Bit rich of Tories to accuse Labour's sums of not adding up. How's the national debt reduction going?
That is where there have offered no opposition at all. If the Tories are such great stewards of the economy, why have things got worse by nearly every measure? Why does the historical data not back it up?
There was a great lie that Labour allowed to be swallowed after the financial crisis. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, there has been some great analysis since, a common theme is that very few people understood what was about to happen. This is true within the markets that caused this and when they realised what was happening, protected their own interest at our cost. Brown probably could have put more protections in place and definitely misunderstood the stability of a recently increased tax base. But these were based on relatively new financial markets derived on new forms of debt. The conservatives were calling for more deregulation at the time and just as miguided in their beliefs.
I've never understood why Labour never fought the idea that they were somehow responsible for the American sub-prime morgage failure. Imagine the reaction if a Labour government tried to tell the banks what and how they could invest after it had set up the Bank of England to do that very thing.
I bloody hate the tories with a vengeance but did anyone else hear Diane Abbott on lbc (Nick Ferrari) this morning re new police numbers. Bloody pathetic. Couldn't get her numbers right at all. Christ sake she's the shadow home secretary.
I have finally been able to make SOME MINIMAL sense of her sums, though they still don't make too much sense.
How many police?10,000 What's the cost£300,000 What's really the cost£80,000,000 That's just £8,000 per officer? What will they be paid? Has this been thought through? The additional costs in Y1 will be about 250,000 police officers is £64.3 Million. So 250,000 officers? No perhaps 2000-2250? Where did 250,000 come from? It was you wasn't it? The other costs will be Y1 £64,000,000, £139,100,000, £270,000,000, £298,000,000. This equals £771,000,000.
I'm going to ignore her maths for a second and run through what I think she had on her papers as she panicked and failed to answer with any sense.
Allowing for average police salary of £25,000 (around £23,000 outside London and £27,000 in London)
These figures must also include pension payments etc as otherwise all these officers in Y3 will get an outrageous bump up in salary and then a decrease in Y4. I would also assume they include equipment and training. which once again bring us a bit closer.
Jeremy Corbyn has since said the total cost will be £300,000,000 which if inclusive of employment benefits such as services pension etc, this would be more acceptable of an ''average'' costing.
According to the answer given to a Freedom of Information request to the Nottinghamshire Police five years ago "the cost of recruiting and training a Police Officer is approximately £12,900. The annual payroll cost of a new Police Officer is £30,520 per annum". (It's presumably gone up since.)
So the training costs alone would be £129mn. Then there's all their kit, office accommodation, computer facilities, etc, etc. Again on Notts payroll figure 10,000 new officers would cost the quoted £300mn per annum alone without any associated costs.
The Labours have said they'll fund this from reversing CGT rate changes - is that correct? Well, that might be an issue. Many assets which attract CGT have been held for many, many years. There has been a big increase in CG tax receipts over the last two years. Having been fairly static at £4bn for four years running they went up to £5.5bn in 2014/5 and then to £7bn in 2015/6. My guess is that many astute people have been cashing in while CG tax rates are low and the levels of the tax take will dwindle away quite markedly if tax rates increase. Asset holders will merely not cash in and wait for the next Tory Govt. Corbyn is likely to be looking at a big drop in the CG tax-take if he were to get into power. Has this truly been thought though? Or is it just more old pony?
It is possible your niece had family support to get going (no), and she may have a partner as well, (yes) in the private health sector nurses pay can be better than the NHS, (she's an NHS district nurse) and living outside London can be cheaper than in London, (yes).
I'm still a little wary about foodbank stats. Is it a chicken and egg thing? Are there more of them because people need them or do people use them because there are more of them? It's a really good method of productively using food that might otherwise get wasted (best before dates and all that). But I'm surprised the Joseph Rowntree Foundation - a champion of the poor - appears not to have done any recent research on this issue. It's last commentary on food banks (that I could find anyway) is a couple of years old and uses figures from elsewhere (The Trussell Trust) to suggest that "benefit delays are the single biggest cause of referrals to food banks". That is obviously an unacceptable situation.
