Current Affairs

[barney]

I was reading an article today where a Scottish Nationalist MP was asked about the economic benefit to Scotland after Scexit and couldn’t come back with one.
Not a single one.
Embarrassing?

[towny44]

I was reading an article today where a Scottish Nationalist MP was asked about the economic benefit to Scotland after Scexit and couldn’t come back with one.
Not a single one.
Embarrassing?

Well if it does end up as a pigs breakfast, you can be sure that Sturgeon will blame the English.

[david63]

Am I missing something once again?

The workers at Felixstowe are on strike for more pay. Now I fully admit that I have no idea as to the background to this dispute but there are some details, if true, that do not make sense.

On the news last night it was stated that discussions have been ongoing for nine months and that they need a 10% rise to match the rate of inflation. Now correct me if I am wrong but the rate of inflation was nowhere near 10% nine months ago - so that can only mean that the union is "moving the goalposts".

Anyway I will show them - if I don't get a 15% rise in my pension I will be going on strike - see how they like that!!

[Mervyn and Trish]

Well if you're having 15% I want 25%. So there.

[screwy]

I’ll accept 10% cos I’m not in the Union…

[towny44]

It rather seems to me that the unions are making a concerted effort to replicate their late 1970s success in bringing a govt down, and with the backing of the media, they may very well succeed

[Stephen]

Well if you're having 15% I want 25%. So there.

If you're having 25% I want 30%....it's only fair

Oh, hang on a minute I don't get my pension until next year, so I'l have the arrears in advance now please

[Mervyn and Trish]

You think you're getting your pension next year? I heard Liz and Rishi had agreed to push it back another 5 years. Meanwhile Sir Hindsight says I wouldn't have done that. I'm not Boris you know. Sorry, not Rishi. Or Liz.

[Kendhni]

Am I missing something once again?

The workers at Felixstowe are on strike for more pay. Now I fully admit that I have no idea as to the background to this dispute but there are some details, if true, that do not make sense.

On the news last night it was stated that discussions have been ongoing for nine months and that they need a 10% rise to match the rate of inflation. Now correct me if I am wrong but the rate of inflation was nowhere near 10% nine months ago - so that can only mean that the union is "moving the goalposts".

Anyway I will show them - if I don't get a 15% rise in my pension I will be going on strike - see how they like that!!

They were offered 7.5% based on information from several months back but since inflation has moved o they rejected it and now want 10%.

[Kendhni]

You think you're getting your pension next year? I heard Liz and Rishi had agreed to push it back another 5 years. Meanwhile Sir Hindsight says I wouldn't have done that. I'm not Boris you know. Sorry, not Rishi. Or Liz.

Neither has surrounded themselves with glory, uturns, botched up announcements, unfulfillable promises, incompetence ... not boding well for the future.

The one advantage is that neither is the bumbling incompetent clown that has infested number 10 for the last few years. He wanted to fulfil the role of a caretaker PM and then immediately ran for the hills (when the going gets tough, Johnson makes himself scarce, as usual). This circus of an election should have been brought to a conclusion several weeks ago so that during the worst financial crisis for 50 years, we would hopefully get someone that can actually run this country ... general elections take less time.

[david63]

They were offered 7.5% based on information from several months back but since inflation has moved o they rejected it and now want 10%.

The point is that you cannot keep moving the goalposts to suit one side of the argument. If inflation had gone down to 5% would they have demanded 5% instead of 7%? (We all know the answer to that!)

[Kendhni]

They were offered 7.5% based on information from several months back but since inflation has moved o they rejected it and now want 10%.

The point is that you cannot keep moving the goalposts to suit one side of the argument. If inflation had gone down to 5% would they have demanded 5% instead of 7%? (We all know the answer to that!)

I was just stating their position. A contract isn't formed until both sides agree, so strictly speaking until that agreement is reached then both sides can modify their conditions based on evolving information. In your scenario, if inflation had gone down the 7.5% offer could have been removed from the table and replaced with a 5% offer ... it does work both ways.

[Stephen]

You think you're getting your pension next year? I heard Liz and Rishi had agreed to push it back another 5 years. Meanwhile Sir Hindsight says I wouldn't have done that. I'm not Boris you know. Sorry, not Rishi. Or Liz.

If they want to see another birthday they’ll leave well alone

[towny44]

They were offered 7.5% based on information from several months back but since inflation has moved o they rejected it and now want 10%.

The point is that you cannot keep moving the goalposts to suit one side of the argument. If inflation had gone down to 5% would they have demanded 5% instead of 7%? (We all know the answer to that!)

I was just stating their position. A contract isn't formed until both sides agree, so strictly speaking until that agreement is reached then both sides can modify their conditions based on evolving information. In your scenario, if inflation had gone down the 7.5% offer could have been removed from the table and replaced with a 5% offer ... it does work both ways.

