Bollitics The new leader of the Labour Party

[snowychap]

however , a few key points , ( quoted to suit my argument of course ..see VT rule 103)

Indeed, it is striking that the overall fiscal effect of the changes after May 2010 up to 2014/15 compared to a price-linked base system was neutral overall

That the overall effect is neutral means that the gains for some (mostly the top half) were funded by the losses of others as the next sentence after the quote says, "In effect, the reductions in benefits and tax credits financed the cuts in taxes."

that analysis also suggests that the top tenth has lost more proportionately than the bottom tenth.

That analysis is the Treasury analysis.

They go on to say that the first important dimension to be looked at in this kind of analysis is how large an income group is lumped together at the top when making this kind of comparison because the incomes of those right at the top are so large, that what happens to them dominates the averages shown for the top tenth as a whole.

 

 

But within this picture there are important variations, such as the less favourable treatment of some of those at the top, or the more favourable treatment of some of those at the very bottom if Universal Credit is introduced as planned and has the intended effect on take-up.

the bottom twentieth would be gainers on average as a result of some of them receiving the new Universal Credit who would not currently be receiving all of the benefits and tax credits which it replaces

These two points are regarding something which hasn't happened yet (full implementation of UC and its full take-up), i.e. it's their analysis of what should be seen if those things were to happen (that's still to be seen as this was supposed to have been fully rolled out and operational a couple of years ago).

[TrentVilla]

 ( I'm trying to work out if  Trent and Blandy  liked it because of the effort you went to to get it or if they didn't read it and liked it because they felt it proved me wrong and were showing Bicks their support )

 

 

I only signed up to this site because I've been a life long Bicks supporter, the sooner this place is renamed BicksTalk the better although that sounds somewhat like the content of TBAR now I come to think of it.

[chrisp65]

 

 ( I'm trying to work out if  Trent and Blandy  liked it because of the effort you went to to get it or if they didn't read it and liked it because they felt it proved me wrong and were showing Bicks their support )

 

 

I only signed up to this site because I've been a life long Bicks supporter, the sooner this place is renamed BicksTalk the better although that sounds somewhat like the content of TBAR now I come to think of it.

 

could you imagine the Bickster controlled VT

 

match thread is nearly there love, 5 minutes away

throwing up in Rogues Gallery will cost you £40

travel thread would be mostly Birkenhead and how the hell do you find the car park for the Pyramids Shopping Centre

[bickster]

Finding the car park in the pyramids requires at least an A level in orienteering.

[Demitri_C]

 

Even for someone starting a business from scratch as he did, the wealth of their parents provides a safety net not afforded to others or can. The education (no matter how poorly they perform), contacts etc of their upbringing can also have an impact, as too can having an aviary built.

 

I dont understand what does a safety net have to do with anything? how do you know his parents would have helped him out if it went tits up? you dont and I dont. He made that money himself it all started with a van and selling cds at the back of his van. he may had have had help buying some things but he made the money himself. its like moving into an office that a cousin of mine owns and starting a business its me who made it successful or a failure not the person helping me. I think we are not going to agre eon this subject somehow 

 

Being self made is one thing, rags to riches is something entirely different. 

 

He wasn't a rich person before, if his parents were that was them but his story is admirable and should not be dismissed because his parents had decent jobs. Read how Branson managed to get air space despite having the government and airports against him. he didnt get help from his parents there

[bickster]

Dem, did you read the bit of the Branson Story where his mother mortgaged the family home to pay a bill to customs and excise because Richard had been selling stock that was meant to be exported from the UK and not paying the tax on the sales?

His family bailed him out a number of times and supported his income whilst he ran the business without wages at the start

Rags to Riches my arse

[Demitri_C]

Dem, did you read the bit of the Branson Story where his mother mortgaged the family home to pay a bill to customs and excise because Richard had been selling stock that was meant to be exported from the UK and not paying the tax on the sales?

 

I like the way you choose a section of his failure but ignore the real important facts of his success

 

1) He setup the student magazine him self as he writes in his book where his father was a barrister and his mother was air hostess and were not involved in his business. (he dropped out of school at age of 16) Branson managed to get interview huge stars like the rolling stones by himself and made the magazine a huge success

 

2) He then started selling music significantly cheaper than the high street and made a whole load of cash.

 

3) Like you said correctly that virgin had purchased declared export stock and his mum re- morgaged but you seem to have left out what occurred afterwards 

 

He didnt give up he continued himself and in the early 70s bought a music shop and a huge manor where he setup a studio for failing artists (genius idea really) and had major success. Then he eventually made a significant amount of money selling his virgin label for 500m to EMI. And that is just scratching the surface bicks we have not even talked about him setting up the trains (which was a huge gamble) or his other services like Virgin Atlantic.

