Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Because no won wants a twit, and if you don't want two faces tossers then you are very unlikely to get the best for anyone if you persist with all is right wing nonsense.

PS Any that goes for anyone else.

Watch you on about E/L.. staple diet there for most of the year -)

"Don't do as I do, do as I say!"



Being against the above is right wing nonsense?

The above being all this isolationist, little Englander right wing me me me nonsense that you right wing lot trot out day after day on here.

That article was about lefty hypocrisy Stan, nothing to do with little Englanders.

Do try to keep up.

The above being what has been posted on here for years by you right wing boneheads.

What about the left wing boneheads. Why has every Labour government left the country in bad shape? The normal case is Labour in for one term then out again. Blair only managed longer because he moved the party to the right. Whenever the public are offered a left wing choice they reject it.

Just look what a mess the left wing government in France is making.

Osborne’s NHS boost is unfunded – he doesn’t have the cash 30/11/2014

The BBC’s lead political story today (Sunday) is George 0sborne’s announcement of a £2 billion boost for the English NHS, to get it through the winter crisis period. The Boy, looking much healthier than he did on Wednesday, wanted us to believe the money was available because the economy is strong.


Take a look at the graph (above). Income tax has not increased by even a fraction of a percentage point since he became Chancellor and in fact takings have been lower than in 2008 for much of his period in office.

Corporation tax is lagging well behind its 2008 figure, and in a “strong” economy, this must be because Gideon has cut it in order to help his rich business friends (by which we mean donors to the Conservative Party) get richer.

VAT receipts are up. You’ll remember of course that Mr Zero’s pal David Cameron spent the entire 2010 election campaign promising not to increase the rate of VAT, and almost the first thing he did when he achieved office was – of course – increase the rate of VAT. That is why VAT income has increased.

He doesn’t have the money. He said it was available due to the strength of the economy and economic indicators are instead showing weakness.

According to BBC political correspondent Louise Stewart, the money is – in fact – nothing to do with the strength of the economy. “Of the £2bn, around £1.3bn of it is new money,” she wrote, inaccurately. “The Treasury said it would be found from savings in other government departments.” Not new money, then. “The remaining £700m will come from the existing Department of Health budget and will be put into front line.”

Have you spotted the problem with that? The national deficit is increasing at this time. Government departments are not making savings; they are overspending. They will not have the money to spare. And 0sborne seems to be asking us to count money that is in the existing health budget twice.

This is unfunded spending. Imagine the uproar if a Labour government had announced it!

Here’s an interesting snippet, from the BBC News report: “The Conservatives’ coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats, had called for an emergency injection of £1.5bn and a party spokesman said they had ‘fought to make sure that extra funding for the NHS next year is in the Autumn Statement’.” So it seems Mr 0sborne would not have put up any money at all if not for the Liberal Democrats forcing his hand.

Perhaps we should be blaming Nick Clegg and Danny Alexander for making unfunded spending commitment and George 0sborne, David Cameron, Andrew Lansley and Jeremy Hunt for the gross mismanagement that has made it necessary?

Ed Balls has made several sensible points that you can be sure will be ignored by the mainstream media and anyone else who has been taken in by the Tory Nonsense Narrative. The Conservatives have already announced £7 billion in unfunded spending, he said. He warned that VAT could rise again – pointing out that the Tories lied about raising it before the last general election.

“Pretty much everything George has said… falls apart under scrutiny,” he told Andrew Marr.

That has been true since the moment the Coalition was formed in March – yes, March – 2010.

as per above.........The Boy, looking much healthier than he did on Wednesday,

but the next incumbent, whoever that may be, would have the cash?
if not, then they too are making similar unrealisable promises; if yes, then presumably so do the present lot .... not that i'ld believe any of them

Camoron back at Nos 1 trending on twitter.

Trends · Change
#CameronMustGo
#UnionJXFactor
#Ferguson
#InHindsightOverAndOut
#MTVStars
Mirallas
Darren Wilson
The Force Awakens
Imran Khan
Kabul

George Osborne warns people in modest homes to be 'clobbered' by Ed Balls' mansion tax
Chancellor rounds on Ed Balls after first indications of different levels of Labour tax on property come to light


By Georgia Graham, Political Correspondent6:32PM GMT 30 Nov 2014 Comments180 Comments
Ordinary home owners will be “clobbered” Labour’s mansion tax, George Osborne has said, as his Labour shadow unveiled further more details about who will be hit by the levy.
The Chancellor told the Andrew Marr programme that the value of homes hit by the proposed annual tax would soon fall under a Labour government.
He was speaking after Ed Balls, Labour’s shadow chancellor, indicated for the first time the different levels of the mansion tax on the wealthy property owners.
Mr Balls said that homes worth more than £2 million, £3 million, £10 million and £50 million will be taxed with levies increasing “more than” proportionately through the bands.
This suggested that those in the most expensive houses will be hit with a very large bill.



