Jump to content


Rugby League World - Grand Finals Issue

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD - THE GRAND FINALS ISSUE - OUT 17 OCT OR DOWNLOAD IT NOW!
Try our Fantastic 4-Issue Bundle Offer:
For just £14, a saving of 10% on the regular cover price, you’ll get:

The Grand Finals Issue (out 17 Oct) – Grand Final drama from both hemispheres plus Four Nations preview
The Four Nations Issue (out 21 Nov) – Fantastic coverage of the Four Nations tournament down under
The Golden Boot Issue (out 19 Dec) – A look back at the 2014 season plus the big reveal of the winner of the Golden Boot
The 2015 Season Preview Issue (out 23 Jan) – How will your team perform in 2015? We preview every club.


League Express

Podcast

Photo
* * - - - 1 votes

Ed Miliband


  • Please log in to reply
779 replies to this topic

#281 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 04 September 2013 - 01:08 PM

A poor day for Ed in today's PMQs.  Oh come on Ed, you could have blown every bit of wind out of Cameron's sails with a simple nod while also doing what is the right thing on the shameful bedroom tax.

 

 

What's especially telling is Nick Clegg's face.  Does anyone really think he's enjoying himself at all these days?


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#282 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,347 posts

Posted 04 September 2013 - 01:22 PM

the spare room subsidy is NOT shameful, though, so Miliband would be wise to avoid the subject. You do  know the facts: it extends the rules already in place  regarding housing benefit for those in private sector accommodation to those in public sector. It motivates public sector housing managers to more accurately match property to peoples needs. 



#283 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 04 September 2013 - 01:52 PM

the spare room subsidy is NOT shameful, though, so Miliband would be wise to avoid the subject. You do  know the facts: it extends the rules already in place  regarding housing benefit for those in private sector accommodation to those in public sector. It motivates public sector housing managers to more accurately match property to peoples needs. 

Now, if there were tolerances or exceptions built into the policy then it would be fairer.  For example, if a man lives in a two council flat on his own but the council has no one bedroom alternatives available then they should be forced to exempt him from the policy.  Otherwise you get consequences like this.  Most councils simply do not have the housing portfolio needed to adjust for this tax meaning people have a choice, pay a penalty for not being able to move or leave for the private sector and end up costing the state far more, if they can get somewhere else at all.  Don't forget that the vast majority of people affected by this are on levels of income low enough that they have few, if any, options available to them.

 

How can it be fair in the slightest if someone is penalised for something he can do nothing about?  I think shameful is just the right word for it.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#284 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,347 posts

Posted 04 September 2013 - 01:58 PM

Can't agree.  Its about time social landlords woke up to the their responsibilities to their tenants and to the taxpayer.  And I speak as a someone who has both direct and indirect family members in these situations.  I've also seen what is possible in housing associations once freed from the suffocating grip of local authority control. 



#285 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 05 September 2013 - 11:40 PM

Can't agree.  Its about time social landlords woke up to the their responsibilities to their tenants and to the taxpayer.  And I speak as a someone who has both direct and indirect family members in these situations.  I've also seen what is possible in housing associations once freed from the suffocating grip of local authority control. 

UN investigation into the impact of "bedroom tax" on UK housing.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#286 JohnM

JohnM
  • Coach
  • 20,347 posts

Posted 06 September 2013 - 12:02 PM

I'll look forward to her report with interest. Certainly as a former  Director of the Department of Planning of the city of São Paulo and National Secretary for Urban Programs of the Brazilian Ministry of Cities she's done a good job in solving Brazil's housing crisis:  It is estimated that more than 50 million Brazilians live in inadequate housing. Most of these families have an income below the minimum wage of R$675 (about US$330) a month. Roughly 26 million people living in urban areas lack access to potable water, 14 million have no refuse collection service and 83 million are not connected to sewerage systems.



#287 Bedford Roughyed

Bedford Roughyed
  • Moderator
  • 5,374 posts

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:48 AM

Falkirk is getting interesting again... plots thickening all over!


With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

#288 archibald

archibald
  • Coach
  • 646 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 11:02 AM

So, he stands up and pretends he's going to do something about zero hour contracts. The man is an utter lightweight.



#289 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 11:16 AM

So, he stands up and pretends he's going to do something about zero hour contracts. The man is an utter lightweight.

 

Better to say nothing about zero hour contracts then?


That's me.  I'm done.


