I don't think they could in reality, as it would be the beginning of the end of the UK as a financial centre. Perhaps they could do some things with regulation and tax to upset the EU, but they aren't going to want to destroy the credibility of the City as a trusted international financial centre.
Westminster Politics
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Alright Nostradamus. I won't hold my breath.
Dodgy as hell. Not the first red flag either to anyone paying attention.
But at least they kept that commie Corbyn out. *facepalm*
The FT published a good piece looking at some of the issues the EU face this morning: https://www.ft.com/content/dd7e6828-f603-47bf-bdd7-61e9dcb5f9ac
Good article, managed to find it without the paywall.
British politics makes perfect sense when you realize it's all about older people hating the young
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Allison Pearson is just Katie Hopkins without a 40 year diet of cigarettes, gin and stomach acid.
Today's PMQ. As usual, Boris seems completely unable to either listen to or comprehend the very clear questions that Starmer is asking.
Yes I know it is a typical politicians response.
But Boris does himself no favours at all by playing silly and childish games. PMQs are an important and the most accessable part of our parliamentary process.
But the way Boris treats this forum underscores his lack of competence.
Yes I know it is a typical politicians response.
But Boris does himself no favours at all by playing silly and childish games. PMQs are an important and the most accessable part of our parliamentary process.
But the way Boris treats this forum underscores his lack of competence.
Starmer: “You have failed to fund and support the NHS”
Boris: “I find it absolutely reprehensible that you would attack the hard working doctors, nurses and cancer patients of the NHS like that and urge you to apologise and withdraw the statement”
It gets very tiring and very boring very quickly.
Shame the knighted gimp appointed a private healthcare lobbyist to the job his new shadow cabinet spent 5 years describing as 'the real Labour leader', or he could point out the whole Serco thing. Oh well, I'm sure Johnson will stop calling it NHS Test and Trace any day now.
Last edited:
How does not having a budget work? Everyone just spends what they like and tally up afterwards?
(Sky said the UK government isn't putting out a budget because of covid)
(Sky said the UK government isn't putting out a budget because of covid)
thats pretty much what has happened so far isnt it?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
lets hope its something helpful
I have staff who are high risk and I'd like to see support extended for them
And something like the german scheme where the government will help with short time working for a while would be good
Would also be nice to see council drop the rates for commercial properties that cant be used or used fully as well
Yes, or just some free money/food for me please. I am prepared to help out by eating.
I had been under the impression that the chancellor creates a budget and the rest work within those budgetary restrictions.
What the feck is with that graphic? It’s a budget not a budget movie
nope - its not even a winter spending review... its a oh fek we are feked panic
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Rishi is speaking now
Viable jobs will be supported? Oh god this is going to be a shit show isn’t it?
I don't understand that? An employer pays an employee 55% of a weeks wages to work 33% of their hours? So they are paying them for not being there? Can't see them going for that. They'll just have them working their normal hours.
Yeah, I'm a bit confused how they incentivise employers use it.
If I'm an employer with 10 staff doing similar roles to provide 400 hours a week, and I now only need 200 hours a week, why wouldn't I just cut 5 of the staff, rather than spread it out among 10 and have to pay much more in wages?
Presumably they've thought about this and there is some incentive. How does it work in Germany?
How does national insurance and employers income tax contributions interact with the scheme?
It may be cheaper for tax purposes to have 10 people on less hours than 5 people on more due to the tax allowances.
It's of course a minimum of 33% of their hours so those at that level won't apply unless they need to retain staff. I'd presume employers will make staff work most of their hours but will claim this.
Hopefully it's less susceptible to fraud as the last scheme.
not really I mean if you have enough work for somebody 3 days a week thats 60% of their wages then of the remaining 40% the government will pay 33% the employer 33% and the employee receives 33% less or effectively
employee does 60% of the work and gets 86.4% of the wage
Employer pays 73.2% wages for 60% of the work (plus I believe also has to pay for all contractual benefits in kind eg car, as well as paying NI and pension)
Government pays 13.2% of the wage
I think a lot of people are loosing their job by the end of the month
One of the few areas so far in the pandemic you can’t fault the government on is the furlough scheme and how they protected jobs over the summer.
Realistically though they can’t continue support anywhere near that level going forward because if the only way you’re keeping a job is based on the Government paying a huge chunk of your wage then at some point those people are going to lose their jobs, be it now or in 6 months. I think I read somewhere the German job protection scheme will costs approximately €31 billion by the end of 2021, where as the furlough scheme has already cost the UK £39 billion upto now.
I can’t really see what else they could do here, at some point this is all going to have to be paid back
Realistically though they can’t continue support anywhere near that level going forward because if the only way you’re keeping a job is based on the Government paying a huge chunk of your wage then at some point those people are going to lose their jobs, be it now or in 6 months. I think I read somewhere the German job protection scheme will costs approximately €31 billion by the end of 2021, where as the furlough scheme has already cost the UK £39 billion upto now.
I can’t really see what else they could do here, at some point this is all going to have to be paid back
Croydon shooting: Officer shot dead at police station https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54293111
From the government's point of view that headline 'cost' of the furlough shouldn't be the key consideration though. Even looking solely at the economics of it, the key consideration is how the cost of furlough compares to the cost of the alternative. For example:
If furlough ends and X number of people lose their jobs, how many additional service jobs are lost due to the decline in consumption caused by X people no longer having disposable income? When those people lose their jobs how does that further affect the service industry (and when does that spiral end)? How much would HMRC lose in sales tax due to the decline in luxury goods consumption? How much would HMRC lose in income tax/NI because of the job losses? How much would it cost DWP if a significant proportion of the newly unemployed apply for Universal Credit? How much would it cost to employ the number of staff/pay the overtime required to process that many claims? What would be the impact on the wider Civil Service if, as is already happening, DWP has to borrow staff from other departments to cover the caseload? How much would it cost the government if the end of furlough caused a few major contractors to go under and they had to find and negotiate new deals in this climate?
And then, at the end of the day - how much would the government need to invest into the economy to re-create the jobs it could have saved by extending furlough?
There are thousands of other ways massive job losses could cost the government more money in the long term (additional burdens on healthcare and policing spring to mind). Obviously I don't know the answers to all those questions, but the point is that it's not as simple as saying 'this is costing £Xb so it isn't sustainable' as if furlough exists in a vacuum and the alternative is cost-neutral.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I love that.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
I'm sure it'll make a difference for a few years and sway some folk but eventually these folk will die and the ones that are left will be a generation that grew up getting their knowledge from Twitter and Facebook memes so everything will be fine.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
parts of our media are awful
Great post. This wild ride certainly ain’t over yet.
Does anyone reckon Cobra meetings are a load of bollocks? It really doesn’t look like the sort of meeting where shit actually gets hashed out. Just looks like a facade with a cool name and photographers (as if they’d be allowed to be present if it was a real thing).
dont think photographers are allowed in the meetings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabin...#/media/File:Cabinet_Office_Briefing_Room.jpg
as for COBRA it stands for Cabinet Office Briefing Rooms - Basically the government briefing all other parties about what the response is so yeah I think its kinda in the name that its not where decisions get made - its where they get all stakeholders on the same page and brief them about the coordinated response
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabin... Briefing Rooms,major implications for the UK.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date