The Politics Thread

[Worthy4England]

The fishermen/women were fecked over when they voted for Boris and his chums and the subsequent oven ready deal (which was a rebranded hash of the May one that he said was shit). The new deal is no worse for said fishermen/women and actually improves their ability to sell their catches.

If you really want to understand why our fishing industry has largely died, you need to go back to 1989 when the EU was offering matched funding to update fishing fleets. We decided not to get involved as our finance industry was all that mattered back then. It mean European fisheries modernised and we didn't. Any of ours that did, did so at far greater cost to themselves, meaning our industry is less competitive.

lastly, if we're prioritising minor industries at the expense of everything/one else. Shall we not also fight for clogs makers, or demand greater market access for those Harris Tweed makers in the Hebrides? I know joined up thinking isn't a strong point, but if you stop thinking in small single issues and look at bigger pictures you might spend less time angry and pissed off with the gammons...

The 'bigger picture' is, yet again we are paying money into a club, taking the club rules for in actual fact, little gain for the UK but the old enemies, France make far more gains.

So is your view that we should do no trade with any country in Europe?

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

The fishermen/women were fecked over when they voted for Boris and his chums and the subsequent oven ready deal (which was a rebranded hash of the May one that he said was shit). The new deal is no worse for said fishermen/women and actually improves their ability to sell their catches.

If you really want to understand why our fishing industry has largely died, you need to go back to 1989 when the EU was offering matched funding to update fishing fleets. We decided not to get involved as our finance industry was all that mattered back then. It mean European fisheries modernised and we didn't. Any of ours that did, did so at far greater cost to themselves, meaning our industry is less competitive.

lastly, if we're prioritising minor industries at the expense of everything/one else. Shall we not also fight for clogs makers, or demand greater market access for those Harris Tweed makers in the Hebrides? I know joined up thinking isn't a strong point, but if you stop thinking in small single issues and look at bigger pictures you might spend less time angry and pissed off with the gammons...

The 'bigger picture' is, yet again we are paying money into a club, taking the club rules for in actual fact, little gain for the UK but the old enemies, France make far more gains.

Sometimes you pay a little to get a lot. Think of it as a clubcard. You might pay a couple of quid up front with some supermarkets, but you can make it back in one transaction usually. After that its all gravy

[BWFC_Insane]

The fishermen/women were fecked over when they voted for Boris and his chums and the subsequent oven ready deal (which was a rebranded hash of the May one that he said was shit). The new deal is no worse for said fishermen/women and actually improves their ability to sell their catches.

If you really want to understand why our fishing industry has largely died, you need to go back to 1989 when the EU was offering matched funding to update fishing fleets. We decided not to get involved as our finance industry was all that mattered back then. It mean European fisheries modernised and we didn't. Any of ours that did, did so at far greater cost to themselves, meaning our industry is less competitive.

lastly, if we're prioritising minor industries at the expense of everything/one else. Shall we not also fight for clogs makers, or demand greater market access for those Harris Tweed makers in the Hebrides? I know joined up thinking isn't a strong point, but if you stop thinking in small single issues and look at bigger pictures you might spend less time angry and pissed off with the gammons...

The 'bigger picture' is, yet again we are paying money into a club, taking the club rules for in actual fact, little gain for the UK but the old enemies, France make far more gains.

But that’s not true or even remotely true. You can’t just make stuff up - reality is France have the same access to UK fishing waters they’ve had for the last four years. It’s just that period is extended to 12 years. There is little economic gains there beyond certainty.

We have market access for fresh foods, sanitary and medical products that is worth billions to our economy. We do have to align on standards but we were anyway. There is no change. Do you want us to reduce our food standards - if so why? Cos otherwise there is absolutely no change in this arrangement beyond extending our trading ability.

[Hoboh]

The fishermen/women were fecked over when they voted for Boris and his chums and the subsequent oven ready deal (which was a rebranded hash of the May one that he said was shit). The new deal is no worse for said fishermen/women and actually improves their ability to sell their catches.

If you really want to understand why our fishing industry has largely died, you need to go back to 1989 when the EU was offering matched funding to update fishing fleets. We decided not to get involved as our finance industry was all that mattered back then. It mean European fisheries modernised and we didn't. Any of ours that did, did so at far greater cost to themselves, meaning our industry is less competitive.

lastly, if we're prioritising minor industries at the expense of everything/one else. Shall we not also fight for clogs makers, or demand greater market access for those Harris Tweed makers in the Hebrides? I know joined up thinking isn't a strong point, but if you stop thinking in small single issues and look at bigger pictures you might spend less time angry and pissed off with the gammons...

