4 hours ago, mickbrown said:

She's just said, more than once, that no family would pay more than £2500 for energy this year.

She's a fucking idiot or a fucking liar. Too early to tell yet.

Am I the only one who would rather pay £2500 more on my energy bill a year, if it didn't mean paying £7000 a year more on my mortgage and the value of my house dropping by 10%

4 hours ago, mickbrown said:

She's just said, more than once, that no family would pay more than £2500 for energy this year.

She's a fucking idiot or a fucking liar. Too early to tell yet.

She doesnt understand the help her government are giving, perhaps she should ask Martin Lewis. Either way it does not give me any confidence she can run a bath never mind run the country.

2 hours ago, Spider said:

Thought we were supposed to be better off without the EU dragging us down though?

 

I never thought that. You did.👍

6 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

I never thought that. You did.👍

No. Not anymore.

It was 6 years ago, you may have missed it but I've realised a good while back that it was a shocking decision.

I'm in the here and now. 

And here and now, it was a shit decision. 🙂

4 minutes ago, Spider said:

No. Not anymore.

It was 6 years ago, you may have missed it but I've realised a good while back that it was a shocking decision.

I'm in the here and now. 

And here and now, it was a shit decision. 🙂

You’re quite right, a shocking decision. The here/now and future is outside the EU. Time to look forward not backwards.

Edited September 29, 20223 yr by BobyBrno

26 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

You’re quite right, a shocking decision. The here/now and future is outside the EU. Time to look forward not backwards.

It's tricky that.

Seems Brexit just naturally takes us backwards.

And the self imposed bureaucracy is hardly helping us move forward.

Still, folk with union jack tattoos are joyfully telling us that they are looking forward to scraping frost off their windows and high interest rates "like we had in the 70's and we survived that blah blah blah"

So we're all at it.

23 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

You’re quite right, a shocking decision. The here/now and future is outside the EU. Time to look forward not backwards.

Looking forward it will be great to see how our new PM sorts out the NI protocol and then explains to all the devolved nations how Westminster is going to match all the money they used to receive from the EU🇬🇧 Maybe Kwasi could sort it like he has done with our economy 😄

At least Covid has gone away

 

https://news.sky.com/story/amp/covid-hospital-admissions-in-england-highest-since-august-amid-new-autumn-wave-12707495

2 hours ago, Spider said:

She’s just been torn several new arses by a load of Alan Partridges.

We are officially in Keith Hill territory.

Newscast - The Liz Truss BBC Local Radio Interviews - BBC Sounds

All the interviews in one handy package.

Borrowed from Facebook.

It’s a long one but worth sticking with it. I love the closing two 

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.　
So, that's what they decided to do.
 
The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just£80.
 
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.　

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).　
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.　

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"　
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"　

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"　

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.　

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!　

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up any more. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.　
 
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

 

1 hour ago, MickyD said:

Borrowed from Facebook.

It’s a long one but worth sticking with it. I love the closing two 

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.　
So, that's what they decided to do.
 
The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just£80.
 
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.　

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).　
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.　

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"　
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"　

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"　

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.　

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!　

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up any more. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.　
 
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Shocking that so many of those were low paid workers but that is Tory Britain for you. 

1 hour ago, MickyD said:

Borrowed from Facebook.

It’s a long one but worth sticking with it. I love the closing two 

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.　
So, that's what they decided to do.
 
The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just£80.
 
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.　

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).　
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.　

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"　
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"　

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"　

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.　

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!　

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up any more. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.　
 
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Blokes 1-8 didn't turn up anyway as they had frozen to death and couldn`t afford the rent. So, bloke nine sat on his own chatting to the barmaid and realised he didn't like the others anyway and found some friends in his social bracket.

I think she's fucked up...

 

2 hours ago, MickyD said:

Borrowed from Facebook.

It’s a long one but worth sticking with it. I love the closing two 

Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.　
So, that's what they decided to do.
 
The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just£80.
 
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.　

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).　
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.　

But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"　
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"　

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"　

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.　

The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!　

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up any more. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.　
 
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

But this not what the clowns have just done they cut the tax rate for the highest pay from 45% to 40%.

At the same time as saying Unions wanting pay rises are going to increase inflation. 
 

So a nurse having more money each month is inflationary, a highly paid person having more money is not.

other those entrenched in political blinkers the changes have been hammered. 
 

Let's see how long before cost cutting comes out of the woodwork, ( high inflation and cutting cost- double whammy) If these 2 are still around by Xmas I will bet anyone on a here a pint that as part of us all pulling together we are presented with a plan to modernise the NHS which basically involves selling bits off to their mates . 

Fuckwit 

 

 

29 minutes ago, Ani said:

But this not what the clowns have just done they cut the tax rate for the highest pay from 45% to 40%.

At the same time as saying Unions wanting pay rises are going to increase inflation. 
 

So a nurse having more money each month is inflationary, a highly paid person having more money is not.

other those entrenched in political blinkers the changes have been hammered. 
 

Let's see how long before cost cutting comes out of the woodwork, ( high inflation and cutting cost- double whammy) If these 2 are still around by Xmas I will bet anyone on a here a pint that as part of us all pulling together we are presented with a plan to modernise the NHS which basically involves selling bits off to their mates . 

Already floating the idea of benefit cuts so that folk earning over 150k can have more.

Who are they sending to QT

Id go either

Treasury 'plodders' bloke

Or the blonde geordie bisexual

I mean she's going to need some sort of evidence that this is working - and quickly. People will end up rioting at this rate. The disgust is palpable.

If this were to improve the economy in the way that she's suggesting - then I wouldn't have any ideological problem with it. I'm a pragmatist at heart. 

But it's looking like an almighty fuck up right at this moment.....!

3 hours ago, Nowack said:

Newscast - The Liz Truss BBC Local Radio Interviews - BBC Sounds

All the interviews in one handy package.

5 mins in was enough for me

Did you know you would crash the pound and the markets?

 

If she had said, obviously there was a chance but that didnt worry us because etc etc etc

 

But no, just wiffing and waffing shit

 

Thats after she had explained tax cuts would cause new roads to be built

 

Shes taking the piss or absolutely numb as fuck

Ripped to bits over fracking, about 24 minutes

All that money spent on being Sir Margaret and turns out shes just a shit Michael Foot

I think the folk of the red wall area's of the North and Midlands are now starting to have a rethink. 😁

18 minutes ago, Casino said:

Ripped to bits over fracking, about 24 minutes

All that money spent on being Sir Margaret and turns out shes just a shit Michael Foot

Theresa May without the strong and stable

37 minutes ago, Casino said:

5 mins in was enough for me

Did you know you would crash the pound and the markets?

Didn't Sunak warn that her plans would lead to this?

Don't get me wrong I don't want him as PM but fuck me he couldn't have fucked it up anywhere near a quickly as she has.