Labour and PIP

[Confused_Fred]

Its funny I'm only seeing reply's from those don't work.
Working people are struggling with child care costs and over taxation.

Given the choice between paying thousands each month for child care and working, they will stay home.
No one in there right mind is going to pay 40% income tax on 45k and 2k council tax, they will just work less.

The result will be less tax income for the government and more people claiming in work benefits. No one on here seems to see that

 

[Kev45]

Its funny I'm only seeing reply's from those don't work.

Imagine claiming to be the owner of the largest plumbing company in the SE. Employing 350 staff directly, and thousands more subcontractors indirectly.

That's Fred btw, it isn't a joke or even an attempt by me to wind him up, and it is exactly what he claimed for months and years on end.

Then imagine being such a bitter little bastard that you have to constantly goad, mock and belittle people you don't know.

Imagine that.

So, imagine being in Fred's shoes, and then still not understanding that plumbing is an important cog in vital infrastructure (clean water, sanitation, waste etc).

Imagine arguing, winning a contract to fit bathrooms in 500 new build houses every four months for five years, won't benefit anyone at all.

Because that is exactly what Fred the is arguing here.

It won't benefit the supply chain, companies, individuals, families, communities, local economies, the overall economy, and nor will it lead to more profit and or tax revenue leading to more private and public investment, etc.

Imagine arguing 1.5 million new build houses won't benefit anyone.

Given the choice between paying thousands each month for child care and working, they will stay home.

No one in there right mind is going to pay 40% income tax on 45k and 2k council tax, they will just work less.

So when he claims people will be working less, he must have first-hand knowledge and experience of this, surely.

Because Fred understands how local (national) economies work.

Which is why his multi-million company is so successful.

Because everyone is working less and to directly quote Fred “scrounging” of the state, right?

 

[Confused_Fred]

Kev you have no idea of the train wreck that's coming in 10 years !!
You don't need to be Mystic Meg to see this !!!

Thames Water is about to get a 20 billion bale out from labour. You know the same Thames Water that's been milking bill payers and paying high share dividends since the 1990's. Lets forget about all leaks and raw sewage they have dumped.

After all they're an infrastructure project

 

[Kev45]

Kev you have no idea of the train wreck that's coming in 10 years !!

Actually, I have an idea what's coming at this precise moment in time, yet again you are trying to buIlshit your way out of responding to the main points I raised in my previous post.

You don't need to be Mystic Meg to see this !!!

You obviously do, because you haven't got a clue what is going to happen in ten years time.

Why ten years anyway, why not four, or seven and a bit?

Thames Water is about to get a 20 billion bale out from labour. You know the same Thames Water that's been milking bill payers and paying high share dividends since the 1990's. Lets forget about all leaks and raw sewage they have dumped.

I don't know what point you are making here.

Are you suggesting Thames Water should be allowed to continue “milking” customers and carry on dumping shi/t?

That Labour should do sweet f/uck all?

Or are you arguing that Labour are wrong to sort out the car crash of an economy and crumbling infrastructure left by 14 years of ideological austerity and failed Tory privatisation?

After all they're an infrastructure project

Quite obviously, you still do not understand what rebuilding and or modernizing 14 years of neglect means.

You have just stated that the government is going to bail out Thames Water by 20 billion (due to a lack of investment) and Thames Water has diverted high share dividends to shareholder pockets, yes?

So that means that Thames Water has failed due to its business model, and to corruption (and p/iss poor regulation), yes?

Sweet f/uck all to do with infrastructure, right?

In one breath, you argue that investing in infrastructure is pointless and won't benefit anyone, and in the very next breath (inadvertently) explain why it needs that investment.


Now let's go back to my previous post.

Explain to me how building 1.5 million houses won't benefit anyone and is not good for the economy, and all the other reasons I gave, it's a really simple question for someone who can predict things faster than Mystic Meg?


Edited due to crap grammar.

 

[Moriarty]

So lets play imagine.
Seems to be todays buzz word.

Imagine, people were having enough kids to support them as tax payers when they grew old.
Imagine, people didn't think they were victims of a corrupt system and actually did something about it.
Imagine, instead of bitching and whining you actually went out to vote which would have avoided the train wreck that 5 years of Labour will give us.
Imagine, you actually got the Brexit we voted on, a trade relation without the complications of EU law,
Imagine, if we had a system in place to actually rescue the NHS by bringing back nursing schools,
Imagine, we were not a London centric country,
Imagine, we gould revitalise the North by bringing back manufacturing,
Imagine, the corperations which are supposed to build houses didnt sit on the land they have until the value goes up,
Imagine, when Privatising an industy government actually puts in place contracts where they cant be forced to take it in the ass,
Imagine, that the civil service actually served the public, not who get awarded what title after 20 years of doing "Yes Minister, but",
Imagine, actually caring what happens to the country you live in, not just hating it,
Imagine, one day, remembering just how fecking lucky you are to live here.

