"Britain will not rejoin EU in my lifetime, says Starmer"
Prices of the electricity we use to charge
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
That's right. Instead, he'll hand over control to a world government with Tony Blair in it.
If they get their just deserts the Conservatives will come third to LibDems in seats and third to Reform in votes. I don't think either will happen; the Conservatives won't do quite as badly as most are predicting.
"Sir Ed, 58, was postal affairs minister in the coalition government while dozens of postmasters were wrongly convicted of false accounting because of glitches in the dodgy Horizon computer system."
www.thesun.co.uk
Ed Davey is whitewashing failures with ridiculous stunts, blasts ex-postmistress
AN ex-postmistress launched a blistering attack on bumbling Sir Ed Davey – demanding the Lib Dem leader quit over his ‘whitewashing’ of the Post Office scandal. Yvonne Tracey decl…
www.thesun.co.uk
"A report released in December showed 313 of the 597 cases upheld last year by the Independent Case Examiner involved the payment system."
www.thesun.co.uk
I'm a child maintenance expert - how to challenge errors and avoid overpaying
PARENTS who have separated are usually obliged to share the cost of bringing up a child, and that most often comes in the form of child maintenance payments. But recent figures show that child main…
www.thesun.co.uk
"Of these seats, 34 have a majority of less than 5 per cent. They make up one in four of the 129 marginal constituencies being decided in Thursday’s general election."
www.telegraph.co.uk
The marginal seats where postal vote delays might swing results
Some 34 constituencies with majority of 5pc or less are affected by problems for which councils and Royal Mail blame each other
They WILL get their just deserts. They trashed a massive majority fooling around, divided, squabbling among themselves, elected an idiot as leader who lasted six weeks, and failed to deliver on illegal migrants. On top of that, rather than stop the haemorrhaging of people out of the workforce in their fifties, rather than reform the wages of low paid workers such as those in the care sector, and improving their conditions, they imported around 120,000 people in a single year on care visas! These no doubt worthy folk, also brought about 80,000 dependants with them. Nobody in government seems to have asked what the impact of 764,000 net inward migration in 2022 and 685,000 in 2023 would have on the cost of housing - rental costs and inflation of house prices through demand. Rising demand in any vital commodity inevitable raises prices. The utter uselessness of the recent governments is almost legendary - and I say that as a Conservative voter.
Thinking about the scale of that level of migration, and its impact on housing and the environment, remember that the population of Birmingham, our second largest city, is 1.15 million. In TWO YEARS - they exceeded that in adding to the population of our country. Where is the new Birmingham? Where would you build it on this map? Remember, almost all of the newcomers settle in England. Pin the tail on the donkey and show me where we should build the new mega city every two years.
Looking at this satellite picture, remember this: The island next door to the west, Ireland, has one tenth the population of England! One tenth!
Last edited:
Further points relating to post above:
One of the big mental blocks for many politicians is that they are devoted to the idea of economic growth. This is just the total amount of money earned and spent inside the country. It has nothing to do with how well off anybody is, or how happy, or how good their environment is to live in. It is just about the bottom line earned and spent. This is a disaster for our well-being. The fact that you have a house full of guys next door who are pedalling about on Deliveroo bikes earning pennies, does contribute to growth, but it does nothing for you or them in terms of well being.
If everybody was paid more and inflation was low, then we might actually be better off. But much migration (not all) sees the incoming people in low paid employment - like the 120,000 care workers and their additional 80,000 dependants.
Why have governments of all kinds been so devoted to keeping up the endless stream of new Brits then? They must know what impact they have on prices and competition for accommodation and on services and our environment. They are not stupid - are they?
I think it is most likely because they are terrified of something worse in their eyes. The collapse of the giant Ponzie Scheme we have been running here since 1948..... The cradle to grave care and welfare system. Free NHS - Universal Pensions - Universal Credit - Softer and softer scrutiny of people claiming they are unable to work and are now entitled to collect free money and housing benefits.
The welfare system could work when it was set up.
It was MUCH less generous than it is now, and most people died by the time they were about 70. We generally stopped the idea that all adults smoked and died of complications related to smoking not long after the retirement age, and FAR less in real terms was spent on health. Income support for the unemployed was time limited and only available if you had a contributions record.
People were stoical, they didn't claim they had PTSD because someone was a bit stern with them at work and nobody was happy to go around whining about their mental health and how it meant everyone else should pay their bills.
People did of course have PTSD. They had spent five years at war and had experienced truly terrible things. Maybe they had sat in a freezing Lancaster bomber night after night, flying at 150 miles an hour, over Germany and knew that they had at best a fifty fifty chance by the end of their tour, of not being cremated alive in a burning bomber carrying a thousand gallons of petrol being shot out of the sky. They had PTSD alright - but they went to work.