But even you must recognise that the country cannot really afford to inflation match everyones wage and pension and benefit. If we do then we guarantee that inflation will continue rising ad infinitum, or at least until Putin dies of old age.

[Kendhni]

The point is that you cannot keep moving the goalposts to suit one side of the argument. If inflation had gone down to 5% would they have demanded 5% instead of 7%? (We all know the answer to that!)

I was just stating their position. A contract isn't formed until both sides agree, so strictly speaking until that agreement is reached then both sides can modify their conditions based on evolving information. In your scenario, if inflation had gone down the 7.5% offer could have been removed from the table and replaced with a 5% offer ... it does work both ways.

But even you must recognise that the country cannot really afford to inflation match everyones wage and pension and benefit. If we do then we guarantee that inflation will continue rising ad infinitum, or at least until Putin dies of old age.

And even you must realise that wages have not been keeping up with inflation for many years now ... so arguably that has been helping to keep inflation artificially low. There was also an NI tax rise, which was basically a bit of political smoke and mirrors to avoid putting income tax up ... that effectively became a tax on workers.

I am not saying it is right or it is wrong, but there are many factors feeding into this. This 'rebellion' has been well predicted for many years now ... this may even only be the start of several years of discontent and pushback from workers.

[towny44]

I was just stating their position. A contract isn't formed until both sides agree, so strictly speaking until that agreement is reached then both sides can modify their conditions based on evolving information. In your scenario, if inflation had gone down the 7.5% offer could have been removed from the table and replaced with a 5% offer ... it does work both ways.

But even you must recognise that the country cannot really afford to inflation match everyones wage and pension and benefit. If we do then we guarantee that inflation will continue rising ad infinitum, or at least until Putin dies of old age.

And even you must realise that wages have not been keeping up with inflation for many years now ... so arguably that has been helping to keep inflation artificially low. There was also an NI tax rise, which was basically a bit of political smoke and mirrors to avoid putting income tax up ... that effectively became a tax on workers.

I am not saying it is right or it is wrong, but there are many factors feeding into this. This 'rebellion' has been well predicted for many years now ... this may even only be the start of several years of discontent and pushback from workers.

I do agree with all the points you make, I just hope the electorate are intelligent enough to recognise that although the tories will try their level best to minimise wage increases, they are more likely not to increase taxes, and whilst Labour might be more sympathetic to wage increases, they will certainly grab more back in higher taxes, as the economy stagnates.

[Kendhni]

At the minute I really have no idea which flavour of government would be best placed to sort this economic mess out ... and I am concerned that our 2 PM candidates are clearly appeasing and pandering to the most self-serving 0.2% of the population and totally ignoring the 99.8% ... at the minute both candidates, and the entire tory party, are sounding totally out of touch.

Back in February I said I was concerned that the government was showing that it was totally out of ideas (which has proven true) ... worse, neither candidate seems to be offering anything realistic ... and the asinine suggestion that tinkering with tax rates and tax bands will provide any meaningful help to those that need it, is laughable (is that really the best the entire intellect of the tories can come up with? Any brain dead moron can regurgitate that idea, but we are long past that). They have to come up with something much better that can stimulate the economy and provide fairness to all.

[Kendhni]

... and then the next story I read is that they think inflation could reach 18% next year ... very worrying for many!
The last few years of playing politics with a joke PM is over, we need a serious and capable PM at the helm.

[towny44]

... and then the next story I read is that they think inflation could reach 18% next year ... very worrying for many!
The last few years of playing politics with a joke PM is over, we need a serious and capable PM at the helm.

Unless Putin dies of a heart attack we wont be the only country struggling with high double digit inflation next year.

[Mervyn and Trish]

It's very easy to oppose the government. Anyone can criticise. But where are the revolutionary brilliant alternative ideas?

[towny44]

Ken, blames Boris for all our economic woes, but since much of it was down to the cost of civid, and now the impact on fuel costs brought about by Putins war on Ukraine, I cannot see that any other PM or govt would have fared any better, and in fact most of europe is in a very similar situation to the UK.
He also seems to be limiting his criticism of the 2 Tory leadership candidates to the policies of just Liz Truss, totally overlooking Richi Sunaks views, which I suspect are close to his own, although he probably credits them to Sir Keir Hindsight.
Finally he claims that both candidates have no valid ideas of how to tackle the current crisis, totally ignoring the fact that it is the Tory party members they are trying to win over. Clearly in Rishi's case he cant really put forward his ideas of living within our means, if he is to have any chance of persuading the very small and very conservative membership that he is the best candidate for the job.

[Kendhni]

Ken, blames Boris for all our economic woes, but since much of it was down to the cost of civid, and now the impact on fuel costs brought about by Putins war on Ukraine, I cannot see that any other PM or govt would have fared any better, and in fact most of europe is in a very similar situation to the UK.