Mr Balls warned people living in expensive homes – the vast majority of whom will be in the south east - that they can afford to pay more and “will do under a Labour Government”. Mr Balls has already said the £2million threshold will be raised in line with high end property prices.
However, Mr Osborne said under a Labour Government the value of homes hit by the mansion tax tax - which he dubbed a “homes tax” – would soon fall.
He said: “It’s not a mansion tax. It’s a tax on people’s homes. And of course they come on this show and tell you it’s for people with houses worth £10 million or £50 million.
“Once Labour introduce a homes tax, it will be people with homes worth a fraction of that who will be clobbered with it.”
The row comes after Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, was forced to defend the tax from a savage attack from the singer Myleene Klass who said it would hit “grannies” who had little income and had bought their houses decades ago before they increased in value.
Mr Balls dismissed her concerns and said that the tax was “affordable”. He said: “I think people with houses of £50 million or £10 million can afford to pay a bit more and they are going to under the next Labour government.”
Mr Balls told the same programme: “The vast majority of properties in London and across the country will not pay, but don't you think it is fair, especially when so many foreign investors are investing in our housing market, and when you have much lower tax rates on highest value properties than other houses.
“We need some money to save the National Health Service that's what we are going to deliver. Most people think it is fair, whatever Myleene Klass thinks.
“We are going to graduate it, it is going to be a progressive tax done only be £250 a month, that is quite a lot of money but for people with properties over two million we think that is affordable, given my point about basic rate tax payers not paying that, over three million, over 10 million over 50 million it will more than proportionally increase.
“It will be progressive so it is going to be steered, staged and tiered but it will be fair. Nobody watching your programme with a house worth less than £2 million will pay. Most people think a tax on properties above £2 million is fair to save the National Health Service.
Labour would not be dissuaded from pressing on with the policy of the party wins May’s general election, he said. “Most people will support there will some people who will campaign against it. But to be honest I think people with houses of £50 million or £10 million can afford to pay a bit more and they are going to under the next Labour government.”

errrrrrrrr Cyners labour have presented there costings to the OBR.

The Tories HAVE NOT, so we have £7 billion plus another £2 billion uncosted and under written by the statement "we have a strong economy".


LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

Lets face it any baffon can BORROW MONEY and chuck it at the NHS and employ slaves within the rest of the economy and claim that we have a strong economy.

What utter nonsense.

Lets face it any baffon can BORROW MONEY and chuck it at the NHS

Tony Blair , Gordon Brown and the Labour government

"Haystack - 30 Nov 2014 19:53 - 51773 of 51780

What about the left wing boneheads. Why has every Labour government left the country in bad shape? The normal case is Labour in for one term then out again. Blair only managed longer because he moved the party to the right. Whenever the public are offered a left wing choice they reject it.

Just look what a mess the left wing government in France is making."

"What about the left wing boneheads"? depends what your definition is, left wing bone heads like the WRP are irrelevant and Labour have little to do with left wing, trust you H/S to try and change the substance to suit your own ends.

6:32PM GMT 30 Nov 2014
Chancellor rounds on Ed Balls after first indications of different levels of Labour's tax on property come to light

Ordinary home owners will be “clobbered” by Labour’s mansion tax, George Osborne has said, as his Labour shadow unveiled further more details about who will be hit by the levy.

The Chancellor told the Andrew Marr programme that the value of homes hit by the proposed annual tax would soon fall under a Labour government.

He was speaking after Ed Balls, Labour’s shadow chancellor, indicated for the first time the different levels of the mansion tax on the wealthy property owners.

Mr Balls said that homes worth more than £2 million, £3 million, £10 million and £50 million will be taxed with levies increasing “more than” proportionately through the bands.

This suggested that those in the most expensive houses will be hit with a very large bill.

Mr Balls warned people living in expensive homes – the vast majority of whom will be in the south east - that they can afford to pay more and “will do under a Labour Government”. Mr Balls has already said the £2million threshold will be raised in line with high end property prices.


However, Mr Osborne said under a Labour Government the value of homes hit by the mansion tax tax - which he dubbed a “homes tax” – would soon fall.

He said: “It’s not a mansion tax. It’s a tax on people’s homes. And of course they come on this show and tell you it’s for people with houses worth £10 million or £50 million.

“Once Labour introduce a homes tax, it will be people with homes worth a fraction of that who will be clobbered with it.”

The row comes after Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, was forced to defend the tax from a savage attack from the singer Myleene Klass who said it would hit “grannies” who had little income and had bought their houses decades ago before they increased in value.

Mr Balls dismissed her concerns and said that the tax was “affordable”. He said: “I think people with houses of £50 million or £10 million can afford to pay a bit more and they are going to under the next Labour government.”

Mr Balls told the same programme: “The vast majority of properties in London and across the country will not pay, but don't you think it is fair, especially when so many foreign investors are investing in our housing market, and when you have much lower tax rates on highest value properties than other houses.

“We need some money to save the National Health Service that's what we are going to deliver. Most people think it is fair, whatever Myleene Klass thinks.

“We are going to graduate it, it is going to be a progressive tax done only be £250 a month, that is quite a lot of money but for people with properties over two million we think that is affordable, given my point about basic rate tax payers not paying that, over three million, over 10 million over 50 million it will more than proportionally increase.

