What human rights laws will May change and why does she say if - doesn't she know what they are? Was she not home secretary for 6 years - surely she would have police reps telling her you need to change this or that. How does she not know what they are?
I think the leaders in those papers are disgusting and outrageous. They make me want to vomit! What a joke! How low can these bastards go?
I think everything that is wrong with the Tories can be summarised in May's statement that if the abolishing human rights stops terrorists she will do it. She is playing on people's fears. She has been home secretary for 6 years and Prime Minister for long enough to know what aspect of human rights legislation is getting in the way of stopping terrorists. Why the if? Why not say what the legislation in question is - hasn't she had a chance to work it out? And they have had 7 years to change legislation, and committed to it in their referendum and suddenly decide to make this vague announcement days before the vote. She has mentioned things that can already be done within our existing laws! We need to examine the details and learn lessons. And we need to give the police the powers to do their jobs and protect us.
It is to deflect from the conclusions that can be logically made about police numbers and resources. If we want to stop people having the power of free speech we might not even get the clues that were give to us from the Channel 4 programme for instance. We already have strong laws to protect brainwashing and grooming - these are done outside of the law. We need to learn teh lessons - why did the police not deal with these potential terrorists appropriately - more likely to be around resources than legislation that tehprime minister can't give a specific example of how it affects things.
Opportunist and disgusting. We won't defeat terrorism by ripping up our rights.
Dropped my wife into school this morning - she was telling me they were losing two teachers and not replacing them due to budget cuts. That is the other reality of the tories.
Isn't that just politics in this country for at least the last 20 years? Spin spin spin, all the parties to one extent or another do it and why I generally don't believe much of what they all say.
Re schools, sadly London & the south east will be hit hardest (and some other major cities) as the money is redistributed as they currently receive considerably more funding than many parts of the UK per head.
It's never reported of course but more schools will get additional funding than those that will lose, is that what you get from the reality of the tories?
I don't know what school your wife works mutley but I assume that the two not being replaced won't mean a class of children fending for themselves?
Many London schools if we take Primary have up to 25% more teachers than classes, compare that to other places in the U.K. Where schools struggle to have one teacher per class and those teachers often forgo their PPA time as there is no cover.
Of course in an ideal world we would have a fairer funding structure (which is what they are trying to do) and also more funding in general.
10,000 young people are thrown out of the care system every year at the age of 18. Some will get a job on the minimum wage. The story above about people in their mid twenties getting on the housing ladder (let alone a car) does not apply to them. Life chances are not all that equal and Labour more than the Tories are prepared to consider that issue.
Or to look at it the other way, is the UK population going to continue to watch as the NHS falls apart, kids leave Uni saddled with debt (and no way of finding a place of their own), old people suffer indignity and worse as the care system collapses, the police and security system buckles while trying to deal with the terrorist threat; and yet still allows itself to be led into a frothing rage by the Daily Mail when some hapless politician suggests that there might need to be a tax rise to help fix these things?
I don't think we are disagreeing in the main Prague, but neither of our main parties have a clue how or what to do or more likely it's all about getting elected and they won't say things unpalatable to their audiences. Can you imagine in labour strongholds if they had proposed the Denmark model, i.e. you pay income taxes on nearly every penny ranging from 35-55%? Plus anything you buy with whats left will cost 5% more (assuming it attracts VAT).
And before someone trots out the nurses visiting food banks..... A nurse in Denmark is paid more than the UK, around £35,000. However they will pay over 40% of their total salary in income tax so would net a similar amount to a UK nurse (19-20k).
We all have an honest decision to make (or maybe we don't), are we all prepared to receive less in our pay packets to have a better NHS, Police, State etc etc........... i think sadly if any party actually put that forward they'd get no where near being elected as we've built a society of expectation and of someone else paying for it, or what we used to refer to as 'the never never'.
The one bit we may disagree on is property, i'm not saying it's easy but buying your first property never has been and has always meant sacrifices, whether that be 2nd jobs 5-6 nights a week like I did, or renting a room in a shared house for the first few years of marriage and then moving out of Eltham to Rainham in Kent like my parents did (who both worked in the city).