The Trussell Trust's latest data also give some clues as to what is happening and suggests that issues arising from universal credit may be a main driver for the increase in foodbank use. Not the least of which is the large delay (six weeks plus) that can occur before people get the benefit to which they are entitled.
Here's the Trussell Trust CEO's latest comment: “The move to simplify an often complex welfare system is a welcome one but any large reform can have unforeseen consequences. Foodbanks see first-hand how changes to the welfare system affect people on the ground, and so can offer an early warning to decision-makers. We are sharing our early observations with the Department for Work and Pensions to ensure any adverse side effects Universal Credit can have on people are addressed before full rollout is completed. We have been heartened by Secretary of State Damian Green’s willingness to engage, his department’s work to pilot improvements, and the recent changes to the Universal Credit taper rate which mean people moving into work will keep more of their earnings. We hope our insights can inform efforts to make sure the values on which Universal Credit is built are delivered in practice. To stop UK hunger we must make sure the welfare system really does work for everyone.”
It seems to me to be a good thing that the Trust appears to believe that Green and the DWP are actually trying quite hard to improve things. Also of interest that the Trust seems supportive of a wholesale shake-up of the benefit system.
I noticed, and mention this for the sake of clarity, that Trussell's foodbanks provide 3-day emergency food packs and that on average the clients in the last year have taken two. This indicates to me (and I admit that I might have misinterpreted what the Trust has said) that most foodbank use is NOT day-to-day long-term support but rather short-term assistance to get people over the worst. If that is true, it seems rather encouraging that help is given and then Trussell's clients manage to get on with their lives on their own two feet.
That said, I was surprised to see that, for example, more food packs were distributed in East Anglia than in London. I am speculating that because the trust says "People in insecure or seasonal work are particularly affected" that an significant number of food pack recipients might be seasonal fruit & veg pickers who presumably suffer from the double whammy of low wages and insignificant payments from central government.
The Trussell Trust are the biggest single providers/supporters of food-banks. They have strict rules about how often they can be used, I believe that (at a local level) they are increasingly needing to break the rules. The bit about benefit delay/sanction is true, and mostly as a result of Universal Credit (6-13 week delay)
Other food-bank providers, often more locally based, can be more flexible. I know of two different ones who regularly give parcels to the same people/families every week. They try not to but know that the people would starve or commit a crime if they didn't.
I am a trad Labour voter and former NGA trade union member of over 20 years. However, and I think there are many Labour voters like myself, I will not vote for Corbyn and Abbot. Corbyns traditional stance on Nuclear Weapons (trident) worries me, the reason we have not had a World War for nearly 80 years is because of nuclear weapons, also he stated somewhere that he is in favour of free migration in the EU. Also he looks like my old noncey Physics teacher. Abbot is just appalling, she's so bad she may as well be Conservative. Corbyn appointed her and so for me this shows how bad his judgment is, if JC thinks Abbot is decent (yes I know he put an X on her ballot paper) then how the hell can he be trusted. So the trade union vote (they backed Corbyn) has buggered it up for the nation. If only Labour had voted in the correct Miliband brother back in the day. Although some might say he was too much of a Blairite. Just to add balance, anyone earning less than 35k per annum and voting Tory are shooting themselves in the foot. There appears to be no party that suits my political thinking. My ballot paper will be spoiled.
For those of us who are not fans of Diane Abbot (let's be fair pretty much everyone) then I think this might be a useful reminder that not everyone in her party shares either her views or her manner of dealing with people.
I personally can see and hope the likes of Jess Philips as forming part of a (New) New Labour breakaway after the upcoming kicking they are going to get in the election.
