else you might have read in The Mail. I got lot of advice on the application from MacMillan - perhaps you'd like to slag them of for encouraging benefit claimants. I don't know you but I really hope you or yours never find yourselves in that position I've run the London marathon for Macmillan and know what they do, my own dad had been self employed with his own business for years, went under because large companies took so long to pay him he couldn't get stock, he ended up being cared for by Macmillan as he slowly passed away with cancer. I think you know what type of person I meant, and as I said, it was brought in for the most needy of which the person you are on about is, perhaps if there wasn't so much piss taking from others there would be more to go around. I don't need to read the Daily Mail, my Mrs worked in social housing for many years and knows the real needy people from those idle ones just on the take. There was one 2 years ago wo was caught on twitter complaining to Sky Sports with Gary Neville that he was paying £100 a month to Sky so shouldn't have to pay £15 to watch live games (proposed during the covid) he was then found to be complaining that Universal Credit wasn't enough to get by on. Oh well if there was a bloke on Twitter then that's nailed it. Well if he was then I agree - he's a twat - but I wonder how many of them you need before it adds up to just what the Sunaks ought to have paid HMRC? (Without even getting on to Zahawi). Or didn't Braverman mention them?
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 12, 2022 17:02:53 GMT
I've run the London marathon for Macmillan and know what they do, my own dad had been self employed with his own business for years, went under because large companies took so long to pay him he couldn't get stock, he ended up being cared for by Macmillan as he slowly passed away with cancer. I think you know what type of person I meant, and as I said, it was brought in for the most needy of which the person you are on about is, perhaps if there wasn't so much piss taking from others there would be more to go around. I don't need to read the Daily Mail, my Mrs worked in social housing for many years and knows the real needy people from those idle ones just on the take. There was one 2 years ago wo was caught on twitter complaining to Sky Sports with Gary Neville that he was paying £100 a month to Sky so shouldn't have to pay £15 to watch live games (proposed during the covid) he was then found to be complaining that Universal Credit wasn't enough to get by on. Oh well if there was a bloke on Twitter then that's nailed it. Well if he was then I agree - he's a twat - but I wonder how many of them you need before it adds up to just what the Sunaks ought to have paid HMRC? (Without even getting on to Zahawi). Or didn't Braverman mention them? You don't get elected like that - it's demonising things that wins Tory votes.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Jul 12, 2022 17:13:53 GMT
Javid dived out early, perhaps his tax declaration has spooked him 🤔
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Jul 12, 2022 19:18:58 GMT
Javid dived out early, perhaps his tax declaration has spooked him 🤔 Bald. Only Zahawi left to pull out now.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jul 12, 2022 19:22:07 GMT
Javid dived out early, perhaps his tax declaration has spooked him 🤔 Bald. Only Zahawi left to pull out now. Perhaps a Mohican cut would help Starmer, your hero.
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Jul 12, 2022 19:26:19 GMT
Javid dived out early, perhaps his tax declaration has spooked him 🤔 Bald. Only Zahawi left to pull out now. You know Liz wears a wig don't you?
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jul 12, 2022 19:41:27 GMT
One thought… on the Grateful 8; Kemi Badenoch, Suella Braverman, Jeremy Hunt, Penny Mordaunt, Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Tom Tugendhat and Nadhim Zahawi
Put aside the party for a moment and consider what it says about our society today that of the 8 candidates only two are white and male. Further they are split equally between white and non white and male and female.
Back in 2005 there were 7 candidates in the Tory leadership election and all were male, pale and stale. Labour’s 2010 was not far off the same with 4 out of 5 m.p.s with Diane Abbott the 5th candidate.