Are people really saying 2 x young city workers couldn't afford to buy an average semi in Rainham Kent at circa £275k if they saved up for 5 years? Or is it they still want to go out at least 3 nights a week, eat out, have a nice car, contract mobile phone, 50" TV and a sky subscription - and also buy a pad in an expensive part of the UK (London). I've lost count of the times I've had this conversation with people who work for me, who when I sit them down and go through their expenditure they don't see any issue (only entitlement) of spending 50% of their salaries (say £35k) on new cars on HP, going out/eating out, spending £10 in pret at lunch, mobile phones, 2 weeks in the sun, an uber account etc etc. It's simply a matter of priorities, buy an old banger or get the bus, restrict yourself to a pay as you go phone, get Freeview not Sky, stay in more, make a packed lunch and don't buy 3 coffees a day in Starbucks!
Indeed. I was with you until we got to property.
Maybe you read before, I established that in the time since I left for Prague in 1993, the salary of the job I had has gone up by about 80%, but the value of my house has gone up 550%. Now the thing is that the job I had was a decent one by most standards, it would have put me in the famous top 5%. However the house, well its in Surbiton, so a fair way out from London and importantly I wasn't married and sometimes had two flatmates helping pay the mortgage. Especially useful when interest rates went to 15%. So I had a decent life, but I wasnt exactly living like those City types who eat wherever they like and don't even look at the bill. Now? Obviously my equivalent couldn't even live as I did.
Looking through your prescription for how young city workers should live, one thing is clear. You are saying that they should expect a standard of living that is far worse than that enjoyed by equivalent qualified people 20-25 years ago. You could see why they might be a bit pissed off by that when they look at the growth of the country's GDP since then, and the evidence of super riches all round London which were not there when I left. I am not sure entitlement is the right word to describe their attitude, if you look at it like that.
I looked up the GDP per capita PPP adjusted figures for the period in question
1993: £19,059 2014: £40, 233
So it's more than doubled, but you expect young city workers, presumably graduates who are working hard to get on, to bring a packed lunch? Wow. Just, wow. I am not having a go at you for suggesting how they save. I am asking how is it possible they have to live like I never did when their contribution to GDP has doubled compared to my day?
Again I ask, where does all the money in Britain go???
A degree say from a mediocre UK university isn't the 'equivalent qualification' that it was 30 years ago - London and other world class cities have a global labour market in which we compete with the best and brightest from everywhere.
How many foreigners worked in the City in the 1980s versus today?
I think everything that is wrong with the Tories can be summarised in May's statement that if the abolishing human rights stops terrorists she will do it. She is playing on people's fears. She has been home secretary for 6 years and Prime Minister for long enough to know what aspect of human rights legislation is getting in the way of stopping terrorists. Why the if? Why not say what the legislation in question is - hasn't she had a chance to work it out? And they have had 7 years to change legislation, and committed to it in their referendum and suddenly decide to make this vague announcement days before the vote. She has mentioned things that can already be done within our existing laws! We need to examine the details and learn lessons. And we need to give the police the powers to do their jobs and protect us.
It is to deflect from the conclusions that can be logically made about police numbers and resources. If we want to stop people having the power of free speech we might not even get the clues that were give to us from the Channel 4 programme for instance. We already have strong laws to protect brainwashing and grooming - these are done outside of the law. We need to learn teh lessons - why did the police not deal with these potential terrorists appropriately - more likely to be around resources than legislation that tehprime minister can't give a specific example of how it affects things.
Opportunist and disgusting. We won't defeat terrorism by ripping up our rights.
Dropped my wife into school this morning - she was telling me they were losing two teachers and not replacing them due to budget cuts. That is the other reality of the tories.
Isn't that just politics in this country for at least the last 20 years? Spin spin spin, all the parties to one extent or another do it and why I generally don't believe much of what they all say.
Re schools, sadly London & the south east will be hit hardest (and some other major cities) as the money is redistributed as they currently receive considerably more funding than many parts of the UK per head.
It's never reported of course but more schools will get additional funding than those that will lose, is that what you get from the reality of the tories?
I don't know what school your wife works mutley but I assume that the two not being replaced won't mean a class of children fending for themselves?
Many London schools if we take Primary have up to 25% more teachers than classes, compare that to other places in the U.K. Where schools struggle to have one teacher per class and those teachers often forgo their PPA time as there is no cover.
Of course in an ideal world we would have a fairer funding structure (which is what they are trying to do) and also more funding in general.
