The Politics Thread

[Bruce Rioja]

Were you 15 seconds outside your PB or something this morning you grumpy bastard.

Haha. If only.

[BWFC_Insane]

You do know he lost?

Very sharp.

He has made history by securing Labours greatest increasd in vote share since 1945.

He has bucked the enormously significant trend of Rupert Murdoch correctly endorsing the prime minister since taking over the sun in 1969.

In his campaign he drew the biggest crowds since Churchill in 1945.

The highest youth participation for 25 years.

The largest comeback from a large negative poll rating ever.

1 lame duck prime minister - gone within the year.

All achieved with a treacherous Blairite plp that tried to oust him from day 1. From his current position of great strength and with a coming united plp. He will be prime minister within 5 years.

Peace out.

I've not stopped laughing at this, sorry but the pigeons that visit from time to time could have given May a run for her money, she was so inept it was unbelievable.
I am sorry but a left wing Marxist lead party will never get elected no matter how it tries, here I agree with BWFCi, a moderate Blair type with policies that didn't chuck the baby out with the bath water but different would have murdered May in an election, she is so shit she needs to go but the bugger is who would replace her from her party, most of them are damaged goods now.

The last 48 hours have changed everything. Nobody could have seen Corbyn getting 41% of the vote, but he did.

Hold another election next week and I think there is a strong chance that Corbyn's Labour would win. Tories are in a total mess.

Corbyn as a person is more difficult, but his policies have struck a chord with the electorate. Remember 41% of the vote would win you an election in many instances. Only takes a few disillusioned Tories switching or not voting and Labour could win now.

Politics has changed in the last two days beyond anyone's expectations.

[BWFC_Insane]

Some upside? This is a wonderful result. Tories in chaos and now with an undeliverable mandate.

Corbyn has shown socialism can be revived. The youth turnout shows what can be achieved. Labour can now work together to ensure Corbyn's platform remains, with a few tweaks, and a more electable leader endorsed by Corbyn. That isn't easy, but Labour are in a great spot right now. They can probably consider themselves favourites at the next election, whenever that might be.

fecking Hell. As if by magic you've changed your tune, Old Son.

Quelle surprise!

Well I said previously I read it entirely incorrectly - I wasn't the only one. Corbyn's policies have connected. He's exceeded even the most wildly optimistic expectations. He improved in the campaign. I still think Labour will need a more convincing leader to sell the platform, but no doubts about it, socialism is back on the electoral table in this country.

I don't agree with every policy either. Some are just plain bonkers. But with a bit of modification a slightly broader focussed leader, Labour are suddenly electable again. The Tories on the other hand...well it's going to be a bumpy ride.

[Prufrock]

The Tories on the other hand what? Are still in charge? Won the election? Won more votes? More importantly won more seats? Under our current political system there is no way a socialist will become PM. We are now going to have yet another long period of Tory rule while the Labour Party figures that out again.

Here's my hot-take: there will be a Friday in October this year where all the momentum lot will be scratching their heads at how, despite winning every single vote in Hackney and Tottenham and getting Stormzy to do a Twitter rap about Corbyn, a dull Tory technocrat has just won a 30 seat majority.

[bedwetter2]

Oh, and if you want discussion about final salary scheme, I'm happy. Why have you suddenly brought up defined benefit though? Do you not understand the difference or something?

I believe you may be getting confused between defined benefit and defined contribution schemes. DB is final salary. DC is sometimes referred to as a money purchase scheme and does not guarantee an income of a certain size in retirement. There are other differences too.

[bedwetter2]

I don't see why you should ignore Mr Genshaw's view that in some way the public sector is self-supporting. I replied to that, nothing more.

As to why the public sector may or may not be worth it, you may need to refer to virtually all local authorities paying their senior staff more than is warranted (in my local authority, a unitary one, staff salaries and pensions account for 42% of income) and, why leaders of Councils or NHS trusts have managed to escape before disciplinary action is taken against them only to reappear at another such organisation with full pension rights to be added to their new benefits including 'golden handshakes' in some examples. Quangos and political advisers. There was supposed to be a "call me Dave" bonfire of the quangos. Not happened has it?

I'm happy for doctors and soldiers to be well paid. That was not what I implied. You probably don't wish to contemplate whether the public sector is sized correctly for the population of the country. It certainly wasn't before 2010 when the civil service was used as a job creation scheme to keep the number of unemployed at lower levels. Anyway, you in the legal profession are probably largely reliant upon public largesse so are unlikely to bite the hand that feeds.