I think that’s a great thing!
|
|
|
Post by Seymour Beaver on Jul 12, 2022 19:52:02 GMT
One thought… on the Grateful 8; Kemi Badenoch, Suella Braverman, Jeremy Hunt, Penny Mordaunt, Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Tom Tugendhat and Nadhim Zahawi Put aside the party for a moment and consider what it says about our society today that of the 8 candidates only two are white and male. Further they are split equally between white and non white and male and female. Back in 2005 there were 7 candidates in the Tory leadership election and all were male, pale and stale. Labour’s 2010 was not far off the same with 4 out of 5 m.p.s with Diane Abbott the 5th candidate. I think that’s a great thing! But you can't split 7 or 5 equally.😆
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jul 12, 2022 19:55:02 GMT
One thought… on the Grateful 8; Kemi Badenoch, Suella Braverman, Jeremy Hunt, Penny Mordaunt, Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Tom Tugendhat and Nadhim Zahawi Put aside the party for a moment and consider what it says about our society today that of the 8 candidates only two are white and male. Further they are split equally between white and non white and male and female. Back in 2005 there were 7 candidates in the Tory leadership election and all were male, pale and stale. Labour’s 2010 was not far off the same with 4 out of 5 m.p.s with Diane Abbott the 5th candidate. I think that’s a great thing! Also , I don't think those candidates have been " manouvered " into place , no quotas etc, it seems to have happened naturally. Whatever other criticism people can have of Kemi, it is clear that she genuinely loves this country, for many people that is a perquisite if representing the country as PM, it should not have to be said, but it does.
|
|
|
Post by thewonderstuff on Jul 12, 2022 20:03:28 GMT
One thought… on the Grateful 8; Kemi Badenoch, Suella Braverman, Jeremy Hunt, Penny Mordaunt, Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Tom Tugendhat and Nadhim Zahawi Put aside the party for a moment and consider what it says about our society today that of the 8 candidates only two are white and male. Further they are split equally between white and non white and male and female. Back in 2005 there were 7 candidates in the Tory leadership election and all were male, pale and stale. Labour’s 2010 was not far off the same with 4 out of 5 m.p.s with Diane Abbott the 5th candidate. I think that’s a great thing! It is a good thing thing but you can't completely separate it from policy and oh the policy that has been spewing out these past few days! Sparked an interesting debate or two earlier today.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jul 12, 2022 20:09:39 GMT
One thought… on the Grateful 8; Kemi Badenoch, Suella Braverman, Jeremy Hunt, Penny Mordaunt, Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Tom Tugendhat and Nadhim Zahawi Put aside the party for a moment and consider what it says about our society today that of the 8 candidates only two are white and male. Further they are split equally between white and non white and male and female. Back in 2005 there were 7 candidates in the Tory leadership election and all were male, pale and stale. Labour’s 2010 was not far off the same with 4 out of 5 m.p.s with Diane Abbott the 5th candidate. I think that’s a great thing! So women being under-represented is some horror show that needs correcting but white people being under-represented is "a great thing"? Virtue-signalling nonesense.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Jul 12, 2022 20:16:09 GMT
One thought… on the Grateful 8; Kemi Badenoch, Suella Braverman, Jeremy Hunt, Penny Mordaunt, Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Tom Tugendhat and Nadhim Zahawi Put aside the party for a moment and consider what it says about our society today that of the 8 candidates only two are white and male. Further they are split equally between white and non white and male and female. Back in 2005 there were 7 candidates in the Tory leadership election and all were male, pale and stale. Labour’s 2010 was not far off the same with 4 out of 5 m.p.s with Diane Abbott the 5th candidate. I think that’s a great thing! So women being under-represented is some horror show that needs correcting but white people being under-represented is "a great thing"? Virtue-signalling nonesense. That's an excellent point DC. Being white in some circles does seem to be contemptible
|
|
|
Post by LL Cool Dave on Jul 12, 2022 20:17:49 GMT
Out of that lot, probably the only one who sounds like anything close to being a normal human being for me.
|
|
|
Post by RedandWhite90 on Jul 12, 2022 20:25:19 GMT
Out of that lot, probably the only one who sounds like anything close to being a normal human being for me. Not sure the foxes would be happy. First they came for the foxes etc... Makes you wonder how long badgers in Hartshill would be safe for.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 12, 2022 20:31:48 GMT
So women being under-represented is some horror show that needs correcting but white people being under-represented is "a great thing"? Virtue-signalling nonesense. That's an excellent point DC. Being white in some circles does seem to be contemptible Should be based on merit, as with anything. Not on the colour of your skin or gender. Rishi, Savid and anyone already shamed shouldn't ever have been in the race.
|
|