#290 archibald

archibald
  • Coach
  • 646 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 11:42 AM

Better to say nothing about zero hour contracts then?

Why not. It's just the latest "thing" for people to get all het up about. They've even got this fancy name now as to when I had one of these terrible, terrible jobs. 20 years ago.



#291 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,460 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 11:51 AM

The Emperor has no clothes.


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police


#292 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 12:52 PM

Just watched the whole of Miliband's speech.  Overall summary:  Uninspiring and missed the target audience.  Regardless of your intentions, going to the TUC and bigging up a 19th century Tory isn't going to get them on the edge of their seats...  He'd have been as well going on about how Thatcher was really to the left of many of Labour's policies, now and under the last Labour government.

 

On the substance of the speech though:

 

He's promising to get the young people of Britain working again.  Go on then Ed, we're listening... how will you do that?  Ah, government funded schemes that you'll fund by taxing bank bonuses.  The ones they're already paying 45% tax on.  Where will you set it?  Back to 50%?  60?  98%?  Is that anyone who is in the finance industry or just people earning over £500,000?  What about the other industries where directors get huge bonuses?  What about other seriously high earners, e.g. footballers?  Bank bonuses get a bad name but if someone gets a £1m bonus now, they're paying £450,000 of it directly to the state.  It's a nice easy target and soundbite for Miliband in front of a union audience but it's not that practical in reality.  Ed complained about bankers bonuses being up this year, yes it sounds distasteful when the country is in quite severe austerity measures but then increased bonuses = increased tax revenues = a quicker end to austerity measures, how else does the government make money?  What if the bankers decide to convert most of the bonuses to salaries or share options, many are already doing that.

 

Also, he announced a policy of companies having to offer compulsory apprenticeships if they want a major government contract.  Is that just manual and blue collar contracts or does it include the white collar industries?  Take bin men as an example, most areas now have outsourced contracts for this work, how do you apprentice as a bin man?  There are surely many better, less blunt, ideas, e.g. scrap Employers NI for all youths employed in a certified apprenticeship scheme or provide tax credits for training costs in a company that lead to an accreditation.  Simpler than simply holding a quite blunt tool of "offer apprenticeships or don't get a government contract".  Carrot rather than stick is always better.

 

Then there's a new "British Investment Bank" that's legally obliged to loan money to businesses.  Surely that's going to have extortionate interest rates to cover the defaults of the bad debts such a policy inevitably brings.

 

Next, investing in housing.  is this going to be state housing, increasing the council housing stock across Britain?  If so, good.  If not, where's the money going?  What's it going to do for Britain?

 

He actually gets it right on zero hours contracts, he highlights the key points about how they're being exploited and will stop them.  He also highlighted when they're appropriate.  He's not going to ban zero hours contracts, just stop the exploitation.  So, there's a good point Ed.  One out of a speech isn't bad.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#293 Johnoco

Johnoco
  • Coach
  • 20,118 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 12:56 PM

He actually gets it right on zero hours contracts, he highlights the key points about how they're being exploited and will stop them.  He also highlighted when they're appropriate.  He's not going to ban zero hours contracts, just stop the exploitation.  So, there's a good point Ed.  One out of a speech isn't bad.

He would get my vote based on this alone. Some employers today would make the 19thC factory owners look benevolent if they could get away with it. Ideally they want banning because people  can always be co-erced into accepting them.



#294 archibald

archibald
  • Coach
  • 646 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 01:01 PM

 

On the substance of the speech though:

 

He's promising to get the young people of Britain working again.  Go on then Ed, we're listening... how will you do that? 

 

He actually gets it right on zero hours contracts, he highlights the key points about how they're being exploited and will stop them.  He also highlighted when they're appropriate.  He's not going to ban zero hours contracts, just stop the exploitation.  So, there's a good point Ed.  One out of a speech isn't bad.

It's always puzzled me when governments say "they'll get people back to work", because if they could do that, there'd be no unemployment.

 

On zhc, how's he going to stop the exploitation? If he sets maximum times, then employers who use them will simply get shut 1 day before the time passes and get someone else in. Plus, why is it ok that bar staff and doctors/teachers are ok to have to use them but no-one in between is?



#295 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,696 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 01:37 PM

Ed complained about bankers bonuses being up this year, yes it sounds distasteful when the country is in quite severe austerity measures but then increased bonuses = increased tax revenues = a quicker end to austerity measures, how else does the government make money?

