This kind of communication can’t be allowed.
Westminster Politics 2024-2029
- Thread starter Pexbo
- Start date
This kind of communication can’t be allowed.
To encourage people to save rather than spaffing their money on hookers and coke? Why does it bother you?
Blair going full on cnut mode. He’s had his nose too far up trumps assTony Blair saying benefits to easy to game and need 'emergency handbrake' on the system.
Block people with anxiety and ADHD from claiming benefits, says Tony Blair
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/block-people-anxiety-adhd-claiming-050000167.html
I can see why you hate people jumping to such extreme perspectives.
So, Nigel Farage didn't declare a donation of FIVE MILLION pounds.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn5pr0gp3gro
And that's the donation we know about. I wonder how many others there are.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn5pr0gp3gro
And that's the donation we know about. I wonder how many others there are.
It's nice to have the choice of blowing money on coke and hookers or stuffing it into an ISA. You pay tax on neither of them. Whereas the person working full time making min wage will still end up paying more tax than they can realistically afford and can only dream of hookers and coke. Or an ISA.
Yeah but Arsenal upgrade and Taylor Swift
Would just cause everyone to liquidate their ISAs just before the law happens, effectively resetting their stocks entry price to their current value.
And making people invest a bit less.
I do not get why they do not make ISA UK-businesses only, or increase some part of it to be exclusive to investing in the UK market. I love investing in the US, but from UK point of view, encouraging people to invest in the UK seems a no-brainer to me.
We all dream of hookers and coke!
This is not the super rich or even rich you are castigating.
Could this be the campaign to finally allow the country to begin healing?
I know. We've gone full circle. It's systemic.
Also, that's a tagline surely!
They tried it a few years ago, it was called the British ISA remember and absolutely no one wanted it. I sat on some consultation calls for it and I can tell you it was very dimly received.
If the government wants to support investment into the UK they have the means without messing with financial products. Gilts are already there for public infrastructure spending but that would be an accountable action and politicians sure do hate those. Most of the investment the UK needs isn't super profitable so gilts makes more sense than relying on direct private investment.
I do find it hypocritical how often those on the right laud those who game the system to evade tax and then castigate benefit claimants.
One is a wealthy person stealing from the taxpayer the other is a poor and likely desparate person. I know who deserves more scorn.
One is a wealthy person stealing from the taxpayer the other is a poor and likely desparate person. I know who deserves more scorn.
Well said. And people on benefits are more likely to spend money and have that money circulate back into the system.
I think it was more that it would only benefit wealthier folk and have limited impact on the UK market.
The plan was it'd be an allowance in addition to your regular £20k allowance, but realistically only folk who'd maxed out their regular ISA would use it, given the restrictions. For rich folk it'd have been extra allowance, so welcomed.
It wasn't a terrible idea, but the ISA landscape was crowded enough already and it needed designing differently.
Well the other side of it is that it costs a fortune for providers to change their systems to support all these random ISA variants. LISA and even CTFs all end up with very few providers due to cost.
If you can't get providers on side then these initiatives quickly die off.
Judging by the ongoing convo it very much seems to be tumbleweeds whenever Farage does something extremely dodgy. Strange that.
He's just a cheeky chappy, and anyone would do the same if they got the chance
Politics of envy
GB News commentator to sue charity for not offering internships to white people
Sophie Corcoran challenging 10,000 Interns Foundation, which works with people from under-represented groups
https://www.theguardian.com/law/202...ffering-internships-white-people-legal-action
An influencer is taking a charity that organises internships for black and minority ethnic people to court because they do not organise schemes for white people.
Sophie Corcoran, a GB News commentator, applied to a programme the 10,000 Interns Foundation was running with the Bar Council.
She said she was “shocked to discover that the scheme is restricted to applicants of a particular racial background”.
The Guardian understands the internship charity has received a legal letter outlining Corcoran’s intent to sue, and on Wednesday responded. The suit is claiming that she has faced loss of employment opportunity as she is white, and discrimination under the basis of the Equality Act.
Corcoran said she had been “exploring a legal career” and therefore applied to the £14.80-an-hour internship scheme run by the 10,000 Interns Foundation programme and the Bar Council, but was rejected.
She said: “This case is not simply about my own experience. I am pursuing it because I believe that no person in Britain should be denied opportunities because of the colour of their skin. I believe strongly that equality before the law must apply to everyone. Through this case, I hope to challenge practices that discriminate on racial grounds and to reinforce the principle that fairness and equal treatment should apply to all.”
Corcoran’s challenge has been backed by the Restore Britain MP Rupert Lowe, who described the internship scheme as “vile, anti-white racism” and “racist filth”.
---
This paid internship scheme was created in 2020 with the support of the Bar Council and other organisations. It is a registered charity so it is regulated. The whole point in the legal sector was to try and become more representative. The Equality Act allows for positive action to address under representation of specific groups (sections 158 and 159).
This is both predictable and depressing.
Sophie Corcoran challenging 10,000 Interns Foundation, which works with people from under-represented groups
https://www.theguardian.com/law/202...ffering-internships-white-people-legal-action
An influencer is taking a charity that organises internships for black and minority ethnic people to court because they do not organise schemes for white people.
Sophie Corcoran, a GB News commentator, applied to a programme the 10,000 Interns Foundation was running with the Bar Council.
She said she was “shocked to discover that the scheme is restricted to applicants of a particular racial background”.