Now tell me, why are you angry?

I am a Nationalist, I love the country in which I was born, I do not however love its political system, its bullshit limp wristed politics, where media dictates policy.
Politicians should be judged by the people who vote for them, not the media, this is how we got Labour.
Really, voting age of 16.
So desperate are they for power they will bring in the young who know feck all.
Gonna leave it there, pretty sure some folks will have a go, should be fun.

 

[Kev45]

 

[Moriarty]

View attachment 15841

Nice of you to take a selfie.

 

[Confused_Fred]

I don't know what point you are making here.

Are you suggesting Thames Water should be allowed to continue “milking” customers and carry on dumping shi/t?

That Labour should do sweet f/uck all?

The point I'm making is labour will give in and bale them out just like there doing with Tata Group in Port Talbot.
Labour are going take out loans that we're ALL will have to pay back to pay to private business.

You cant see when theses loans are called in, public services will be CUT !!!

And government should let them fail. I cant remember the government baling out pubs when they go out of business, not even sub post offices.

I'm sick of business blackmailing the government with threats of pulling out of the UK to get billions of tax payers money.

 

[Kev45]

And government should let them fail. I cant remember the government baling out pubs when they go out of business, not even sub post offices.

The Labour government has only been in power a few days, you donut.

So you believe 16 million customers should be left without fresh water and sanitation, right?

And 7,000 staff are laid off, costing another small fortune?

Either way, the government is still going to bail them out.

Now answer my question, that you keep ignoring, or I won't respond again.

Explain to me why building 1.5 million houses won't benefit anyone and is not good for the economy, it's your claim, so explain it?

 

[Confused_Fred]

The government always going to step in

If Thames water go bankrupt, the official receiver called in: share holders and management get nothing.

If the government bales them out: share holders still get there dividend payments and management still get there bonus.

 

[Moriarty]

The point I'm making is labour will give in and bale them out just like there doing with Tata Group in Port Talbot.
Labour are going take out loans that we're ALL will have to pay back to pay to private business.

You cant see when theses loans are called in, public services will be CUT !!!

And government should let them fail. I cant remember the government baling out pubs when they go out of business, not even sub post offices.

I'm sick of business blackmailing the government with threats of pulling out of the UK to get billions of tax payers money.

Government has to bail out those they privatised, otherwise it makes them look like idiots, which they are.
Lets actually be honest, if you privatise an industry then regulate it, it will fail.
If you keep it national, it will be inefficient and failing, but propped up by taxpayer money.

Either way you get failure.

The only way is allow privatisation to conform with the market, don't regulate them.
That allows competition and therefore lower prices.
The only thing you regulate is monopolies and price fixing.

Yes the market is fallible, but government is broken.

 

[Confused_Fred]

Society is regulated. You kill someone you go to jail.

The water industry is a monopoly with no market forces. You cant change to another company if the bills to high or they offer bad service. You can say the same about the rail industry and underground network.

Privatization did work with electricity, gas and telecoms, prices did fall.

It's clear Thames water will fail. The only question left is now much do government spent?

My feeling is the government can get a better deal if they wait. If they nationalize too soon they will face claims from share holders. After all the money they have taken out of this company the last thing government should do is reward them.

 

[Kev45]

Lol.

Yes, clearly the solution to bailing out a poorly regulated water sector is to have no regulation in it at all.

I mean, why stop at the water sector, let's lift all regulation and deregulate throughout the entire economy.

In an interlinked global economy in which you have NO control over whatsoever unless you monopolise it.

Grain from Ukraine, anyone?

Where global warming isn't a thing and more competition is the solution.

Let's pretend decades of deregulation in the banking sector didn't lead to the global banking crisis in 2007/8 (and numerous other examples).

Clearly it was a direct consequence of what regulation there was.

“Conform to the market”, drones of consumers flocking to join other drones.

A Ron Paul or even a Robert Nozick wet dream, where capitalist vultures can be trusted not to poison our drinking water, and who won't dump even more raw sewerage in our rivers and sea.

While they slash and burn and eke out every last penny of profit.

All while their business model benefits from an existing infrastructure that their ideology didn't contribute a single penny to.

 

[Confused_Fred]

Lets try and get back on subject

On the campaign trail, Starmer said he would like to scrap the policy “in an ideal world”, but has insisted “we haven’t got the resources to do it at the moment”.

But old and new Labour MPs are already threatening revolt over the issue, with former shadow chancellor John McDonnell and newly elected Liverpool Riverside representative Kim Johnson both saying they plan to put forward amendments to next week's King's Speech seeking to scrap the welfare restriction.