 

Didn't most of the banks delay paying bonuses from last year until this year so they would be taxed at 45% instead of 50%?

 

These are not benevolent knights in shining armour happily paying their dues in order to rescue the British economy from austerity measures.

 

If we are reliant on taxes earned from huge bank bonus payments to escape from austerity, we are truly doomed.


John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#296 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:04 PM

Didn't most of the banks delay paying bonuses from last year until this year so they would be taxed at 45% instead of 50%?

 

These are not benevolent knights in shining armour happily paying their dues in order to rescue the British economy from austerity measures.

 

If we are reliant on taxes earned from huge bank bonus payments to escape from austerity, we are truly doomed.

You're right, they're not.  If you could get £50k more by delaying your bonus by a month or two then you'd do it too...

 

What it does highlight though is that they are paying income tax rather than the offshore contracting route that more than a few others use. 

 

I get calls weekly from these companies offering to arrange my affairs so that I take home 90% of my income after tax.  Many are based on the Isle of Man, I contract with them, they contract with the end client, international tax laws mean that they pay me locally at local tax rates of almost nothing, they take 5% and give me the rest.  Same with the professional sportsmen who misused the Employee Benefit Trust system to pay next to no "tax" on their income.  Ethically and legally dodgy but they're relying on HMRC being so overwhelmed with other avoidance and evasion work that you'll get through unscathed, it'd take a major law suit against someone to set the precedent on this to stop it, as they did with EBTs, then the next scam would come up.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#297 ckn

ckn
  • Admin
  • 16,933 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:18 PM

He would get my vote based on this alone. Some employers today would make the 19thC factory owners look benevolent if they could get away with it. Ideally they want banning because people  can always be co-erced into accepting them.

Someone on minimum wage zero hour contracts are only paid that minimum wage because employers legally cannot pay them less or give them fewer employee benefits.

 

It's not as bad as how more than a few companies exploit immigrants.  Company scams UKBA into authorising a batch of visas because they con the system into saying there's no skilled UK workers to do the work, it's not that complex but would take a while for me to write out.  They then get an agency to contract with a bunch of foreigners who want to come here, mainly Indians, using the pre-authorised working visas.  They come here on near minimum wage and forced by contract to use the agency's accommodation at a rate that leaves them barely enough to eat.  When they're at the point that they've got enough time here to request permanent leave to remain the agency cancels their contract, sends them home and gets the next batch of people who want to come here for a better life.  All perfectly legal but, as you say, with lower ethics than 19th century factory owners.


Arguing with the forum trolls is like playing chess with a pigeon.  No matter how good you are, the bird will **** on the board and strut around like it won anyway


#298 John Drake

John Drake
  • Admin
  • 7,696 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 02:21 PM

You're right, they're not.  If you could get £50k more by delaying your bonus by a month or two then you'd do it too...

 

For the vast majority of ordinary working people, including me, such notions are the stuff of pure fantasy.

 

It offends me that such bonuses continue to be paid in an industry that only survives due to having been bailed out in the main by taxes paid by ordinary working people who could never themselves aspire to such unjustifiable remuneration.

 

However much tax they pay on these bonuses, far from helping to end austerity, it will never match the amount of tax money that has flowed the other way in order to preserve all their jobs in the first place. They will never repay that debt in full. Never.

 

I'd love to see a government elected in this country that rejected the fallacy that you can only have a thriving economy by paying those at the top much much more, and those at the bottom much much less.

 

Do I anticipate Ed Miliband will lead such a government? No, not really. More's the pity.


John Drake
Site Admin: TotalRL.com
TotalRL.com
Email: john.drake@totalrl.com


#299 Steve May

Steve May
  • Coach
  • 10,111 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 03:15 PM

Just watched the whole of Miliband's speech.  Overall summary:  Uninspiring and missed the target audience. 

 

Read this, and thought "ckn having his weekly whinge about Ed Miliband" and almost stopped. 

 

Glad I didn't, because I wasn't expecting to see this..

 

  So, there's a good point Ed. 

 

Jesus wept.  Praising Ed Miliband.  Have you been on the gin at lunchtime?


That's me.  I'm done.


#300 Wolford6

Wolford6
  • Coach
  • 10,460 posts

Posted 10 September 2013 - 03:33 PM

Ed Miliband should have been in a gin at lunchtime.


Under Scrutiny by the Right-On Thought Police