My wife's school isn't in London. Earlier this year 40 kids in our area were not given any choice of secondary school. Not you have to have this school and not your choices - they were told there were no places anywhere. Of course something will be found at some point, but it really isn't good and please , we understand you are bothered about paying more tax but don't try to tell us the NHS and schools are not in crisis when they clearly are!
And stop talking about an ideal world please - it is quite annoying when these basic improvements are achievable in our world if very rich people and corporations pay a bit more tax. I haven't got an issue paying more tax - I back myself to do better from a growing economy.
24 hours before the election and still haven't got a clue which way I will vote.
Labour is the obvious way - 5 more years of the Tories and our public services will collapse. But their proposals are unaffordable and how can you vote for Corbyn? And the thought of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary is a nightmare.
The Lib Dems? Their obsession with Europe turns me right off and Farron is a lightweight. And just seeing Clegg on TV makes me want to scream.
The Tories? Obviously the safe option but this campaign has really shown up May's limitations and how can you vote for a party that obviously wants to destroy the NHS?
We deserve so much better than this lot that I think I may just draw my own box on the voting slip saying none of the above.
10,000 young people are thrown out of the care system every year at the age of 18. Some will get a job on the minimum wage. The story above about people in their mid twenties getting on the housing ladder (let alone a car) does not apply to them. Life chances are not all that equal and Labour more than the Tories are prepared to consider that issue.
100% agree on children coming out of care. I'd encourage anyone who feels they have something to offer and even more so if you are under 35 to volunteer to some of the charities who mentor children coming out of care.
24 hours before the election and still haven't got a clue which way I will vote.
Labour is the obvious way - 5 more years of the Tories and our public services will collapse. But their proposals are unaffordable and how can you vote for Corbyn? And the thought of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary is a nightmare.
The Lib Dems? Their obsession with Europe turns me right off and Farron is a lightweight. And just seeing Clegg on TV makes me want to scream.
The Tories? Obviously the safe option but this campaign has really shown up May's limitations and how can you vote for a party that obviously wants to destroy the NHS?
We deserve so much better than this lot that I think I may just draw my own box on the voting slip saying none of the above.
Well seeing as we all know the Tories are going to win, your best protest vote will be to vote Labour and reduce their majority.
Not knowing what house prices there are Prague, I have no idea? Quick Google says average flat is 268k. 50k salary per year inc student loan is 2900 take home. So yes, that is do-able even while moving up the ladder.
I lived at home for 4yrs after uni before moving out, while paying back my student loans (24k in total). You know it's coming out so you budget for it. Deposit was roughly 20k. If you want to be a new home owner these days you have to make sacrifices but it's certainly not impossible and paying back somewhere between £10 and £100 month should not stop that. If it does then debt repayments are not the real issue.
I'd say 90% of my mates at uni have achieved the same as me and a few of those have done it in London too.
Why are we using the £50k as a benchmark salary here? It's about double the national average, which is itself pushed up by London wages. You know as well as I do Polo that the amount of young people earning that amount in this area is extremely limited. In fact don't we have one of the highest house price to average earnings ratio in the country ratios around here?
That's why I started using the £25k benchmark initially and we probably do BA yes. However, it's not the point. If you earn £25k and are 9k in debt or 90k in debt, the repayments are still minimal and do not stop you being able to save up and get your own home.
24 hours before the election and still haven't got a clue which way I will vote.
Labour is the obvious way - 5 more years of the Tories and our public services will collapse. But their proposals are unaffordable and how can you vote for Corbyn? And the thought of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary is a nightmare.
The Lib Dems? Their obsession with Europe turns me right off and Farron is a lightweight. And just seeing Clegg on TV makes me want to scream.
The Tories? Obviously the safe option but this campaign has really shown up May's limitations and how can you vote for a party that obviously wants to destroy the NHS?
We deserve so much better than this lot that I think I may just draw my own box on the voting slip saying none of the above.
Well seeing as we all know the Tories are going to win, your best protest vote will be to vote Labour and reduce their majority.
I'm genuinely not sure the Tories are going to romp away with this election.
24 hours before the election and still haven't got a clue which way I will vote.
Labour is the obvious way - 5 more years of the Tories and our public services will collapse. But their proposals are unaffordable and how can you vote for Corbyn? And the thought of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary is a nightmare.
