When will this shit end?

[Crazyfool01]

1 minute ago, priest17 said:

Nice to see your new hat is Flight Of The Concords inspired

 

  my hats aren’t going to fit if this goes on much longer ... 

[Cherry Tree]

22 hours ago, gizmoman said:

One of the things that does come up when people mention Starmer was his involvement with the Jimmy Saville case when at the CPS, i've just read this, written by a labour party member before his election,

https://medium.com/@lucynevitt/starmers-shambolic-cps-affabd38bb6d

it contains this bombshell,

"However, one of the most crucial cases is related to John Worboys, the black cab driver who spiked the drinks of scores of unsuspecting women before sexually assaulting them while they were unconscious in the back of his taxi. Worboys was convicted in 2009 of 19 charges against 12 women. It was suspected that there were over 100 more victims. But Sir Keir ruled not to pursue further charges. What is most interesting about the case is that Carrie Symonds, the current partner of Boris Johnson, was a victim of Worboys. If Sir Keir is elected Labour’s next leader elected, the party would face a situation where they would have not only failed to elect a woman leader, but they would also elected a man who oversaw the mishandling of a high-profile rape case involving the prime minister’s partner."

PMQ's will never be the same now!

As somebody has stated the right wing are out in force on social media. Including this one where they have been caught sharing another doctored video, the problem with these things is that it has been viewed by nearly 300k people and forwarded by god knows how many before the factually correct story is published.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52653609

You would think that, as a Minister in the Health Department,  Nadine Dorries would have something more important to occupy her time.

[Sasperella]

1 hour ago, mattiloy said:

I also dont have likes left but yes to all of this n all

Well, what an embarrassing agree-off this has become 😉

[Ryan1984]

Charlie Brooker’s Anti-viral Wipe captured what we’ve all been through perfectly.

All the clips showed (again) how bad some/most of the decisions have been.

[Sawdusty surfer]

3 hours ago, MEGABOWL said:

As someone in the 40 per cent bracket I can categorically say going to 45 would not be a problem. I’d vote for that.

 

 

[gizmoman]

32 minutes ago, Cherry Tree said:

As somebody has stated the right wing are out in force on social media. Including this one where they have been caught sharing another doctored video, the problem with these things is that it has been viewed by nearly 300k people and forwarded by god knows how many before the factually correct story is published.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-52653609

You would think that, as a Minister in the Health Department,  Nadine Dorries would have something more important to occupy her time.

It's true almost everyone has an agenda and it takes work to get the truth sometimes, even this BBC rebuttal isn't honest and so makes Dorries tweet seem worse than it was. (don't get me wrong editing a video to make what is said different  is totally out of order), The BBC link states,

"But the clip does not include the reporter's question, which asks Sir Keir about the incorrect use of guidelines being used by the authorities in the reporting and investigating of child sexual abuse allegations.

As can be seen from the full exchange, Sir Keir was talking about how the police wrongly applied the guidelines, and how police culture had to change."

In the unedited clip he actually states that "the guidelines change that and they require the police and prosecutors to focus intently on the allegation being made" so he is clearly not just talking about the police applying the old guidelines incorrectly he is talking about a systemic problem. It's quite a stretch to say the reasons he listed are the reasons he and the CPS didn't prosecute but there were clearly problems within the system, both police and prosecutors. The BBC claiming he was only talking about the police shows their bias IMO.

I haven't looked at the other claims in that original article but it was written by someone clearly who didn't like Starmer so may well have some incorrect or distorted info, it pays to look at everything with a degree of suspicion, even the BBC!

[Homer]

3 hours ago, stuartbert two hats said:

You're responding to some imaginary comments I'm not making.

It's a textbook internet strategy.

[philipsteak]

18 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

Charlie Brooker’s Anti-viral Wipe captured what we’ve all been through perfectly.

All the clips showed (again) how bad some/most of the decisions have been.

Good to have him back in the day job.

I don't know why it was funny and I don't know why it was right, but his description of Matt Hancock as 'your sister's first boyfriend with a car' was spot on

[stuartbert two hats]

3 minutes ago, philipsteak said:

Good to have him back in the day job.

I don't know why it was funny and I don't know why it was right, but his description of Matt Hancock as 'your sister's first boyfriend with a car' was spot on

Has he been filming those front room bits in his real front room all this time?