Further shake-ups of the benefits system have also been hinted at by new Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, who launched the government's 'Back to Work Plan' this week in which she promised that more disabled people and those with health conditions will be supported to get into and remain in work. It immediately prompted calls to "reassure disabled people" they won't be forced into unsuitable jobs.

Well that only took a week

Kev have you thought about a suitable job yet

You cant be a road sweeper ......... they have a union.
You cant be a cleaner at the town hall or in a school....they have a union.
And I dont want you touching my food so no supermarket work !!!

The only job you could do is labour PM. You could sit on your bum all day arguing but we just had election

Hmmm.... I know you can you can work in a call center. Let me look up fights to India

Bet your glad you voted labour now

 

[Kev45]

Lets try and get back on subject

Yes, let's remind the audience that this thread is a direct consequence of a group of women in the Lobby upsetting you last weekend (ripping you a new arse).

I was talking about this in the lobby today and the "walking dead" didn't get


Explain it to your: in the past most people didn't see 50 and lot of people right now I won't see 50 too.

The benefit system in the UK relied on people dying before 60 and not claiming the state pensions or health care costs. Thanks to various public health campaigns people are living longer they are going into that 80s and at 90's more often than not it's all costs money.

So what do you say so the person working in Tesco's on minimum wage their whole life? They don't get a pension, no medical care in their old age? Oh I'm sorry we have to give it to somebody who basically stopped working their twenties and went on to sickness benefits... but there's nothing physically wrong with them.... it's just mentally illness.

What about the poor man who 1/2 drunk himself to death in his 20s? We had to send him through rehab, we put him all liver transplant and he got one !! He deserved to spend the rest of his life doing whatever we want right?

what about the poor woman is suffered from anorexia in her teens and never really entered the workforce. She deserves to spend the rest of their life on welfare too?

What about the ex drug addicts who literally put poison into their bodies for years. Again we had to send them through rehab. Are allowed spend a rest of their lives doing nothing too?

People what about the people we just can't cope with life? They try to get a job but it was too much for them and now they're on sickness benefits.

You cant asked people right now carry on paying same level of tax so others can spend 30 years or more living on welfare. We can't ask people in the workforce right now carry on working so there's 70th birthdays so others can spend so long on welfare. We cannot ask our young people to work into their 70s so people can stay on benefits 40 years or more.

People who have been on welfare over 10 years so out of touch with what's going on with the rest of us. They have little interest in it. All that matters to them is that monthly payment they get off the government.

Well like it or not, if your on welfare your world is about change even under a labour government. And if you think you can talk your way out of returning to work, think again. Its not people running the system now, it's an AI. If you don't follow the rules, it will cut you off.

Bet your glad you voted labour now

I didn't vote Labour, but at least I did vote, unlike you.

Kev have you thought about a suitable job yet

Well, I have given it some thought actually, as it happens. As you are an extremely successful businessman, a multi-millionaire, and you own the largest plumbing company in the SE employing 350 staff directly and 2,000 + staff indirectly, then you can employ me.

You can give me a job, I mean if you really are a qualified plumber as you claim, then a one eyed, one legged monkey high on acid could do exactly the same job, right?

Or I could clean and maintain your (imaginary) £4,000,000 6 bedroom town house (6 bathrooms) on Clarendon Terrace in Brighton, yes?

Do you remember posting those rightmove images? (schoolboy error).

Hmmm.... I know you can you can work in a call center. Let me look up fights to India

You can, you can for sure, that's one “fight” I suspect you won't win.

 

[Confused_Fred]

I didn't vote Labour, but at least I did vote, unlike you.

OooooOOooooooOOOoooo what until whale thingy see that

Clarendon Terrace

That's Kemp town and used to live on Hove Lawns. ( Much better area )

I could pull some strings and get you a job.........but I don't want too

After stepping away from the business just before the pandemic I go back when their short staffed and run jobs out on site for a few weeks. I'm trying to work 6 months or less of the year now. I teach sailing more than sit on site all day.

But..... I did learn one thing this week that mite help you

IF your on UC and in work, they will cover the cost of training if your new employer requests it. I was talking to a man who was laying a flat roof this week and he said cos his take home pay was so low and they wanted him to earn more and get off UC, they paid 4k for him to do an NVQ in roofing. I had to sign off his NVQ paper work

Now all you have to do is get a job Kev ..... I still have no idea what you can do

HMmmmmn.... what about the man who empty's those dog poo bins? You can do that, you have a dog

 

[Confused_Fred]

The sausage sat at the bottom of the hole, the weight of his disappointment pressing down on him. The cheers and applause he had imagined from his fellow sausages seemed like distant, hollow dreams now. Instead, he was greeted with nothing but the cold, dark earth and the faint echoes of his own voice.