The Lib Dems? Their obsession with Europe turns me right off and Farron is a lightweight. And just seeing Clegg on TV makes me want to scream.
The Tories? Obviously the safe option but this campaign has really shown up May's limitations and how can you vote for a party that obviously wants to destroy the NHS?
We deserve so much better than this lot that I think I may just draw my own box on the voting slip saying none of the above.
Well seeing as we all know the Tories are going to win, your best protest vote will be to vote Labour and reduce their majority.
I'm genuinely not sure the Tories are going to romp away with this election.
24 hours before the election and still haven't got a clue which way I will vote.
Labour is the obvious way - 5 more years of the Tories and our public services will collapse. But their proposals are unaffordable and how can you vote for Corbyn? And the thought of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary is a nightmare.
The Lib Dems? Their obsession with Europe turns me right off and Farron is a lightweight. And just seeing Clegg on TV makes me want to scream.
The Tories? Obviously the safe option but this campaign has really shown up May's limitations and how can you vote for a party that obviously wants to destroy the NHS?
We deserve so much better than this lot that I think I may just draw my own box on the voting slip saying none of the above.
Well seeing as we all know the Tories are going to win, your best protest vote will be to vote Labour and reduce their majority.
I'm genuinely not sure the Tories are going to romp away with this election.
They are not behind in one poll. They won't romp away like the predictions, but the best we can hope for is teh same or a slightly reduced majority. That could get rid of May and that would be a result because she is useless.
10,000 young people are thrown out of the care system every year at the age of 18. Some will get a job on the minimum wage. The story above about people in their mid twenties getting on the housing ladder (let alone a car) does not apply to them. Life chances are not all that equal and Labour more than the Tories are prepared to consider that issue.
100% agree on children coming out of care. I'd encourage anyone who feels they have something to offer and even more so if you are under 35 to volunteer to some of the charities who mentor children coming out of care.
The Tories are always praising the voluntary sector, as are all the parties quite rightly. What worries me is the direction of travel. I often think the Tories would like to hand over the entire NHS to the Macmillan charity, and run the thing on voluntary work and contributions. People coming out of care are not feckless scroungers, but people who have had a tough hand in early life.
I only wish that my vote would count. But i have lived in a Tory stronghold all my life. Every vote I have had in over 40 years of voting has been nothing more than a protest vote and tomorrow will be no different. Until proportional representation is introduced there are many people who don't even bother to vote because it is a waste of time. I shall vote tomorrow knowing full well that my vote would count for nothing. Surely this cannot be right.
Not knowing what house prices there are Prague, I have no idea? Quick Google says average flat is 268k. 50k salary per year inc student loan is 2900 take home. So yes, that is do-able even while moving up the ladder.
I lived at home for 4yrs after uni before moving out, while paying back my student loans (24k in total). You know it's coming out so you budget for it. Deposit was roughly 20k. If you want to be a new home owner these days you have to make sacrifices but it's certainly not impossible and paying back somewhere between £10 and £100 month should not stop that. If it does then debt repayments are not the real issue.
I'd say 90% of my mates at uni have achieved the same as me and a few of those have done it in London too.
What's the cost of Prague housing got to do with this? I am referencing the experience of my sister's kids, whose fees I help pay for. They live in Eltham.
Trying to work out what the fees would have been that you had to pay back. Nothing like 27k, were they.
I think everything that is wrong with the Tories can be summarised in May's statement that if the abolishing human rights stops terrorists she will do it. She is playing on people's fears. She has been home secretary for 6 years and Prime Minister for long enough to know what aspect of human rights legislation is getting in the way of stopping terrorists. Why the if? Why not say what the legislation in question is - hasn't she had a chance to work it out? And they have had 7 years to change legislation, and committed to it in their referendum and suddenly decide to make this vague announcement days before the vote. She has mentioned things that can already be done within our existing laws! We need to examine the details and learn lessons. And we need to give the police the powers to do their jobs and protect us.
It is to deflect from the conclusions that can be logically made about police numbers and resources. If we want to stop people having the power of free speech we might not even get the clues that were give to us from the Channel 4 programme for instance. We already have strong laws to protect brainwashing and grooming - these are done outside of the law. We need to learn teh lessons - why did the police not deal with these potential terrorists appropriately - more likely to be around resources than legislation that tehprime minister can't give a specific example of how it affects things.