The DUP, as I have previously stated is a backward looking disruptive political party. I have no love for them, but they were never a proscribed organisation and there have not been any proven terrorist links. To claim otherwise would invite a libel prosecution.

Dunno quite where to start with this, but I'll give it a whirl.

I suspect HG was responding to your comment and didn't suggest, as far as I read, that somehow the public sector was self supporting. You suggested it was all to be paid by the private sector - HG pointed out that public sector employees pay tax too (which is largely the mechanism we use to pay for the public sector).

More worrying for people like me was the clear statement that the public sector should get significant wage increases, payable by the private sector, of course.

Public sector employees don't pay income tax? Blimey. Missed that

I can understand your worry, that it might cost more - that might take a few extra quid out of your pocket. Then when my missus mates' come round two of whom are nurses and talk about their various day jobs (only one of which is nursing) to ensure they can pay the bills I think something's wrong somewhere. The Tories have had 7 years in which they could've addressed the points you raise above or the fact we've got nurses going to foodbanks. They haven't. I'm all for trimming down some of the middle and upper management shite and paying frontline staff a bit more.

As to your sneering comment

Anyway, you in the legal profession are probably largely reliant upon public largesse so are unlikely to bite the hand that feeds.

I'm not in the legal profession (and as far as I'm aware have never suggested the same - maybe you're referring to Pru - who I believe is in the legal profession)

On to the DUP. I'll stick with my assertion that they're a group of people only some reprehensible turds would have holding the casting vote after an election - as I made fairly clear would apply equally to Sinn Fein. Then again now we have some reprehensible turds trying to structure their government that way, I'm not surprised either.

As to inviting libel, I posted a picture of a bloke holding an AK47 which is fairly normal at all the fancy dress parties I go to (it's a bit rough round here and in fairness they prefer Uzi's). People can judge for themselves whether there are any connotations in relation to that or whether it was just a normal family holiday pic.

You carry on consoling yourself that because they've never been proscribed, they're little angels - will help you sleep better.

I'm not bothered about the T word and it's chances of getting me done for libel - so here goes - They're tw*ts.

Fcuk me. Read my earlier comment. If we have a fairly fixed tax base as we have in this country then any additional expenditure will come from the taxpayer. If that additional expenditure goes to one section of the tax base, then the rest of the tax base stumps up the difference.

Now that may be desirable in the case of the lower paid, but ain't for the already well paid public sector employees. It is not a small group. There are in excess of 2.5m public sector employees excluding local authority employees. Sometimes it seems that there are more chiefs than indians in sections. An across the board increase of 3% costs £2.45bn which you and I would have to pay a portion of. Now, if employees in the private sector had started off with higher average income than the public sector employees average in 2009 then that would be a different picture but that is not the case. The public sector has significant advantages over the private sector, e.g. income, pensions and an expectation that each employee can take 4 weeks sick leave per annum without even being questioned by their management.

The legal profession comment was for Prufrock. I was not sneering but pointing out facts that their bread an butter work comes from funding by the public sector. Anyway, he is big enough to look after himself.

Nurses with a bit of seniority are paid fairly well in the NHS. I can't speak for most of the private sector but as my wife works in that sector she can confirm there should be no nurses other than student ones going to foodbanks unless they have major debts hanging around their necks. Typically nurses with a specialism will be paid in excess of £34k, some much more.

As to the DUP, remember they sprang from the Ulster Unionists originally to suit the firebrand politics of Ian Paisley snr. They were always a bit edgy and remain so to this day. Like all politicians they are b*llsh*tt*rs and I don't trust any of them. Not one.

[BWFC_Insane]

The Tories on the other hand what? Are still in charge? Won the election? Won more votes? More importantly won more seats? Under our current political system there is no way a socialist will become PM. We are now going to have yet another long period of Tory rule while the Labour Party figures that out again.

Here's my hot-take: there will be a Friday in October this year where all the momentum lot will be scratching their heads at how, despite winning every single vote in Hackney and Tottenham and getting Stormzy to do a Twitter rap about Corbyn, a dull Tory technocrat has just won a 30 seat majority.

Possibly. But I think the Tories are in a total state now. They relied on an anti-SNP protest vote to even be able to form a government. Without those Scottish seats they'd not even be able to rule at all now.