The 'bigger picture' is, yet again we are paying money into a club, taking the club rules for in actual fact, little gain for the UK but the old enemies, France make far more gains.

But that’s not true or even remotely true. You can’t just make stuff up - reality is France have the same access to UK fishing waters they’ve had for the last four years. It’s just that period is extended to 12 years. There is little economic gains there beyond certainty.

We have market access for fresh foods, sanitary and medical products that is worth billions to our economy. We do have to align on standards but we were anyway. There is no change. Do you want us to reduce our food standards - if so why? Cos otherwise there is absolutely no change in this arrangement beyond extending our trading ability.

We'll see if it's remotely true or not, probably just like no one was ever going to vote leave in the first place.

[Worthy4England]

What's your solution to how we trade with the EU, Hobes?

[BWFC_Insane]

The fishermen/women were fecked over when they voted for Boris and his chums and the subsequent oven ready deal (which was a rebranded hash of the May one that he said was shit). The new deal is no worse for said fishermen/women and actually improves their ability to sell their catches.

If you really want to understand why our fishing industry has largely died, you need to go back to 1989 when the EU was offering matched funding to update fishing fleets. We decided not to get involved as our finance industry was all that mattered back then. It mean European fisheries modernised and we didn't. Any of ours that did, did so at far greater cost to themselves, meaning our industry is less competitive.

lastly, if we're prioritising minor industries at the expense of everything/one else. Shall we not also fight for clogs makers, or demand greater market access for those Harris Tweed makers in the Hebrides? I know joined up thinking isn't a strong point, but if you stop thinking in small single issues and look at bigger pictures you might spend less time angry and pissed off with the gammons...

The 'bigger picture' is, yet again we are paying money into a club, taking the club rules for in actual fact, little gain for the UK but the old enemies, France make far more gains.

But that’s not true or even remotely true. You can’t just make stuff up - reality is France have the same access to UK fishing waters they’ve had for the last four years. It’s just that period is extended to 12 years. There is little economic gains there beyond certainty.

We have market access for fresh foods, sanitary and medical products that is worth billions to our economy. We do have to align on standards but we were anyway. There is no change. Do you want us to reduce our food standards - if so why? Cos otherwise there is absolutely no change in this arrangement beyond extending our trading ability.

We'll see if it's remotely true or not, probably just like no one was ever going to vote leave in the first place.

We don’t need to wait and see because it’s not a prediction. You stated something that was factually incorrect.

[Worthy4England]

There's lots of words written about "taking rules off other countries" (or trading bloc in the case of the EU). Do people not understand that's what happens across the globe? If I do a services deal in the US, it's written under US Law and governed by "their rules." But further than applicability of general laws, they generally have obligations to comply with their policies and procedures too - so for example on an IT Service you might be obliged to follow NIST (cybersecurity framework) - which adds obligations into the service you're providing.

On goods - let's take beef as an example - to export to the US, you have to comply with FDA/FSIS rules around inspections and equivalence. You don't comply, you don't get the goods through.

They take our rules to export stuff to the UK.

So we take rules, wherever we trade, they take rules wherever they trade. Brexit didn't stop that.

[BWFC_Insane]

There's lots of words written about "taking rules off other countries" (or trading bloc in the case of the EU). Do people not understand that's what happens across the globe? If I do a services deal in the US, it's written under US Law and governed by "their rules." But further than applicability of general laws, they generally have obligations to comply with their policies and procedures too - so for example on an IT Service you might be obliged to follow NIST (cybersecurity framework) - which adds obligations into the service you're providing.

On goods - let's take beef as an example - to export to the US, you have to comply with FDA/FSIS rules around inspections and equivalence. You don't comply, you don't get the goods through.

They take our rules to export stuff to the UK.

So we take rules, wherever we trade, they take rules wherever they trade. Brexit didn't stop that.

You’d imagine people understand it but then it’s people…so I’m guessing in many cases the truth and reality is ‘they don’t’.

But the politicians and media heavily mislead them too. In a deliberate and calculated way.

The irony is that every single goods item or product covered by SPS we are already aligned to EU rules for anyway. There isn’t a single change. But the Mail and express have to find a way to whip up the anger.

[Prufrock]

I think broadly it's fair to say current pensioners have a better deal than anyone younger than them will ever have. I'm really cautious about "generational warfare" or the grim trend of pitting generations against each other. It isn't pensioners fault. It's a maths problem from the 40s. The stage pension age was set at 65 at a time when life expectancy from 65 was 12 years. I.e. the numbers were balanced (simplified) on the idea you need to provide for 12 years of retirement.