 

You may well feel its "rags to riches you and mostly done himself

 

Anyway this has gone so Off topic now and your the mod 

[peterms]

Dem, his dad was a barrister, his mother a ballerina, he went to private school and university, his grandfather was a Privy Councillor.

This is not some working class lad made good.

Get real about it. It's just another example of the rich self-spawning.

[colhint]

Somehow I don't think it will be Emily Thornbury

 

My Money would be on the son of Baron Hunt of Chesterston Cambs

Edited November 21, 2014 by colhint

[tonyh29]

A shame when people have to resign over trivial matters but by the same token when will people in general learn that social media comments carry the outrage of a load of fruitcakes trawling the net looking for something to outrage them

[chrisp65]

A shame when people have to resign over trivial matters but by the same token when will people in general learn that social media comments carry the outrage of a load of fruitcakes trawling the net looking for something to outrage them

 

agreed

 

Being a bit racist when tired didn't hurt the UKIP campaign, so you can sometimes make a gaff and get away with it. Not least, if you condition the media and the public to your response of 'ah well it was a gaff, to the pub!' which appears to work well for UKIP and Boris J.

 

But ... by the same token, if you live by being pc then you die by being pc. In this case some Islington Labour type hasn't been caught out by double meaning or campaign tiredness, for me she clearly was being a snob about 'that sort of person' and 'that sort of place'. A modest house in a modest town with a worker's van outside - and a representative of the Labour party decided to take the piss.

 

I spend a fair bit of time around Rochester, that looked like a very very typical set up to me. If that's not you're target market, you're in the wrong town.

[drat01]

A shame when people have to resign over trivial matters but by the same token when will people in general learn that social media comments carry the outrage of a load of fruitcakes trawling the net looking for something to outrage them

 

The media "outrage" from Tory supporters like the Sun was OTT, and the cynic in me sees a link between the Tory party debacle with UKIP and a desire to deflect attention away from that.

 

If you look back a whole series of tweets from her then you will see similar ones previously praising people who had dressed up their home with flags etc. It was a trivial matter and as Chris says you never see the outrage from certain media outlets to people like Boris and his blatant racist comments, but that is a different agenda I suppose.

[MakemineVanilla]

 

A shame when people have to resign over trivial matters but by the same token when will people in general learn that social media comments carry the outrage of a load of fruitcakes trawling the net looking for something to outrage them

 

The media "outrage" from Tory supporters like the Sun was OTT, and the cynic in me sees a link between the Tory party debacle with UKIP and a desire to deflect attention away from that.

 

If you look back a whole series of tweets from her then you will see similar ones previously praising people who had dressed up their home with flags etc. It was a trivial matter and as Chris says you never see the outrage from certain media outlets to people like Boris and his blatant racist comments, but that is a different agenda I suppose.

 

 

Whether it is giving in to the demand that someone should apologise for wearing a shirt, or sacking someone for Tweeting an amusingly iconic image of the modern working-class, you can't blame the silly buggers who complain, only those too weak to defy them.

 

How can you form a government if your policies are deflected by every stupid opinion on social media?

[tonyh29]

 

 

A shame when people have to resign over trivial matters but by the same token when will people in general learn that social media comments carry the outrage of a load of fruitcakes trawling the net looking for something to outrage them

 

The media "outrage" from Tory supporters like the Sun was OTT, and the cynic in me sees a link between the Tory party debacle with UKIP and a desire to deflect attention away from that.

 

If you look back a whole series of tweets from her then you will see similar ones previously praising people who had dressed up their home with flags etc. It was a trivial matter and as Chris says you never see the outrage from certain media outlets to people like Boris and his blatant racist comments, but that is a different agenda I suppose.

 

 

Whether it is giving in to the demand that someone should apologise for wearing a shirt, or sacking someone for Tweeting an amusingly iconic image of the modern working-class, you can't blame the silly buggers who complain, only those too weak to defy them.

 

How can you form a government if your policies are deflected by every stupid opinion on social media?

 

 

sadly the masses have the power  ... Had Ed / Thornberry decided to ride it out the bandwagon would have just started and then it would have become a distraction  .. followed by her still having to resign followed by headlines of Ed being weak

 

of course important stuff that "we the people" can use this power for , nobody can be arsed with  ... anyway must dash their was a news reader on sky earlier whose tie I didn't like , so I'm off to start a campaign to get him sacked

[drat01]

If it's Kay Burley where do I sign?

[MakemineVanilla]

The Emily Thornbury thing gets more interesting, as the days pass.

 

The Tory press all lead with it this morning and apparently think it is more significant than UKIP's latest victory.

 

What the media are not telling us is what they surely must know about the white-van man concerned.

 

The joke they are not letting us into is that the guy concerned is almost certainly not a Labour voter.

 

My guess is that his opinions which the media have notably not encouraged him to express, are probably further to the right than Cameron's.