Like all Ponzie Schemes, the welfare system needs a constant stream of new 'investors' - the people who pay in. That way the scam merchants running the scheme can pay out today what they collect in investments and people think all is OK. But of course like all Ponzie Schemes, it starts to unravel down the line when the new investors come to claim their own prize.
THAT is what all governments are afraid of and THAT is why they will never really stop new people coming. Who cares if we all end up living like rats in a barrel?
One of the big mental blocks for many politicians is that they are devoted to the idea of economic growth. This is just the total amount of money earned and spent inside the country. It has nothing to do with how well off anybody is, or how happy, or how good their environment is to live in. It is just about the bottom line earned and spent. This is a disaster for our well-being. The fact that you have a house full of guys next door who are pedalling about on Deliveroo bikes earning pennies, does contribute to growth, but it does nothing for you or them in terms of well being.
If everybody was paid more and inflation was low, then we might actually be better off. But much migration (not all) sees the incoming people in low paid employment - like the 120,000 care workers and their additional 80,000 dependants.
Why have governments of all kinds been so devoted to keeping up the endless stream of new Brits then? They must know what impact they have on prices and competition for accommodation and on services and our environment. They are not stupid - are they?
I think it is most likely because they are terrified of something worse in their eyes. The collapse of the giant Ponzie Scheme we have been running here since 1948..... The cradle to grave care and welfare system. Free NHS - Universal Pensions - Universal Credit - Softer and softer scrutiny of people claiming they are unable to work and are now entitled to collect free money and housing benefits.
The welfare system could work when it was set up.
It was MUCH less generous than it is now, and most people died by the time they were about 70. We generally stopped the idea that all adults smoked and died of complications related to smoking not long after the retirement age, and FAR less in real terms was spent on health. Income support for the unemployed was time limited and only available if you had a contributions record.
People were stoical, they didn't claim they had PTSD because someone was a bit stern with them at work and nobody was happy to go around whining about their mental health and how it meant everyone else should pay their bills.
People did of course have PTSD. They had spent five years at war and had experienced truly terrible things. Maybe they had sat in a freezing Lancaster bomber night after night, flying at 150 miles an hour, over Germany and knew that they had at best a fifty fifty chance by the end of their tour, of not being cremated alive in a burning bomber carrying a thousand gallons of petrol being shot out of the sky. They had PTSD alright - but they went to work.
Like all Ponzie Schemes, the welfare system needs a constant stream of new 'investors' - the people who pay in. That way the scam merchants running the scheme can pay out today what they collect in investments and people think all is OK. But of course like all Ponzie Schemes, it starts to unravel down the line when the new investors come to claim their own prize.
THAT is what all governments are afraid of and THAT is why they will never really stop new people coming. Who cares if we all end up living like rats in a barrel?
It's not just those 120,000 carers who can apply for visas for their relatives, all immigrants who have already settled here have the same rights.
Cheap fixes to the growth problem will cause exponential long term demand on public services. What we need to fix is to wean voters off the idea that they can have their cake and eating it.
In a decade, machines are going to be capable of super intelligence. How are we going to find well paid jobs for everyone of us?
the biggest problem this country has is what to do with its aged citizens. They cost the NHS 10 times more than a young person. I rarely if ever went to see a doctor at my surgery until I was 50. Now I have a large bag of prescription tablets every two months.
Yes, but we did pay for it for 49 years when we hardly used it.
We paid relatively little 40, 50 years ago compared to what we cost the NHS today. Same thing when you look at state pension and personal care.
That shows that the proportion of dependent people is decreasing every year, not an increasing aged population.
"He was with Farage on the night of the Brexit referendum when he sensed a gambling opportunity. “At 10pm, I couldn’t believe I was still getting 9/1 [for a majority leave vote],” he told the Telegraph newspaper afterwards. “We were in our campaign office and I was tracking all the major stock indices, the dollar and pound currency markets. When it got to 3am, I was getting my managers out of bed to get me another 50 grand on here, another 50 grand there, to short sterling. I just couldn’t help myself.”
Cottrell claimed to have won a six-figure sum from shorting the pound but said he promptly “lost most of it the next day” on a horse."
Related Articles
-
MTF Enterprises announces acquisition of EMU Electric Bikes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Wisper 806T folding bike wins Which? ‘Best Buy’- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Sustrans calls for protected cycle lanes- Started by: Pedelecs
-
Amazon launch their first UK e-cargo micromobility hub- Started by: Pedelecs
