DEM not gonna CON dis NATION: Rolling UK politics in the short-lived Cleggeron era

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (7011 of them)

dom top of the bob crow twitter shitpile

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 10:09 (fifteen years ago)

xp I'd axe their benefits etc.

James Mitchell, Monday, 4 October 2010 10:12 (fifteen years ago)

Osbournes stiff arms in that pic...must not touch the young conservatives...must not touch the young conservatives...

Duncan Donuts (Ned Trifle II), Monday, 4 October 2010 10:15 (fifteen years ago)

EYES STRAIGHT AHEAD *Frances is going to kill me with GUNS*

are you robot? (suzy), Monday, 4 October 2010 10:17 (fifteen years ago)

something about checking out the size of his fiscal deficit

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 10:18 (fifteen years ago)

RARE SIGHTING OF PRESENTABLE ENGLISH-GIRL ANKLE shame about rest of outfit and clear lack of familiarity with BUTTONS or IRON.

are you robot? (suzy), Monday, 4 October 2010 10:23 (fifteen years ago)

why are tory women so warty?

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 11:18 (fifteen years ago)

It's the evil trying to get out.

Duncan Donuts (Ned Trifle II), Monday, 4 October 2010 11:22 (fifteen years ago)

Osbourne pretending that the deficit is solely the result of public spending profligacy again.

Matt DC, Monday, 4 October 2010 11:23 (fifteen years ago)

Didn't know this was going to be on: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/series-58/episode-3

James Mitchell, Monday, 4 October 2010 11:35 (fifteen years ago)

That's the whole reason for the Coulson news revive TBH.

are you robot? (suzy), Monday, 4 October 2010 11:36 (fifteen years ago)

oh it's peter oborne so it'll be the jews to blame, sorry i mean not to blame

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 11:36 (fifteen years ago)

to give the scrote some credit, nick robinson just said the reason they're cutting child benefit rather than winter fuel payments is that during the election cameron said something like 'read my lips: i will not cut winter fuel payments'. only osborne said last year he wouldn't cut child benefits. it does seem wrong that two people earning £43k can still claim. both my parents worked full-time throughout my childhood so i can barely get my head around the idea of the 'stay-home mums' the telegraph is whining about. i guess some of my friends' mums didn't work.

laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 12:35 (fifteen years ago)

I gave up work to look after the kids.

Duncan Donuts (Ned Trifle II), Monday, 4 October 2010 12:38 (fifteen years ago)

I was a "stay-home-and-read-ilx dad'.

Duncan Donuts (Ned Trifle II), Monday, 4 October 2010 12:39 (fifteen years ago)

i gave up work

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 12:40 (fifteen years ago)

(not to look after children)

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 12:41 (fifteen years ago)

the details of implementation sound a bit half-baked (lot of gymnastics to avoid calling it "means-tested", but looks like they've created an incentive for to avoid a salary between 41k and 41k+child benefits) and setting aside the axiomatic point about whether cuts are needed and how they should be timed, surely this has to be pretty much the least objectionable thing they could cut. totally fine with me tbqh.

caek, Monday, 4 October 2010 12:42 (fifteen years ago)

my aul fella took foreign jobs to get away from the kids

i dont love everything, i love football (darraghmac), Monday, 4 October 2010 12:43 (fifteen years ago)

I'm not objecting to the cut per se, but (and I would say this of course - see upthread) I think the cut off point should be higher and I don;t understand why households on a lot more than my household should still get the money. That doesn't seem fair or "we're all in together" at all, just seems to be penalising me for going part-time to look after the kids (and read ilx).

Duncan Donuts (Ned Trifle II), Monday, 4 October 2010 12:50 (fifteen years ago)

yes, not doing this on total household income being over twice the 40% limit seems (or something like that) seems, at best, stupid.

caek, Monday, 4 October 2010 12:53 (fifteen years ago)

At the moment this feels like a (rough calculation) 3% pay cut. Ahh, fuck it, it's not like they've suddenly lost my vote, so they could probably care less.

Duncan Donuts (Ned Trifle II), Monday, 4 October 2010 13:01 (fifteen years ago)

Lot of Tory voters will be on £44k though. Not doing it on combined salary seems kind of ridic, but I'm a bit wary of people being in favour of a cut as long as it's safely outside their own income band. £44k is well inside the top 10% of the country isn't it?

Matt DC, Monday, 4 October 2010 13:09 (fifteen years ago)

ITV news took a typically lol perspective on it, focusing the questioning of some Tory person on how punishing 'traditional families' with the stay-at-home mum isn't a Tory way to go about things, but put like that it does seem like it could be a nice vote-loser.

Antoine Bugleboy (Merdeyeux), Monday, 4 October 2010 13:12 (fifteen years ago)

15% according to the today program

xpost

American Fear of Pranksterism (Ed), Monday, 4 October 2010 13:15 (fifteen years ago)

Wonder how many Tory voters are couples earning £40,000 each though as compared to one high earner and a stay-at-home parent.