 

I am sure the media know this but they have carefully confected it into an attack on the working class, when in actual fact it was probably just a knowing smirk at a certain right-wing Tory demograph. 

 

My guess would be that the guy concerned does a fairly decent impression of Al Murray's Landlord.

 

If true, this amounts to an almighty piece of hypocrisy because while the Tory press attack UKIP voters, they are using what might be a potential UKIP voter, to attack Labour.

 

Nice to see the Tory press show their colours and how the so-called neutral outlets fail to point it out.

 

 

[blandy]

It is quite interesting, in a trivial way.

 

I think  it's interesting because you've basically got someone sacked for posting a picture of a house on the interwebs.

In the list of things to get sacked for, that's probably one of the most bizarre ever.

 

I guess the sub-text is a bit different to what you say, MMV - to me it looks like the Labour woman was kind of hinting at "UKIP have won the rochester election - here's a picture of a typical house in rochester (with the underlying thing of all those flags being a typical UKIP/BNP type of adornment  -i.e. "and this is what their voter's houses look like, nudge nudge, racists").

 

But Labour sacked her before it ever got in the press. It wasn't the press wot dun it - it was the Labour people so terrified of anything slightly off message.

 

Meanwhile the tory literature for the election was very BNP in tone, and failed to mention their own party's name, and the UKIPs man was on about repatriating immigrants from the EU. Neither of those two got sacked.

 

Labour's massive problem is that they don't know what to say or think or do, and their leader comes across really badly and as "not one of us". That shouldn't matter, but now he's so aware of it, he's making it worse. The comment he gave when asked what he thought when he saw the picture of the house "Respect" was bananas.

 

What exactly is Labour "for". It doesn't have a purpose.

We know what the tories are for - Landowners, grouse shooters, big business, the very wealthy and their own enrichment.

We know what the UKIPs are for (even if their policies such as they are keep changing) - they're for getting out of Europe and, er, yeah, whatever. Highly cynical, th***cherite, anti-politics mood catchers.

We know what the Greens are for.

Labour - ?? Too timid to seperate themselves from the tories, they make no case for anything most of the time, and their last go at being in Government didn't go well, what with the wars and debts and so on. Same as the tories, basically.

You're right about the tory press piling in to Labour - it's what they do and always have done.

[tonyh29]

It is quite interesting, in a trivial way.

 

I think  it's interesting because you've basically got someone sacked for posting a picture of a house on the interwebs.

In the list of things to get sacked for, that's probably one of the most bizarre ever.

 

I guess the sub-text is a bit different to what you say, MMV - to me it looks like the Labour woman was kind of hinting at "UKIP have won the rochester election - here's a picture of a typical house in rochester (with the underlying thing of all those flags being a typical UKIP/BNP type of adornment  -i.e. "and this is what their voter's houses look like, nudge nudge, racists").

 

But Labour sacked her before it ever got in the press. It wasn't the press wot dun it - it was the Labour people so terrified of anything slightly off message.

 

Meanwhile the tory literature for the election was very BNP in tone, and failed to mention their own party's name, and the UKIPs man was on about repatriating immigrants from the EU. Neither of those two got sacked.

 

Labour's massive problem is that they don't know what to say or think or do, and their leader comes across really badly and as "not one of us". That shouldn't matter, but now he's so aware of it, he's making it worse. The comment he gave when asked what he thought when he saw the picture of the house "Respect" was bananas.

 

What exactly is Labour "for". It doesn't have a purpose.

We know what the tories are for - Landowners, grouse shooters, big business, the very wealthy and their own enrichment.

We know what the UKIPs are for (even if their policies such as they are keep changing) - they're for getting out of Europe and, er, yeah, whatever. Highly cynical, th***cherite, anti-politics mood catchers.

We know what the Greens are for.

Labour - ?? Too timid to seperate themselves from the tories, they make no case for anything most of the time, and their last go at being in Government didn't go well, what with the wars and debts and so on. Same as the tories, basically.

You're right about the tory press piling in to Labour - it's what they do and always have done.

didn't she get sacked  after a second meeting / phone call ?

 

maybe first time around Ed was saying WTF but stood by her  ... then saw the potential political fall out and panicked and she had to go

 

It's not even a patch on calling someone a bigoted old lady imo so yet more hypocrisy 

[bickster]

There was not even a comment offered apart from "scene from Rochester by-election"

Yet Ed Moribund has said that her actions have made him more angry than anything else since he became leader

If this has made him angrier than anything else then he clearly doesn't have a clue yet proves that he's more concerned with image than anything thats gone on in the country under the coalition.

If that is his true belief he really shouldn't be leading the opposition party. He's clearly an idiot

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

they're all idiots. tory, labour, lib dem - there isn't a good idea between them.