For those of us who are not fans of Diane Abbot (let's be fair pretty much everyone) that I think this might be a useful reminder that not everyone in her party shares either her views or her manner of dealing with people.
I personally can see and hope the likes of Jess Philips as forming part of a (New) New Labour breakaway after the upcoming kicking they are going to get in the election.
It seems like the main parties who will have seats in pretty much all the constituencies from what I have heard and read from them I sometimes think I agree with this and what a load of crap. Basically I agree with each of the main parties on something and disagree with all the main parties on other things.
Labour and Diane Abbott proving yet again that maths really isn't their strong point.
Utopia costs money don't you know.
If you look at the figures since Tory austerity, so does living in the seventh circle of hell...
Possibly because we were paying for Labours punt at running the country previously?
That is complete rubbish - the GLOBAL credit crunch would have happened under any government - and Labour actually managed the econmy well before it and in the immediate aftermath. So much so, that the Americans parised us for leading the way. I think Darling was the best chancellor we have had for years!
Austerity was not the way out of trouble, but if you don't understand national finances, it makes sense because it is how you would manage your home finances.
Labour and Diane Abbott proving yet again that maths really isn't their strong point.
Utopia costs money don't you know.
If you look at the figures since Tory austerity, so does living in the seventh circle of hell...
Possibly because we were paying for Labours punt at running the country previously?
That is complete rubbish - the GLOBAL credit crunch would have happened under any government - and Labour actually managed the econmy well before it and in the immediate aftermath. So much so, that the Americans parised us for leading the way. I think Darling was the best chancellor we have had for years!
Austerity was not the way out of trouble, but if you don't understand national finances, it makes sense because it is how you would manage your home finances.
Bit rich of Tories to accuse Labour's sums of not adding up. How's the national debt reduction going?
Don't think anyone needs to "accuse" anything, the interview demonstrates clear as day that she doesn't have a clue whatsoever what she is saying.
Corbinytes and Labour voters in general can try and counter by saying "yeah, but the Tories blah blah blah" all they want....that interview just screams pure incompetence. There really isn't a good comeback that anyone defending her can use in that situation.
Can't help but think 'previous generation' of Labour of the likes of Alan Johnson, David Miliband and Andy Burnham would be destroying the Tories at the moment.
I own one which I only use for car hire abroad - I have a debit card I use day to day. The thing is, if people feel able to spend more, you get more revenue coming in that can net you more than being austere.
Can't help but think 'previous generation' of Labour of the likes of Alan Johnson, David Miliband and Andy Burnham would be destroying the Tories at the moment.
Even if ed had clung on after the previous election he could've walked away with this election. Literally anyone but the labour hard left would've easily have won the election
Can't help but think 'previous generation' of Labour of the likes of Alan Johnson, David Miliband and Andy Burnham would be destroying the Tories at the moment.
Even if ed had clung on after the previous election he could've walked away with this election. Literally anyone but the labour hard left would've easily have won the election
The Tories would have never called this election if that was the case.
How complex can it be? They can't afford food. Mainly because nurses are having to work ludicrous hours in horrendous conditions for terrible pay and it's getting worse under this government.
But your bloke don't like gay sex
Why, do you?
Hadn't realised that about you, but as a lib.Dem. kinda guy myself, I have no issue with it at all.
You're welcome
I'm happy to admit that I ain't got anything against people indulging in it either and not the kind of thing you should be joking about imo
It is amazing how the Prime Minister's general ineptness in this campaign (e.g. she thinks it is OK NHS workers survive on food banks, humiliation in Scotland, refusing to let people take her photo etc.) is barely being reported by the media.
Whilst Diane Abbott makes a fairly minor gaffe regarding paying for a policy and by teatime every news outlet, including the BBC, is trying to see who can have the biggest and most colourful 'DIANE ABBOTT IS A FAT IDIOT LET'S LAUGH AT HER' graphic at the top of their front page.
