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.

I think Corbyn can sit back and wait for the tories and neo-cons to implode.

I think he has no need to hurry, he has got four and half years to total up the torrid mistakes being made by this government.

He had four and a half year to formulate economic policies for 6, 10 and 15years ahead to address "modern" economic problems.

He has four and a half years for the Labour party and younger members to mature and accept the probable realities of governing and also the speed at which changes can occur.

A process of evolution not revolution and sensible discussion as to what the people Labour represent wish for and also the needs of the country as a whole and what is feasible.

But, that may mean dumping of disappointed previous so-called leadership who consider themselves as being moderate by swinging to the right-wing of politics and accepting its dogma.

But, my guess work is that in about two and a half years time, Labour will do a deal with the SNP and Lib/Dems and one or two smaller groups (Not UKIP) in order to rid the UK of the torrid party.

Failing this or in spite of this Scotland will have greater or complete independence.

Perhaps, they may wreak retribution after the election.

Personally, would prefer them to be more moderate.

Interesting times.


But Corbyn has all the time he needs and will not be pushed by the media or by tory mendacity.

Stan,


The Alf Garnet of Moneyam doesn't read the Guardian.

He has somebody to read and explain it to him.

Mind he is trying to keep up with social changes.


8-)

George Osborne must not retreat on tax credits

Telegraph View: Unpicking Gordon Brown's welfare snare will mean short-term political pain, but it is vital work that must go ahead



By Telegraph View:

6:30AM BST 20 Oct 2015

CommentsComments





Gordon Brown was a skilled political saboteur, adept at setting snares for his enemies. Tax credits are a fine example. Mr Brown created a major new welfare payment whose steady growth has left many people dependent on the state for some of their income. Just as Mr Brown surely intended, unpicking that snare by reducing those payments is proving controversial for his successor, George Osborne.


Conservative MPs, rightly conscious of the immediate consequences for low-income constituents, are nervous. They should remember that other major changes in welfare, such as the household welfare cap and the so-called “bedroom tax”, also drew warnings of political and social Armageddon; some even suggested that curbs on housing benefits would lead to the “ethnic cleansing” of major cities. Of course, such fears proved overblown. MPs wavering over tax credits should also recall they were elected in May after those cuts – and on a clear promise to cut another £12 billion from welfare.



And for all Mr Brown’s linguistic cunning in naming his scheme to disguise its true nature, tax credits are indeed welfare, money taken from workers in tax then redistributed by the state according to politicians’ whims. As such, tax credits are inefficient and reduce economic incentives to work and earn more. Despite the short-term political pain, Mr Osborne is right to free Britain from Mr Brown’s snare. This parliament still has more than four years to run and there is more work to be done to balance the books. A retreat on tax credits would weaken the Government and hamper that vital work. Stick to your plans, Chancellor.

Tis true Fred, Alf is a very very sad case indeed and we must take pity on the poor lad.

Tax Credit Cuts: Labour Reversal Vote Defeated


19:41, UK, Tuesday 20 October 2015


http://news.sky.com/story/1573163/tax-credit-cuts-labour-reversal-vote-defeated


A Labour motion calling on the Government to rethink controversial tax credit cuts has been defeated in the Commons.


The opposition day motion called for a reversal of the policy but MPs voted against it by 317 to 295.

Attention will now turn to the House of Lords on Monday, when peers could kill off the cuts in a "fatal" motion.

The tax credit cuts would see three million low-paid families losing more than £1,000 a year.


Despite Labour losing the vote, the debate saw a number of Tory MPs speak out against the changes.

"Despite Labour losing the vote, the debate saw a number of Tory MPs speak out against the changes."

Speak out? yeah they do a lot of that don't they.. but did they actually "vote against" the cuts or not?

Don't forget that the Parliament Act can be used to override the Lords. If the Parliament Act is used then the Lords can only delay the Bill for one month and then it automatically passes to the end of the process. The last time it was used was in 2004 when Blair forced through the hunting bill against the Lords.

What is good about tax credits?

All it is doing is undermining the minimum wage at tax payers expense.


Oh, and making Big Issue sellers a viable "business"....what a joke!

The government's strategy is to lower tax credits, give employers tax breaks and raise the living wage and raise the tax free allowance. One essential is to enforce the minimum wage. In the medium to long term it will rebalance the economy. Brown brought in working tax credit as a bribe to win an election. It is going to be tough on some people for a time but what is the alternative. It is currently a vicious circle enabling employers to pay low wages in the knowledge that the government will top them up.

Corbyn has decided to conform

ICM’s latest weekly tracker on the EU referendum has voting intentions of

REMAIN 44%(-1), LEAVE 38%(+2)

The Lords have removed the 'fatal' motion as it would have created a constitutional crisis.

tax credits cuts
whenever you make changes to the taxation system, there will be people who are disadvantaged by them, and this is assuredly no different
i don't care at all what the likes of fred may say on the subject, as i know full well that he will be quoting from the socialist worker manual, so for me, it has no cadence (i think that's the right word)
however, when i hear impassioned speeches in protest coming from the tory benches in both the commons and the lords, then perhaps closer scrutiny is required

whether or not there should be some "softening" and if so, how much, i am not remotely qualified to judge

Your last remark is obvious!

did you have similar objections when Tata, an indian conglomerate, bought these steel works?

Cadence ,not really the right word .

cadence
ˈkeɪd(ə)ns/Submit
noun
1.
a modulation or inflection of the voice.

------------

Talking bollocks would be more like it ..

Reminds me of PFI contracts!

Your mate Broon is the expert on PFI Fred.

Perhaps credence? But I prefers jimmys definition. Better english.