James Mitchell, Monday, 4 October 2010 13:30 (fifteen years ago)

it's not a large number. more important cuts to worry about. p sure the opposition won't be complaining about it.

laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 13:36 (fifteen years ago)

Class war on Mumsnet:

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/1054558-AIBU-to-claim-child-benefit

TotorosOcarina Mon 04-Oct-10 09:39:45

"At the moment cb pays for shoes and music lessons and pocket money and the baby's trust fund and our sponsored Malawian child, none of which we could really afford from our household expenses."

<snort>

Mine pays for FOOD.

Thats why some need it , some don't.

Haunted Clocks For Sale (Dorianlynskey), Monday, 4 October 2010 14:55 (fifteen years ago)

That should be in italics by the way. That's not my snort.

Haunted Clocks For Sale (Dorianlynskey), Monday, 4 October 2010 14:56 (fifteen years ago)

'not overburden the state (eg private education for the DC, private healthcare).' oh do fuck off

damn, mumsnet ain't so mumsy

laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 15:01 (fifteen years ago)

wonder if they have memes

laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 15:02 (fifteen years ago)

xp depending on the mums you know tbh

i dont love everything, i love football (darraghmac), Monday, 4 October 2010 15:02 (fifteen years ago)

they call them mumes xp

meta the devil you know (onimo), Monday, 4 October 2010 15:05 (fifteen years ago)

meta mums

Mark G, Monday, 4 October 2010 15:07 (fifteen years ago)

I have no idea what that means, btw

Mark G, Monday, 4 October 2010 15:07 (fifteen years ago)

I use my CB to pay the cleaner who might be left unemployed if I didn't use my CB that way. Is that wrong? Would it be better if I sacked her?

Think about it.

Haunted Clocks For Sale (Dorianlynskey), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:08 (fifteen years ago)

because everything complicated that happens in this world is obviously put there to inconvenience and annoy them

so much whining today about the strike along these lines

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:39 (fifteen years ago)

Yeah I just want to pass them a wet-wipe and coo DIDDUMS at most of them. Having said that, I'm about to enter the melee to go to Turner Prize PV.

are you robot? (suzy), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:48 (fifteen years ago)

more retired colonels needed to alert us to the dangers of marxist conspiracies to bring down the government and make us all homosexuals

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:52 (fifteen years ago)

OTM. I'm getting increasingly pissed off with so many people's inability, or refusal, to see the social big picture. Whiny entitlement is the default setting. It's like everything good that happens to them is because they're a special flower who's earned it and everything bad is somebody else's fault. They're Thatcherbabies in the sense they really don't understand how society works.

Haunted Clocks For Sale (Dorianlynskey), Monday, 4 October 2010 16:55 (fifteen years ago)

yes it's like all the stuff that makes society work happens somewhere else, like in some sort of engine room, and the menials are getting uppity (Bob 'Crowe' is a chav so twitter tells me) just to ruin the cruise

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 17:01 (fifteen years ago)

Think this is probably more about the Internet creating a public forum for every vacuous bubble that floats thru people's brains rather than a major shift in attitudes.

Already WSed last summer (Noodle Vague), Monday, 4 October 2010 18:10 (fifteen years ago)

internet's only one (but probably the most honest) part

former moderator, please give generously (DG), Monday, 4 October 2010 18:13 (fifteen years ago)

Well IRL there's also the Tea Party - that's a pretty big trend. I'm hoping it's a blip but the volume of right-wing craziness and intolerance of the state on both sides of the Atlantic at the moment is getting me down.

Haunted Clocks For Sale (Dorianlynskey), Monday, 4 October 2010 18:56 (fifteen years ago)

We'll lose CB, other half earns just over HRT threshold, I'm at home with the kids (so shoot me). I challenge anyone to live in London with two kids on 44k and feel like they are a 'high earner'. But my main problems with the cut (apart from huge disadvantage to single parents) is a) child benefit protects NI contribs of the non-working parent and b) one of the main ideologies behind CB was to give some money directly to the carer (usually mother) and hence to the child. It is a huge assumption that in families where the working parent is a 'high' earner, any of that money gets passed on to the non-working parent and children.

Meg (Meg Busset), Monday, 4 October 2010 21:28 (fifteen years ago)

I think they might wind up walking this one back.

are you robot? (suzy), Monday, 4 October 2010 21:41 (fifteen years ago)

absolutely no chance

caek, Monday, 4 October 2010 21:43 (fifteen years ago)

they may change the way the thresholds work

caek, Monday, 4 October 2010 21:43 (fifteen years ago)

I think they will look like a laughing stock if they roll back on the very first benefit cut they announce in detail. It would just be asking for trouble.

Matt DC, Monday, 4 October 2010 21:43 (fifteen years ago)

this ought to be one of the easier cuts to pass, but i guess actual poor people get less media shine than some of the richest people in the country so what do i know

laughing out loud lol (history mayne), Monday, 4 October 2010 21:45 (fifteen years ago)


This thread has been locked by an administrator

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.