I think the engagement of the youth vote was so significant that it has Tory MPs terrified. They won Kensington for christs sake. And this was an election where at the start a Tory majority of 50 would have been seen as an amazingly good result for Labour. The politics in this country has changed. Corbyn has to be credited with that.

I don't think he is the right man to finish the job but many of his ideals should be kept. They have connected an electorate unlike any other Labour man since Blair.

I don't mind being horribly wrong. I couldn't see this at all. I was a fool.

[Bruce Rioja]

I don't agree with every policy either. Some are just plain bonkers. But with a bit of modification a slightly broader focussed leader, Labour are suddenly electable again. The Tories on the other hand...well it's going to be a bumpy ride.

I still think Corbyn's a major asset to Labour, but I have to agree with the rest.

[BWFC_Insane]

I don't agree with every policy either. Some are just plain bonkers. But with a bit of modification a slightly broader focussed leader, Labour are suddenly electable again. The Tories on the other hand...well it's going to be a bumpy ride.

I still think Corbyn's a major asset to Labour, but I have to agree with the rest.

Major asset - I agree. I didn't before but through the campaign he did connect. I just doubt that many over 55's will ever give him a chance. Not the ones influenced by the Mail/Express etc and those are the voters he would need to get over the line.

A fully Corbyn endorsed leader in a few years, a similar policy platform and no Dianne Abbott...that could easily win. And funny how that vote has totally changed that mindset. Even Alaistair Campbell was having to back Corbyn yesterday, through gritted teeth maybe, but still....

[Lord Kangana]

Depends how Brexit goes. The Scotish Tories (13 at present) will not vote with the Government on a hard brexit. Neither will Ken Clarke. DUP contrived majortiy just wiped right there. Chaos resumes, and country loses patience. I know everyones pissed off that they're still in power, but it's a very tenuous grasp, and they've got a lot of convincing to do to gain an extra 30 seats.

[Bruce Rioja]

I don't agree with every policy either. Some are just plain bonkers. But with a bit of modification a slightly broader focussed leader, Labour are suddenly electable again. The Tories on the other hand...well it's going to be a bumpy ride.

I still think Corbyn's a major asset to Labour, but I have to agree with the rest.

Major asset - I agree. I didn't before but through the campaign he did connect. I just doubt that many over 55's will ever give him a chance. Not the ones influenced by the Mail/Express etc and those are the voters he would need to get over the line.

A fully Corbyn endorsed leader in a few years, a similar policy platform and no Dianne Abbott...that could easily win. And funny how that vote has totally changed that mindset. Even Alaistair Campbell was having to back Corbyn yesterday, through gritted teeth maybe, but still....

I'd love to know what each of the following must be making of it all now;

Angela Eagle
Seema Malhotra
John Healey
Heidi Alexander
Lucy Powell
Owen Smith
Lord Falconer
Lisa Nandy
Maria Eagle
Chris Bryant
Lilian Greenwood
Vernon Coaker
Ian Murray
Nia Griffith
Kerry McCarthy
Kate Green
Gloria De Piero
Karl Turner
Luciana Berger
Pat Glass
Nick Smith
Sir Keir Starmer
Steve Reed
Thangam Debbonaire
Yvonne Fovargue
Diana Johnson
Toby Perkins
Anna Turley
Alex Cunningham
Wayne David
Roberta Blackman-Woods
Jenny Champman
Susan Elan Jones
Nick Thomas-Symonds
Jack Dromey
Sharon Hodgson
Melanie Onn
Richard Burden
Nic Dakin
Mike Kane
Andy Slaughter
Alan Whitehead
Andrew Gwynne
Barbara Keeley
Lyn Brown
Sarah Champion
Christina Rees
Clive Efford
Kevin Brennan
Liz McInnes
Jenny Chapman
Emma Lewell-Buck
Paul Blomfield
Mary Glindon
Stephen Kinnock
Chris Matheson
Neil Coyle
Jess Phillips
Karin Smyth
Ruth Smeeth
Matthew Pennycook
Gerald Jones
Colleen Fletcher

[BWFC_Insane]

^^ Probably (for most) along the lines of 'we kept our seats fair play Jeremy, fair play'. No doubt there will be some re-writing of history. But I suspect that many did genuinely fear their seats and like a fair few, couldn't see what was possible.