The Guardian understands the internship charity has received a legal letter outlining Corcoran’s intent to sue, and on Wednesday responded. The suit is claiming that she has faced loss of employment opportunity as she is white, and discrimination under the basis of the Equality Act.
Corcoran said she had been “exploring a legal career” and therefore applied to the £14.80-an-hour internship scheme run by the 10,000 Interns Foundation programme and the Bar Council, but was rejected.
She said: “This case is not simply about my own experience. I am pursuing it because I believe that no person in Britain should be denied opportunities because of the colour of their skin. I believe strongly that equality before the law must apply to everyone. Through this case, I hope to challenge practices that discriminate on racial grounds and to reinforce the principle that fairness and equal treatment should apply to all.”
Corcoran’s challenge has been backed by the Restore Britain MP Rupert Lowe, who described the internship scheme as “vile, anti-white racism” and “racist filth”.
---
This paid internship scheme was created in 2020 with the support of the Bar Council and other organisations. It is a registered charity so it is regulated. The whole point in the legal sector was to try and become more representative. The Equality Act allows for positive action to address under representation of specific groups (sections 158 and 159).
This is both predictable and depressing.
Who the feck is envious of Farage?
White people are not under-represented. I’m fed up of these racist cnuts and their opposition to anything that helps non-white people.
Think @Drainy is being sarcastic. Also Sophie Corcoran is absolute thick as pig shit.
Filled in my ballot today for my local Green candidate. None of the standing candidates made much effort other than a brief policy release in my area but in the surrounding areas the Green candidates are the standouts. Either way this is the best option to give Labour a kicking, outside of voting for the other fascist parties.
Aye yeah
It is depressing that some genuinely think schemes promoting underrepresented minorities are the problem, not the insidious, institutionalised racism that necessitates them. She's clearly a vile attention-seeker, but I've seen otherwise pleasant and normal investment professionals I deal with go on a rant about the lack of opportunities for white males cos their kid is struggling to get onto a grad scheme after uni.
Then don't vote Green, as they are talking of legalising, and taxing both.
I can’t remember the thread but I do remember this becoming an argument on here where someone was accused of xenophobia for suggesting this to be the case.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/vape-shops-gangs-trading-standards-b2967330.html
I would say it’s been flagrantly obvious well before this report that high streets around the country didn’t suddenly develop an insatiable appetite for vape shops, Kurdish barbers and American candy shops.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/vape-shops-gangs-trading-standards-b2967330.html
I would say it’s been flagrantly obvious well before this report that high streets around the country didn’t suddenly develop an insatiable appetite for vape shops, Kurdish barbers and American candy shops.
I would think this would be so easy to stop, councils should have a criteria to allow a shop to open and continue to remain so. Probably happy to just to collect rates, and turn a blind eye.
Having briefly read the article, everyone is aware!
The tax gap is estimated at £46 billion, benefit fraud is about £6.5bn. So the tax gap is significantly more of an issue for public finances.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/measuring-tax-gaps/1-tax-gaps-summary#overview
As for whether someone with ADHD/anxiety/other truly needs benefit payments, what do you suggest they do if they are unable to get a job, or can only work limited hours due to health issues? Are you suggesting a return to the workhouses? Or should they just be begging in the city centres? Or suicide maybe?
how do you propose to differentiate between those fit for work and those who are not? Because this has been done before, and ran by people with the same "hot take" as you. It didnt end well.
Thousands have died after being found fit for work, DWP figures show
This article is more than 10 years old
Campaigners demand welfare overhaul after statistics reveal 2,380 people died between 2011 and 2014 shortly after being declared able to work
https://www.theguardian.com/society...ied-after-fit-for-work-assessment-dwp-figures
The problem is that a third of people claiming universal credit are in work. So the problem is twofold, not only are many large companies not paying enough tax (the current tax gap is over £45bn), but they are also underpaying staff so their wages need to be topped up by the government.
People "taking advantage of the system", benefit fraud is only 2% of total benefit spending, so it's a bit of a myth as to how significant that really is. Sure, you get the odd anamoly the the media hype into a big story. But that's not the real picture.
Phase 1
Kick people off benefits and lower corporate tax
Phase 2
????
Phase 3
Growth and Bezos for some reason pays more tax.
Kick people off benefits and lower corporate tax
Phase 2
????
Phase 3
Growth and Bezos for some reason pays more tax.
I didn't realise the underpants gnomes were in charge of government policy. Explains a lot.
It's a very wishy-washy article though. Shops are 'suspected' and they 'may be' illicit and officers are 'aware of suspicions'.
If stuff is actually happening, why can't they charge people instead of just suspect them? Literally nobody would be against that.
The first one is the real problem. Wages are way too low for many, even earning a good salary in many cities leaves you living relatively month to month. The reality is many are emigrating purely due to cost of living in my opinion vs whatever Reform will have you believe. The country has become an awful mix of incredibly high cost of living, good but declining public services and ok wages. So you feel it's not that bad but you know it is gradually getting worse and it seems irrational to think it might actually improve.
Re taking advantage, you are talking about how many are proven to be doing so which is near impossible with mental illness. The issue is you can't really prove if someone is being dishonest. If 100 people all claim to suffer from severe anxiety, all 100 could (regardless of if they were telling the truth or not) easily present symptoms of anxiety and get a doctor to agree they had at least some degree of anxiety or depression etc.
He’s actually fecking mental. They are just like Trump and his cronies spouting bullshit and lies because they know people will lap it up.