“It will be progressive so it is going to be steered, staged and tiered but it will be fair. Nobody watching your programme with a house worth less than £2 million will pay. Most people think a tax on properties above £2 million is fair to save the National Health Service.



Labour would not be dissuaded from pressing on with the policy if the party wins May’s general election, he said. “Most people will support [it], there will some people who will campaign against it. But to be honest I think people with houses of £50 million or £10 million can afford to pay a bit more and they are going to under the next Labour government.”

The Telegraph

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/05/labour-nhs-funding-pledge-unravels

Labour NHS funding pledge unravels

Labour’s key election pledge to rescue the ailing NHS with an extra £2.5bn a year has begun to unravel after the party admitted that the money would not be available until halfway through the next parliament.

The party has confirmed that none of the £2.5bn pledge, which formed the centrepiece of Ed Miliband’s speech to its conference in Manchester, would be raised in the first year of a Labour government.

Only an unspecified amount would be available in the second year, because Labour would need to steer a budget through parliament and pass legislation before its planned mansion tax, levy on tobacco firms and tax avoidance crackdown would yield any income.

Labour clarified the policy after the Guardian asked Miliband and Ed Balls, the shadow chancellor, for further details of its NHS spending plans for 2015 to 2020.

The disclosure sparked a row, with the coalition parties accusing Labour of deceit and “hypocritical posturing” over an issue it hopes will help it win the general election on 7 May next year.

Labour said last month that its Time to Care Fund would help save and transform the NHS, which is struggling under rising demand and an unprecedented financial squeeze, by giving it an extra £2.5bn a year to recruit 20,000 nurses, 8,000 GPs, 5,000 careworkers and 3,000 midwives.

Miliband did not, however, mention that the policy would take time to phase in and would not produce the £2.5bn until 2017-18, depriving the health service of several billion pounds in the meantime.

“The centrepiece of Labour’s conference now lies in tatters. We have consistently said that the measures Ed Miliband set out wouldn’t raise anything like what he promised and now it’s clear that even the shadow chancellor agrees”, said the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt.

“NHS patients and staff deserve better than dishonesty and hypocritical posturing, which is why we have actually delivered a real-term rise for the NHS this parliament bigger than Labour’s pledge and have said that a Conservative government would continue to protect and increase the budget in the next.”

Norman Lamb, the Liberal Democrat health minister, was also highly critical of Labour’s presentation. “They have been found out. This turns out to be an attempt to deceive people. The policy is less than a fortnight old and it has completely unravelled. How did they think they could get away with it?” he said.

“Labour claim to be the party of the NHS, but you can’t protect the NHS if you can’t manage the economy. Labour haven’t come clean about their NHS funding figures and now the true story is appearing.”

The Conservatives have pledged to continue giving the NHS real-terms increases in its budget throughout the five years of the next parliament. The Liberal Democrats plan to do the same and to give it a further £1bn a year from 2016.

Labour is committed to maintaining the ringfence around Department of Health spending if it wins power, but the party have only clarified their position since Miliband’s 23 September speech, when he failed to mention this issue. That would mean increasing the department’s budget by just over £2bn in the current financial year to £115.1bn in 2015-16.

Sources close to Balls said Labour would take power when the 2015-16 financial year had already started and would need to implement the measures intended to realise the £2.5bn before the money would start coming in.

“Through our Time to Care Fund, we will be able to allocate £2.5bn a year more than the Tory plans we inherit by raising additional revenue from the wealthiest in society,” a Labour spokesman said. “This is additional revenue through measures such as a mansion tax and a levy on tobacco firms which the Conservative party has said it opposes.”

Miliband had made clear that Labour would not borrow more to pay for the extra funding as it would not spend money it did not have, the spokesman added.

Acknowledging the gradual realisation of the hoped-for revenues, he said: “We will introduce these revenue-raising measures at the start of the next parliament, so that revenues are available from the first full financial year of a Labour government. And our aim is to build up the £2.5bn a year fund as quickly as we can in the next parliament.”

Neither of the coalition parties had backed Labour’s extra £2.5bn, he said.

Prof Chris Ham, the chief executive of the King’s Fund health thinktank, called on Labour to clarify its plans.

“NHS leaders need certainty to manage budgets and plan services for patients. Having raised expectations, Labour needs to make clear exactly how much, and when, additional funding will be provided to relieve the unprecedented pressures on NHS budgets.”

Christina McAnea, the head of health at the Unison union, said Labour needed to think carefully about its NHS pledges because it was still the party most trusted on the service. Miliband needed to be ready to give the NHS more money as soon as it takes office, she said.

Rachael Maskell, the head of health at the Unite union, said Labour may be holding back details of the extra money it plans to give the NHS, and that its plan to integrate health and social care services in order to keep people healthier at home, may help save money.

No answer eh H/S, that means you agree with my appraisal of your argument but haven't got very much about you to admit it... No change there then.

Diane Abbott wants to stand for London Mayor. Could be time to leave London.