[Worthy4England]

I suspect they're all thinking the same thing as most politicians. Including those in our new Government to be.

Whew, made it.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Oh, and if you want discussion about final salary scheme, I'm happy. Why have you suddenly brought up defined benefit though? Do you not understand the difference or something?

I believe you may be getting confused between defined benefit and defined contribution schemes. DB is final salary. DC is sometimes referred to as a money purchase scheme and does not guarantee an income of a certain size in retirement. There are other differences too.

Over here DB tends to be an annual income based on 70% of the average of the last five years of employment. DC is a lump sum based on lifetime contributions of you (and your employer as a rule). You can put the lump sum into an annuity and so convert it effectively to a sort of DB which guarantees income. Or you can invest it in a life income fund (as I have done). You have to take out no less than 5% or more than 10% of the principal after the age of 71 (although you can start earlier of course). I take out 5% which, while not guaranteed, is considerably more that 70% of the average of the best years of my life. To this is added government pension plan income and, if below a certain income, federal old age security.

[bedwetter2]

Oh, and if you want discussion about final salary scheme, I'm happy. Why have you suddenly brought up defined benefit though? Do you not understand the difference or something?

I believe you may be getting confused between defined benefit and defined contribution schemes. DB is final salary. DC is sometimes referred to as a money purchase scheme and does not guarantee an income of a certain size in retirement. There are other differences too.

Over here DB tends to be an annual income based on 70% of the average of the last five years of employment. DC is a lump sum based on lifetime contributions of you (and your employer as a rule). You can put the lump sum into an annuity and so convert it effectively to a sort of DB which guarantees income. Or you can invest it in a life income fund (as I have done). You have to take out no less than 5% or more than 10% of the principal after the age of 71 (although you can start earlier of course). I take out 5% which, while not guaranteed, is considerably more that 70% of the average of the best years of my life. To this is added government pension plan income and, if below a certain income, federal old age security.

Not dissimilar to the UK in some respects. A DB pension here is an employer managed scheme which is guaranteed to pay a percentage of finishing salary (hence "final salary" scheme) which is usually based upon a fixed amount per year of service and usually both employer and employee contribute. As an example if you managed to complete 40 years of service, then the scheme may pay you 60% of your final salary. You could take a lump sum thus sacrificing part of your monthly pension pension payments. You could also transfer your total salary pot to another scheme. Most schemes have closed to new members apart from those pesky public sector ones which are an increasing burden upon the state as all pension payments are paid from current revenue.

A DC pension is in summary a scheme which is provided by private pensions providers (generally the big insurance companies) which depends entirely upon what payments have been put into the scheme by employers and employees and does not guarantee any particular payout. Most schemes invest in a mixture of stocks and shares, gilts, property, bonds and cash trying to spread risk. The employer is no longer legally responsible in the same way as for a DB scheme and has mitigated risk or the possibility of having to inject further cash to prop up the scheme. A lump sum may also be taken up to 100% of the pot but an annuity must be purchased if the pot is left in part or in full.

[Lord Kangana]

Defined benefit is not final salary. It just isn't. It's exactly what it says it is. A defined benefit. Final salary is also just that. Your final salary.

Career averaging, which is what most - though by no means all- of our public services are now paid under(I can go into tedious detail if you really want, but I'm guessing you'll just wriggle rather than saying 'ah sorry, didn't know that' so it'll be a fool's errand on my part) . It's not the same as final salary. I'll leave it up to you as to why that may be. It's not hard.

[Worthy4England]

Defined benefit is not final salary. It just isn't. It's exactly what it says it is. A defined benefit. Final salary is also just that. Your final salary.

Career averaging, which is what most - though by no means all- of our public services are now paid under(I can go into tedious detail if you really want, but I'm guessing you'll just wriggle rather than saying 'ah sorry, didn't know that' so it'll be a fool's errand on my part) . It's not the same as final salary. I'll leave it up to you as to why that may be. It's not hard.

I ask most folks "when was the last time, you personally created a job, for a UK national." generally, I get the answer "never"...

[Hoboh]

You do know he lost?

Very sharp.

He has made history by securing Labours greatest increasd in vote share since 1945.

He has bucked the enormously significant trend of Rupert Murdoch correctly endorsing the prime minister since taking over the sun in 1969.

In his campaign he drew the biggest crowds since Churchill in 1945.

The highest youth participation for 25 years.

The largest comeback from a large negative poll rating ever.