[dotdash79]

10 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Has he been filming those front room bits in his real front room all this time?

Yes

[DeanoL]

3 hours ago, Dave85radiohead said:

Policies like this hurt professionals   who have worked hard to get where they are and often have to work very unsociable hours and take on a lot of responsibility. There are usually a lot of extra insurances etc to pay as well debt in having had the education to get there and there is already no child benefit etc.When the tax gets too high it just isn’t worth taking on that responsibility any more. Like I said there has to be some carrot for people to push themselves as far as they can.

Why? Why do we need these people "pushing themselves as far as they can"? What are these people doing that's so important? 

I just did the calculation. Someone earning 80K takes home £4,586.97 a month. 

If you changed the 40% tax bracket to 45%, they would take home £4,162.01 a month. 

That's equivalent to "working for free" is it? If so I will happily work for free!

[stuartbert two hats]

11 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

Why? Why do we need these people "pushing themselves as far as they can"? What are these people doing that's so important? 

I just did the calculation. Someone earning 80K takes home £4,586.97 a month. 

If you changed the 40% tax bracket to 45%, they would take home £4,162.01 a month. 

That's equivalent to "working for free" is it? If so I will happily work for free!

You forgot all the national insurance. They'll be taking home about 3.6k. So essentially working for free. I mean, who can live on that? It's impossible.

Edited May 14, 2020 by stuartbert two hats
Decimal point!

[zahidf]

So wall london off and reopen the pubs and theatres I say

[dentalplan]

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

So wall london off and reopen the pubs and theatres I say

[Madyaker]

So you can watch 24 cases a day go to 240 cases a day? 

[gizmoman]

22 minutes ago, zahidf said:

So wall london off and reopen the pubs and theatres I say

"Sturgeons hair, secret of her lockdown locks..." WTF is this? I thought the Telegraph was supposed to be one of the "quality" rags. I'm no fan of Nicola Sturgeon but this is demeaning shite.

[stuartbert two hats]

3 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

"Sturgeons hair, secret of her lockdown locks..." WTF is this? I thought the Telegraph was supposed to be one of the "quality" rags. I'm no fan of Nicola Sturgeon but this is demeaning shite.

It's gone downhill from a low position in the last couple of years.

[whitehorses]

23 hours ago, philipsteak said:

Not that I want to encourage anyone, but they have started to open up some of the car parks and toilets around here. The National Park really don't want to encourage people either, but figure it's better than people parking in stupid places and shitting everywhere

😂😂 

[Dave85radiohead]

47 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

You forgot all the national insurance. They'll be taking home about 3.6k. So essentially working for free. I mean, who can live on that? It's impossible.

You get that for earning 60k so you would not be seeing any benefit for earning the extra 20k. May as well take the lower paid job and get more money and have less responsibility.

No point trying to have a reasonable conversation about it though.

[DeanoL]

1 hour ago, stuartbert two hats said:

You forgot all the national insurance. They'll be taking home about 3.6k. So essentially working for free. I mean, who can live on that? It's impossible.

I wish I had but I didn't.

[zahidf]

Good old fashioned union bashing in the daily fail

[DeanoL]

23 minutes ago, Dave85radiohead said:

You get that for earning 60k so you would not be seeing any benefit for earning the extra 20k. May as well take the lower paid job and get more money and have less responsibility.

No point trying to have a reasonable conversation about it though.

At 60K you currently take home £3,620.30 a month. With 45% you would take home £3,245.64 a month instead.

So currently the monthly difference in between 60K and 80K is £966.67. At 45% tax it would be £916.37.

Fifty quid difference.

We can have a perfectly reasonable conversation but we need to use actual figures. You need to explain why paying an extra fifty quid in tax every month would keep people from wanting to put in the extra hours to earn an extra £916. Which, it's worth noting, is much less than the minimum wage for a full time job...

 

 

[stuartbert two hats]

16 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I wish I had but I didn't.

Do it for 60k

[DeanoL]

 

It's just https://listentotaxman.com/

Honestly I'm starting to think what we really need is a new rule where if you earn over £40K, you have to pay 100% tax on it until you pass an exam where you can prove you understand how tax brackets work.

[Smeble]

1 hour ago, DeanoL said:

I wish I had but I didn't.

Fuck me they pay more tax in a month than I get paid in a month.