What is that "mate" of mine Sadiq Khan trying to achieve ?

 

You lost you demented little cretin, get over it and concentrate on your job you terrorist sympathiser.

1 minute ago, royal white said:

3k to 10k is fkin ridiculous, but what about the point I made….”if the refuse they will be forcibly deported” that means that they can be deported 

I would say that is political speak, in other words bollocks.

4 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

They're ripping people off!

Worked hard, paid in but can't take out.

Now they have to pay even more tax after retirement. 

Oldies having to keep Wayne and Waynetta in chocolate, illegals in HMOs, and all manner of non-jobs in the public sector. 

Chip on the shoulder attitudes again.

The road to ruin.

Wayne and Waynetta better looked after than pensioners.  How the fuck the people of this country let the government get away with this I’ve no idea. 

37 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Utter bullshit. 

He's stupid.

Those who pay in get to take out.

10 minutes ago, bolty58 said:

He's stupid.

Those who pay in get to take out.

Thats how it should be…. Sadly those who put in get less than those who don’t put in.

6 minutes ago, bolty58 said:

He's stupid.

Those who pay in get to take out.

Those who pay in now are paying our parents’ / grandparents’ pensions.

Not one penny that I have paid in tax and NI over the last 20 years will go towards my pension. Nor will any of the tax and NI I pay in the next 20 years. 

2 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Thats how it should be…. Sadly those who put in get less than those who don’t put in. 

Equally though, someone who has paid £50k in tax a year for 40 years will get the same state pension as someone who has paid £10k in tax a year for 40 years. 

Just now, Jol_BWFC said:

Equally though, someone who has paid £50k in tax a year for 40 years will get the same state pension as someone who has paid £10k in tax a year for 40 years. 

Should they get 5 times more, having the benefit of much higher wages all their life?
One might suggest that someone paying 50k a year in tax, doesn't need the state pension.

2 minutes ago, Traf said:

Should they get 5 times more, having the benefit of much higher wages all their life?
One might suggest that someone paying 50k a year in tax, doesn't need the state pension.

Yep

2 minutes ago, royal white said:

Yep

To my first line or my second?

The country can't afford to pay the curent state pension, because our NHS is keeping people alive too long. We certainly can't afford to start giving certain pensioners over a grand a week.

9 minutes ago, Traf said:

Should they get 5 times more, having the benefit of much higher wages all their life?
One might suggest that someone paying 50k a year in tax, doesn't need the state pension.

I’m not saying they should, no. I was just pointing out that the system isn’t based on getting out what you put in.

I’d rather the government had the balls to stop the triple lock now and also tell everyone that is 18 (or younger) that when they retire there will be no state pension - so they have to put into their own private pension. It needs to be backed up by stronger workplace pensions and (for those more clever than me) working out how you support the self employed.

In 40 years time, with declining birth rates and AI, there will be insufficient workers paying tax to support the generations that will be living longer. The current pension system is fucked.

4 minutes ago, Traf said:

To my first line or my second?

The country can't afford to pay the curent state pension, because our NHS is keeping people alive too long. We certainly can't afford to start giving certain pensioners over a grand a week.

My bad, I read it wrong (tax not NI contributions) I do think if you pay more in NI then you should getter a higher pension. 

4 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

Those who pay in now are paying our parents’ / grandparents’ pensions.

Not one penny that I have paid in tax and NI over the last 20 years will go towards my pension. Nor will any of the tax and NI I pay in the next 20 years. 

Searching for my Stradivarius.

7 hours ago, Jol_BWFC said:

I’m not saying they should, no. I was just pointing out that the system isn’t based on getting out what you put in.

I’d rather the government had the balls to stop the triple lock now and also tell everyone that is 18 (or younger) that when they retire there will be no state pension - so they have to put into their own private pension. It needs to be backed up by stronger workplace pensions and (for those more clever than me) working out how you support the self employed.

In 40 years time, with declining birth rates and AI, there will be insufficient workers paying tax to support the generations that will be living longer. The current pension system is fucked.

For many years the criticism of the state pension was the comparative small amount it paid.

Much lower than Europe.

Public and political will to improve it.

Can't be done all at once, so a gradual increase over several years.

Then public criticism when they do.