Comments
There was a great lie that Labour allowed to be swallowed after the financial crisis. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, there has been some great analysis since, a common theme is that very few people understood what was about to happen. This is true within the markets that caused this and when they realised what was happening, protected their own interest at our cost. Brown probably could have put more protections in place and definitely misunderstood the stability of a recently increased tax base. But these were based on relatively new financial markets derived on new forms of debt. The conservatives were calling for more deregulation at the time and just as miguided in their beliefs.
I've never understood why Labour never fought the idea that they were somehow responsible for the American sub-prime morgage failure. Imagine the reaction if a Labour government tried to tell the banks what and how they could invest after it had set up the Bank of England to do that very thing.
So the training costs alone would be £129mn. Then there's all their kit, office accommodation, computer facilities, etc, etc. Again on Notts payroll figure 10,000 new officers would cost the quoted £300mn per annum alone without any associated costs.
The Labours have said they'll fund this from reversing CGT rate changes - is that correct? Well, that might be an issue. Many assets which attract CGT have been held for many, many years. There has been a big increase in CG tax receipts over the last two years. Having been fairly static at £4bn for four years running they went up to £5.5bn in 2014/5 and then to £7bn in 2015/6. My guess is that many astute people have been cashing in while CG tax rates are low and the levels of the tax take will dwindle away quite markedly if tax rates increase. Asset holders will merely not cash in and wait for the next Tory Govt. Corbyn is likely to be looking at a big drop in the CG tax-take if he were to get into power. Has this truly been thought though? Or is it just more old pony?
The Trussell Trust are the biggest single providers/supporters of food-banks. They have strict rules about how often they can be used, I believe that (at a local level) they are increasingly needing to break the rules. The bit about benefit delay/sanction is true, and mostly as a result of Universal Credit (6-13 week delay)
Other food-bank providers, often more locally based, can be more flexible. I know of two different ones who regularly give parcels to the same people/families every week. They try not to but know that the people would starve or commit a crime if they didn't.
However, and I think there are many Labour voters like myself, I will not vote for Corbyn and Abbot.
Corbyns traditional stance on Nuclear Weapons (trident) worries me, the reason we have not had a World War for nearly 80 years is because of nuclear weapons, also he stated somewhere that he is in favour of free migration in the EU. Also he looks like my old noncey Physics teacher.
Abbot is just appalling, she's so bad she may as well be Conservative. Corbyn appointed her and so for me this shows how bad his judgment is, if JC thinks Abbot is decent (yes I know he put an X on her ballot paper) then how the hell can he be trusted.
So the trade union vote (they backed Corbyn) has buggered it up for the nation.
If only Labour had voted in the correct Miliband brother back in the day. Although some might say he was too much of a Blairite.
Just to add balance, anyone earning less than 35k per annum and voting Tory are shooting themselves in the foot.
There appears to be no party that suits my political thinking.
My ballot paper will be spoiled.
Enjoy:
huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/09/17/jess-phillips-diane-abbott-corbyn_n_8151468.html
I personally can see and hope the likes of Jess Philips as forming part of a (New) New Labour breakaway after the upcoming kicking they are going to get in the election.
Utopia costs money don't you know.
But Diane Abbott slipping up on police figures is apparently the biggest story in the country. Interesting.
Austerity was not the way out of trouble, but if you don't understand national finances, it makes sense because it is how you would manage your home finances.
How many credit cards do you own?
Corbinytes and Labour voters in general can try and counter by saying "yeah, but the Tories blah blah blah" all they want....that interview just screams pure incompetence. There really isn't a good comeback that anyone defending her can use in that situation.
Whilst Diane Abbott makes a fairly minor gaffe regarding paying for a policy and by teatime every news outlet, including the BBC, is trying to see who can have the biggest and most colourful 'DIANE ABBOTT IS A FAT IDIOT LET'S LAUGH AT HER' graphic at the top of their front page.