All true, but you also forgot brexit which has been a huge bleed on the economy having cost £100's billion with a current run rate estimated to be about £40-80bn per year (there is no accurate measurement because the government is either not keeping track or is choosing to bury the numbers). You also forgot to mention a PM that has been very slow to react and often went into hiding when the big decisions needed to be taken. You also forgot to take into account 12 years of toryism that has (allowing for cashing in Browns bail out to the banks) run up, what is fast approaching, £2tn of debt. Much of this though is to be expected from a government that failed plan anything.

He also seems to be limiting his criticism of the 2 Tory leadership candidates to the policies of just Liz Truss, totally overlooking Richi Sunaks views, which I suspect are close to his own, although he probably credits them to Sir Keir Hindsight.

You really need to read posts before commenting! I have criticised the lack of ideas from both candidates (feel free to go back and check) and said both are out of touch (like rest of toryism). I only think Sunak is the better candidate because he has actual experience of running the economy and a much deeper understanding than the underachiever uturn-Betty (she spouts any populist idea and then uturns the next day ... shows the same untrustworthiness and lack of integrity as the current clown PM). No I don't credit Sunak's policies to Starmer (again just you making things up), because he was against several ideas that the clown PM forced through by going over his head ... several embarrassing Johnson uturns as the tories adopted Labour policy because they had no ideas of their own.

Finally he claims that both candidates have no valid ideas of how to tackle the current crisis, totally ignoring the fact that it is the Tory party members they are trying to win over.

'Totally ignoring''??? ... wow, I made explicit reference to only trying to appease the 0.2% and ignoring the 99.8% in my post. I have told you before, you really need to read posts before you start making things up and banging away on your keyboard.

But the point still holds true, neither candidate has provided any confidence that they have any new or workable ideas in how to handle the current crises.

[Ray B]

What a mess the country is in with no one in charge.
Having a p*ss up in No 10, looking back, seems a minor irritant. But it resulted in throwing the captain overboard in the face of a raging storm.
As the saying goes, better the Devil you know, than the Devil you don't

[towny44]

Ken, blames Boris for all our economic woes, but since much of it was down to the cost of civid, and now the impact on fuel costs brought about by Putins war on Ukraine, I cannot see that any other PM or govt would have fared any better, and in fact most of europe is in a very similar situation to the UK.

All true, but you also forgot brexit which has been a huge bleed on the economy having cost £100's billion with a current run rate estimated to be about £40-80bn per year (there is no accurate measurement because the government is either not keeping track or is choosing to bury the numbers). You also forgot to mention a PM that has been very slow to react and often went into hiding when the big decisions needed to be taken. You also forgot to take into account 12 years of toryism that has (allowing for cashing in Browns bail out to the banks) run up, what is fast approaching, £2tn of debt. Much of this though is to be expected from a government that failed plan anything.

He also seems to be limiting his criticism of the 2 Tory leadership candidates to the policies of just Liz Truss, totally overlooking Richi Sunaks views, which I suspect are close to his own, although he probably credits them to Sir Keir Hindsight.

You really need to read posts before commenting! I have criticised the lack of ideas from both candidates (feel free to go back and check) and said both are out of touch (like rest of toryism). I only think Sunak is the better candidate because he has actual experience of running the economy and a much deeper understanding than the underachiever uturn-Betty (she spouts any populist idea and then uturns the next day ... shows the same untrustworthiness and lack of integrity as the current clown PM). No I don't credit Sunak's policies to Starmer (again just you making things up), because he was against several ideas that the clown PM forced through by going over his head ... several embarrassing Johnson uturns as the tories adopted Labour policy because they had no ideas of their own.

Finally he claims that both candidates have no valid ideas of how to tackle the current crisis, totally ignoring the fact that it is the Tory party members they are trying to win over.

'Totally ignoring''??? ... wow, I made explicit reference to only trying to appease the 0.2% and ignoring the 99.8% in my post. I have told you before, you really need to read posts before you start making things up and banging away on your keyboard.

But the point still holds true, neither candidate has provided any confidence that they have any new or workable ideas in how to handle the current crises.

Ken you take things far too literally, my generalisations are how I see your many detailed posts, which are far too complicated for my simple mind to fully grasp, so I have to rely on gut instinct to help my understanding. Incidentally when you keep throwing out statistics about govt debt and who or what is to blame, my brain goes into sleep mode.

[Kendhni]

Ken you take things far too literally, my generalisations are how I see your many detailed posts, which are far too complicated for my simple mind to fully grasp, so I have to rely on gut instinct to help my understanding. Incidentally when you keep throwing out statistics about govt debt and who or what is to blame, my brain goes into sleep mode.

I will try to dumb my language down a bit more just for you.
You will find reading a post before responding to it is far better than responding based on random things that you have made up.