Opportunist and disgusting. We won't defeat terrorism by ripping up our rights.
Dropped my wife into school this morning - she was telling me they were losing two teachers and not replacing them due to budget cuts. That is the other reality of the tories.
Isn't that just politics in this country for at least the last 20 years? Spin spin spin, all the parties to one extent or another do it and why I generally don't believe much of what they all say.
Re schools, sadly London & the south east will be hit hardest (and some other major cities) as the money is redistributed as they currently receive considerably more funding than many parts of the UK per head.
It's never reported of course but more schools will get additional funding than those that will lose, is that what you get from the reality of the tories?
I don't know what school your wife works mutley but I assume that the two not being replaced won't mean a class of children fending for themselves?
Many London schools if we take Primary have up to 25% more teachers than classes, compare that to other places in the U.K. Where schools struggle to have one teacher per class and those teachers often forgo their PPA time as there is no cover.
Of course in an ideal world we would have a fairer funding structure (which is what they are trying to do) and also more funding in general.
All areas will be hit. I live in Devon which has been on the thin end of educational funding for years and expected to benefit massively from the new formula but something like 80% of schools will lose money in Devon. Our local school will lose two teachers check what will happen in your area here https://www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#!/ .
The Tories? Obviously the safe option but this campaign has really shown up May's limitations and how can you vote for a party that obviously wants to destroy the NHS?
Not sure how a party that wants to dismantle the NHS as we know it is considered the safe option.
Not having a go at you or anything. Just blows my mind that they're considered a safe pair of hands given their record on public services.
Comments
I think the leaders in those papers are disgusting and outrageous. They make me want to vomit! What a joke! How low can these bastards go?
Re schools, sadly London & the south east will be hit hardest (and some other major cities) as the money is redistributed as they currently receive considerably more funding than many parts of the UK per head.
It's never reported of course but more schools will get additional funding than those that will lose, is that what you get from the reality of the tories?
I don't know what school your wife works mutley but I assume that the two not being replaced won't mean a class of children fending for themselves?
Many London schools if we take Primary have up to 25% more teachers than classes, compare that to other places in the U.K. Where schools struggle to have one teacher per class and those teachers often forgo their PPA time as there is no cover.
Of course in an ideal world we would have a fairer funding structure (which is what they are trying to do) and also more funding in general.
Life chances are not all that equal and Labour more than the Tories are prepared to consider that issue.
How many foreigners worked in the City in the 1980s versus today?
And stop talking about an ideal world please - it is quite annoying when these basic improvements are achievable in our world if very rich people and corporations pay a bit more tax. I haven't got an issue paying more tax - I back myself to do better from a growing economy.
Labour is the obvious way - 5 more years of the Tories and our public services will collapse. But their proposals are unaffordable and how can you vote for Corbyn? And the thought of Diane Abbott as Home Secretary is a nightmare.
The Lib Dems? Their obsession with Europe turns me right off and Farron is a lightweight. And just seeing Clegg on TV makes me want to scream.
The Tories? Obviously the safe option but this campaign has really shown up May's limitations and how can you vote for a party that obviously wants to destroy the NHS?
We deserve so much better than this lot that I think I may just draw my own box on the voting slip saying none of the above.
The Tory won't give a toss about people like my Mum, I'll bet you a year's supply of croissants on that.
I often think the Tories would like to hand over the entire NHS to the Macmillan charity, and run the thing on voluntary work and contributions.
People coming out of care are not feckless scroungers, but people who have had a tough hand in early life.
But i have lived in a Tory stronghold all my life.
Every vote I have had in over 40 years of voting has been nothing more than a protest vote and tomorrow will be no different.
Until proportional representation is introduced there are many people who don't even bother to vote because it is a waste of time.
I shall vote tomorrow knowing full well that my vote would count for nothing.
Surely this cannot be right.
Trying to work out what the fees would have been that you had to pay back. Nothing like 27k, were they.
Not having a go at you or anything. Just blows my mind that they're considered a safe pair of hands given their record on public services.
No, on reflection, you probably don't.
The twitter generation are wise to the right wing press nonsense. Let's hope the rest of the country can be too.