He thought back to the pantry and the jar of mustard, the laughter of the other sausages ringing in his ears. What a fool he had been, thinking that digging this hole would somehow redeem him. His casing felt even limper now, a symbol of his crushed spirit.

But as he sat there, a thought began to take root in his mind. Perhaps, he mused, true bravery and cunning weren’t about impressing others or achieving internet fame. Maybe they were about facing challenges head-on, no matter how ridiculous or difficult they seemed, and finding a way to overcome them.

With renewed determination, the sausage decided he wouldn’t let this hole be his final resting place. He had gotten himself into this mess, and he would get himself out of it. Gathering all his strength, he began to climb, inch by inch, using the rough walls of the hole to support his weary casing.

The climb was arduous. The walls were slippery and steep, and more than once, he found himself sliding back down, his progress erased. But each time, he picked himself up and started again, his determination growing with each attempt.

After what felt like an eternity, he finally saw a sliver of light above him. His heart leapt with hope. He pushed himself harder, his limbs aching and his breath coming in ragged gasps. And then, with one final, mighty effort, he hoisted himself out of the hole and into the fresh air.

The sunlight felt glorious on his casing, and he took a moment to savor his victory. He had done it. He had faced his fears, dug deep—literally and metaphorically—and emerged stronger on the other side.

When he returned to the pantry, he was greeted with curious glances from the other sausages. They had heard about his digging endeavor and were eager to hear the story.

“What happened down there?” one of them asked, unable to hide his curiosity.

The sausage smiled, a newfound confidence shining in his eyes. “I dug the deepest hole in all the land,” he said simply. “And I learned that sometimes, it’s not about the hole you dig, but about how you climb out of it.”

The other sausages looked at him with a newfound respect. No longer was he just the “Mustard-Stuck” or “Sour-Sausage.” He was a sausage of resilience and determination.

And so, the internet sausage found his true worth, not in the eyes of others, but within himself. He had faced the depths of his own fears and doubts and emerged triumphant. And in doing so, he had earned the greatest reward of all: his own self-respect.

 

[Kev45]

Let me know when he gets round to explaining why building 1.5 million new homes is bad for the economy and bad for house buyers/renters (50% will be affordable) and local communities.

(not forgetting his racist anti-immigration views where he wrongly pointed they get fast tracked into housing)

 

[Confused_Fred]

Let me know when he gets round to explaining why building 1.5 million new homes is bad for the economy and bad for house buyers/renters (50% will be affordable) and local communities.

Oh that's simple one to answer

People want to live where the work is, that means London and south. The problem is very bit of building lands in those areas is being used. All they can do is build on green belt land. And we all know that wont happen.

Share ownership is turning into a nightmare. The service fees can run into thousands each year trapping many who brought into scheme.

Because the flat is shared ownership, Mr Shaker, a manager at a language training company, must pay a mortgage for the part he owns, rent for the part he does not and service charges to the managing agent, Savills.

Savills is legally responsible for setting the service charge.

When they moved in, the service charge was £150 a month. In 2022, it was raised to £370 a month and in February this year they were told it would rise again to £460 a month.

“We are screwed,” Mrs Shaker told The Argus.

‘Our lives are on hold’ – people ‘trapped’ in 'nightmare' shared ownership schemes

Residents say they are “trapped” in a shared ownership scheme which has become unaffordable with soaring service charges.

www.theargus.co.uk

(not forgetting his racist anti-immigration views where he wrongly pointed they get fast tracked into housing)

See:

£500m for refugee move on accommodation announced

The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities has announced £500m of capital funding to support local authorities to provide more move on accommodation for people who have arrived in the UK under the Ukraine Family Scheme, the Homes for Ukraine Scheme and the Afghan Resettlement Scheme.

www.housing.org.uk

 

[Kev45]

Awe, the poor little mite is obviously getting no attention in main chat, and while he avoids the question yet again.

And while he slurps that cheap cider, glug glug.

You forgot to consult AI Chat Bot didn't you.

I did 5 years for UNHCR.. I worked in some of the worst places all over the world and saw death daily in my 20's..

Of course, you did, sweetheart, of course you did.

Which explains why you posted a link about Ukrainian and Afghan refugees rather than immigration, right?

Who still doesn't understand the fundamental difference between an immigrant (economic, etc) and a refugee fleeing war and persecution, etc, this is really basic stuff a 10 year old would know.

You would think, someone who has “worked all over the world”. For “five years” with “UNHCR” and who saw “death daily”, would have at least some understanding of the basics. At least express some sympathy and some empathy, and who would not use the plight of refugees so callously to score his infantile points.

Btw, someone explain to that him the UNHCR is a REFUGEE agency.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees!!

The clue is in the name, right?