1 lame duck prime minister - gone within the year.

All achieved with a treacherous Blairite plp that tried to oust him from day 1. From his current position of great strength and with a coming united plp. He will be prime minister within 5 years.

Peace out.

I've not stopped laughing at this, sorry but the pigeons that visit from time to time could have given May a run for her money, she was so inept it was unbelievable.
I am sorry but a left wing Marxist lead party will never get elected no matter how it tries, here I agree with BWFCi, a moderate Blair type with policies that didn't chuck the baby out with the bath water but different would have murdered May in an election, she is so shit she needs to go but the bugger is who would replace her from her party, most of them are damaged goods now.

The last 48 hours have changed everything. Nobody could have seen Corbyn getting 41% of the vote, but he did.

Hold another election next week and I think there is a strong chance that Corbyn's Labour would win. Tories are in a total mess.

Corbyn as a person is more difficult, but his policies have struck a chord with the electorate. Remember 41% of the vote would win you an election in many instances. Only takes a few disillusioned Tories switching or not voting and Labour could win now.

Politics has changed in the last two days beyond anyone's expectations.

I must admit to being disappointed in you mate, you remind me of Clegg, sniff of power and your principles fly out the window.

[BWFC_Insane]

You do know he lost?

Very sharp.

He has made history by securing Labours greatest increasd in vote share since 1945.

He has bucked the enormously significant trend of Rupert Murdoch correctly endorsing the prime minister since taking over the sun in 1969.

In his campaign he drew the biggest crowds since Churchill in 1945.

The highest youth participation for 25 years.

The largest comeback from a large negative poll rating ever.

1 lame duck prime minister - gone within the year.

All achieved with a treacherous Blairite plp that tried to oust him from day 1. From his current position of great strength and with a coming united plp. He will be prime minister within 5 years.

Peace out.

I've not stopped laughing at this, sorry but the pigeons that visit from time to time could have given May a run for her money, she was so inept it was unbelievable.
I am sorry but a left wing Marxist lead party will never get elected no matter how it tries, here I agree with BWFCi, a moderate Blair type with policies that didn't chuck the baby out with the bath water but different would have murdered May in an election, she is so shit she needs to go but the bugger is who would replace her from her party, most of them are damaged goods now.

The last 48 hours have changed everything. Nobody could have seen Corbyn getting 41% of the vote, but he did.

Hold another election next week and I think there is a strong chance that Corbyn's Labour would win. Tories are in a total mess.

Corbyn as a person is more difficult, but his policies have struck a chord with the electorate. Remember 41% of the vote would win you an election in many instances. Only takes a few disillusioned Tories switching or not voting and Labour could win now.

Politics has changed in the last two days beyond anyone's expectations.

I must admit to being disappointed in you mate, you remind me of Clegg, sniff of power and your principles fly out the window.

I was opposed to Corbyn primarily on the fact he was a useless feck who was unelectable. During the campaign he proved me wrong. Do I back everything he stands for? No. But I certainly back more than I do from the Tories. What he's achieved is bringing socialism back to the table in UK politics. I certainly didn't expect that.

I voted Labour. If they want my vote next time they still have to earn it. He has to be an effective leader of the opposition now, though he's in a very strong position. I want to see him working to block this minority government as much as is possible.

First post GE poll today...Labour have a 6 point lead. Who could have predicted this on Wednesday?

[bedwetter2]

Defined benefit is not final salary. It just isn't. It's exactly what it says it is. A defined benefit. Final salary is also just that. Your final salary.

Career averaging, which is what most - though by no means all- of our public services are now paid under(I can go into tedious detail if you really want, but I'm guessing you'll just wriggle rather than saying 'ah sorry, didn't know that' so it'll be a fool's errand on my part) . It's not the same as final salary. I'll leave it up to you as to why that may be. It's not hard.

I concede that there are average salary DB schemes, mainly based upon the last 5 years or so of earnings. If you read what I said re DB and DC schemes, I said there were variations between schemes.

The average salary DB schemes are a relatively recent phenomenon, probably coming into use in the last 10 years or so for new entrants but crucially final salary being retained for older members. Public services are the main users of average salary schemes as you rightly said but career average stretched over, say, a 40 year period of service is not one I have heard of.

I know lots about the various scheme structures in use having undergone training to be a company nominated director of a scheme but it would be (even more) tedious to go into further detail on this forum.