You're correct that tax payers now are paying for them, but that is how it has always been. 

People living longer puts strain on that model.

It would be much more affordable if the ridiculous amounts of spending elsewhere were greatly reduced.

 

4 hours ago, bolty58 said:

Searching for my Stradivarius.

He went to stud in 2022.

An interesting result in a council seat Reform had to defend

 

1 hour ago, Lt. Aldo Raine said:

An interesting result in a council seat Reform had to defend

 

They’re coming down the road.

Trouble is there was a Wetherspoons along the way and they’re all in there arguing about Reform, Restore and roundabouts.

Side note - that constituency is 97% white. 

1 hour ago, Jol_BWFC said:

He went to stud in 2022.

Glad to see some can maintain a sense of humour pal.

Wish I did own him!

39 minutes ago, Spider said:

They’re coming down the road.

Trouble is there was a Wetherspoons along the way and they’re all in there arguing about Reform, Restore and roundabouts.

Side note - that constituency is 97% white. 

So only the Muslims want to save the planet? Who’d have thunk.

4 minutes ago, green genie said:

So only the Muslims want to save the planet? Who’d have thunk.

Let them celebrate the odd victory here and there. It is all they are likely to get.

14 hours ago, royal white said:

Are people missing this part “those who refuse the payment will be forcibly removed” 

Which is true - but for that to happen a number of things need to be in place

* The recieving country has been be willing to take them, and be willing to issue travel documents

* Even after the courts process and appeals, ECHR means they can appeal (again) on human rights grounds (right to life, protection from torture). 

* We need somewhere to hold these people while these processes are taking place

So in essence the 'leave or we will force you to leave' idea is bullshit as it stands. That's the bit the govt needs to spell out. But to get that power wed probably need to leave the ECHR. But that would be enormously unpopular in Europe and Washington. 

And that's just my understanding of how complicated this issue is after half an hour or so reading about it. Imagine how complicated it is if you REALLY understand it. 

It's such an easy policy for the opposition to spin - that they must be pretty confident that it will work to even suggest it. Precisely because of how backwards it looks at first glance (and after a few glances to be honest). 

The pilot is only for 150 families. 

If it was rolled out them you could potentially be looking at £250 million in exit payments. That would save something like £1.5 billion pounds annually. So the cost is only actually 16.7% as a rough calculation. But remember that's annually - so we save more money over time. 

I'm not saying it's perfect (plus is will only be to countries that we deem safe). But to me it sounds like a sensible, pragmatic tool to have in your arsenal in certain situations. 

It won't be spoken about sensibly in the news or online though - because people are so polarised.

13 hours ago, Traf said:

To my first line or my second?

The country can't afford to pay the curent state pension, because our NHS is keeping people alive too long. We certainly can't afford to start giving certain pensioners over a grand a week.

Which is the uncomfortable truth. That and our stagnating rates of reproduction. Which is the main reason why we have to allow to make their home here. 

Another thing that doesn't get spoken about sensibly. 

But then can you imagine the outcry if we started incentivising people to have larger families? 

The "if you can't afford them don't breed" argument would be being fired around before anybody had chance to put their pants on. Or take them off! 😂

22 minutes ago, kent_white said:

Which is the uncomfortable truth. That and our stagnating rates of reproduction. Which is the main reason why we have to allow to make their home here. 

Another thing that doesn't get spoken about sensibly. 

But then can you imagine the outcry if we started incentivising people to have larger families? 

The "if you can't afford them don't breed" argument would be being fired around before anybody had chance to put their pants on. Or take them off! 😂

Encouraging folk to have kids is a Reform policy, the full policy is below. This is according to their site the full policy. Not much detail, in fact no detail just words. They have announced they will reintroduce the 2 child benefit cap which I would have thought was a way to encourage folk to have sprogs. 

You can always depend on Lammy 

 

 

1 hour ago, royal white said:

You can always depend on Lammy 

 

 

More interestingly from his round of interviews today, he's stated that the UK could 'legally' strike Iran. So we seem to be ramping up the rhetoric a little. 

Presumably he doesn't know we have a defense treaty type agreement with Cyprus neither.

Bit like Russia had with Ukraine, before attacking it.

Where is the "international law" there, given we didn't.