My grandad recently reached the point he'd been drawing his pension longer than he paid into it. He's not typical, but those numbers don't add up.

Taken on it's own "that was the deal, I paid in" makes sense, but the numbers don't add up. And I personally think it's less unfair to say "I'm sorry you didn't pay in enough, though that's not your fault" than to tell several generations following "I'm sorry, we made a deal".

In reality, it's not even that, because it's politically toxic to even slightly raise the pension age, or NICs, so we consistently don't make anyone pay their way, and now we're here. Where if you're 30 it's almost impossible to buy a house. If you can you'll be paying an astronomical amount until the second you die. And the only way the state will ever be able to pay your parents pensions never mind your own is to cut every service to the quick. The only way to mitigate that is with cheap foreign labour but that's also politically toxic, and so here we are.

[Worthy4England]

The problem I have is with the generalisations. I don't think it's correct to say it's almost impossible to buy a house if you're 30. County Durham £138,000 average house price - 10% deposit, 25 years, £672 per month UK average monthly wage £1,950 - 34% of salary. Lower mortgage than mine was when I bought it, cos the interest rate was way higher and that's with 20+ years of wage stagnation.

Of course very skewed. But there wasn't a shed load of people determining their best chance of work was in London and buying a house down there, back in the day - that was always tough.

None of the welfare state (so not just pensions) was envisaged to do what it's currently trying to do, and the answer can't be "we have captive tax payers, let's hit them harder."

There needs to be some cuts to what we're trying to do with welfare and some additions to the tax base from those that are currently in hiding. HMRC reckons the tax gap is £39bn (only HMRC think it's that low) - so go get it - That's a whole lotta £22bn black hole covered with a pretty chunk of change.

Then there's the thing that no one can talk about - companies - they pay corporation tax on profits. Really? That number they make up every year, to cover up how much it's growing? (which I know is a generalisation and within that some don't)...

[BWFC_Insane]

The problem I have is with the generalisations. I don't think it's correct to say it's almost impossible to buy a house if you're 30. County Durham £138,000 average house price - 10% deposit, 25 years, £672 per month UK average monthly wage £1,950 - 34% of salary. Lower mortgage than mine was when I bought it, cos the interest rate was way higher and that's with 20+ years of wage stagnation.

Of course very skewed. But there wasn't a shed load of people determining their best chance of work was in London and buying a house down there, back in the day - that was always tough.

None of the welfare state (so not just pensions) was envisaged to do what it's currently trying to do, and the answer can't be "we have captive tax payers, let's hit them harder."

There needs to be some cuts to what we're trying to do with welfare and some additions to the tax base from those that are currently in hiding. HMRC reckons the tax gap is £39bn (only HMRC think it's that low) - so go get it - That's a whole lotta £22bn black hole covered with a pretty chunk of change.

Then there's the thing that no one can talk about - companies - they pay corporation tax on profits. Really? That number they make up every year, to cover up how much it's growing? (which I know is a generalisation and within that some don't)...

The thing is once you start doing that on tax - you get people saying that all the rich folk are leaving and businesses are scaling back jobs and/or funneling stuff away from the UK.

And whilst I think these sorts of doom laden predictions are often just vested interests doing their thing we know they are not entirely that.

I would love to say ‘let’s go after the buggers who are avoiding paying or evading or just using the tricks we have allowed them to and big corporates who manage to pay virtually no corporation tax’. It would be brilliant - but once you have messaged that beyond the initial stuff it will be a barrage of how dreadful this is and it will all be small businesses front pages of newspapers saying the government is destroying them. Even if the politics survived which I think is doubtful - but even if it did the reality is I don’t think the implementation would raise much in the end anyway. Not with the tools and realities we have to live with.

[Worthy4England]

Why should I care "what people say?" If tax is owed, then it should be collected. If what you're saying is "That's tricky, we'll go after the captive audience," then people who aren't taking advantage of all the tax avoidance they're currently not doing, you're also going to find they do, coz it'll be cheaper. And you're condoning people cheating the system - which I think most folks would say is wrong.

[Hoboh]

I think broadly it's fair to say current pensioners have a better deal than anyone younger than them will ever have. I'm really cautious about "generational warfare" or the grim trend of pitting generations against each other. It isn't pensioners fault. It's a maths problem from the 40s. The stage pension age was set at 65 at a time when life expectancy from 65 was 12 years. I.e. the numbers were balanced (simplified) on the idea you need to provide for 12 years of retirement.

My grandad recently reached the point he'd been drawing his pension longer than he paid into it. He's not typical, but those numbers don't add up.

Taken on it's own "that was the deal, I paid in" makes sense, but the numbers don't add up. And I personally think it's less unfair to say "I'm sorry you didn't pay in enough, though that's not your fault" than to tell several generations following "I'm sorry, we made a deal".

In reality, it's not even that, because it's politically toxic to even slightly raise the pension age, or NICs, so we consistently don't make anyone pay their way, and now we're here. Where if you're 30 it's almost impossible to buy a house. If you can you'll be paying an astronomical amount until the second you die. And the only way the state will ever be able to pay your parents pensions never mind your own is to cut every service to the quick. The only way to mitigate that is with cheap foreign labour but that's also politically toxic, and so here we are.

Next week, I get my state pension. After leaving school at 16 and starting work I've more or less paid in for 50 years. Nowadays, with lots of the youth not paying anything in until their mid twenties, often losing 8-9 years of paying in, why do they expect to be required to work longer? As for contributing to private pensions, well, try asking the majority of them.

[Worthy4England]

And ya bus pass, y'owd git!

[BWFC_Insane]

I think broadly it's fair to say current pensioners have a better deal than anyone younger than them will ever have. I'm really cautious about "generational warfare" or the grim trend of pitting generations against each other. It isn't pensioners fault. It's a maths problem from the 40s. The stage pension age was set at 65 at a time when life expectancy from 65 was 12 years. I.e. the numbers were balanced (simplified) on the idea you need to provide for 12 years of retirement.

My grandad recently reached the point he'd been drawing his pension longer than he paid into it. He's not typical, but those numbers don't add up.

Taken on it's own "that was the deal, I paid in" makes sense, but the numbers don't add up. And I personally think it's less unfair to say "I'm sorry you didn't pay in enough, though that's not your fault" than to tell several generations following "I'm sorry, we made a deal".

In reality, it's not even that, because it's politically toxic to even slightly raise the pension age, or NICs, so we consistently don't make anyone pay their way, and now we're here. Where if you're 30 it's almost impossible to buy a house. If you can you'll be paying an astronomical amount until the second you die. And the only way the state will ever be able to pay your parents pensions never mind your own is to cut every service to the quick. The only way to mitigate that is with cheap foreign labour but that's also politically toxic, and so here we are.

Next week, I get my state pension. After leaving school at 16 and starting work I've more or less paid in for 50 years. Nowadays, with lots of the youth not paying anything in until their mid twenties, often losing 8-9 years of paying in, why do they expect to be required to work longer? As for contributing to private pensions, well, try asking the majority of them.

Many graduates who haven’t had to work to support themselves through a degree (which is rare now) and who only pay in at 21-22 or later will pay in a far higher percentage than you ever did. Far higher. They’ll also contribute way more tax too. And they will end up needing private pensions to retire at the same age you have done. Paying more out again.

And their salary even though it will dwarf yours at 16 won’t come close to helping them on the housing ladder even though they are offering the skills society desperately needs.

The problem is that this is a basic numbers problem. Too many post war people and consequent dips in birth rates. That’s a problem that needs fixing. We need a larger workforce to support the current retirement pool or a smaller and cheaper retirement pool. And next two decades it gets worse. It’s either or. We have to make a choice.

[Worthy4England]

I'm genuinely strugging to understand the point in the first sentence.

But. All the wealth (apparently) is sat with pensioners - which Hobes now is - most of them own their own assets 70% for house? (apparently), , which you would think was largely going to go to ther kids. Maybe a little later than in our day, so the next generation is probably going to be the richest the UK has ever had, just maybe not quite as quick as they'd like? Be still, my beating heart...

[TANGODANCER]

Rather difficult to make " then and now" comparisons between old fogies who have reached our age and are still alive (barely) and today's middle-age generation, without including the period and aftermath of World War 2, like ten years of rebuilding England. It just seems to make those comparisons a bit hard to equalise.

[Worthy4England]

^^ Yeah, I know you'd have been at the tail end of food stamps mate, we all had outside bogs, nothing like central heating etc. but don't let that stop anyone telling you how good you got it.

[TANGODANCER]

^^ Yeah, I know you'd have been at the tail end of food stamps mate, we all had outside bogs, nothing like central heating etc. but don't let that stop anyone telling you how good you got it.

Touche..

[Worthy4England]

^^ Yeah, I know you'd have been at the tail end of food stamps mate, we all had outside bogs, nothing like central heating etc. but don't let that stop anyone telling you how good you got it.

Touche..

Was recognition, not a swipe, TD.