OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

[ramAnag]

Starmer has, thus far, hit the pensioners, the farmers, Shut down the one oil refinery in Scotland and moved its refining to an English refinery despite most of UK oil being "Scottish". Then there's all the expensegate crap that's been going on. He's upset more folk by temporarily postponing some of the local elections so proposed boundary changes can take place and the elections will happen between 6 and 12 months down the road. Doesn't really matter when they take place, he'll lose them.

2026 should see both shades of Tory ousted at the Holyrood elections. Hopefully the SNP will get more than 50% of the seats and can push for Indy via the UN as Wastemonster won't permit another referendum. This despite the NI Law on this permits one after 7 years there if the Secretary of State for NI decides to call one.

I have no idea what it is Starmer et al are trying to do but I do not believe it's going to work out positively for the general population. It wil, I fear, see Reform get in next time and that scares the living daylights out of me.

Meanwhile, here in Clogland, we have a 4 party right wing coalition, led by the ultra right PVV of Geert Wilders and they are not doing what they said they'd do in their manifesto. In fact they've done the opposite. Not increased the minimum wage. Not scrapped the excess on medical insurance bills. What they have done, which wasn't in the manifesto, is to give tax breaks to the rich, big business and the multinationals. A similar thing to what right wing Meloni is doing in Italy.

Have the right wing and the rich got a stranglehold on the rest of us or can we get back to common sense and doing what's best for the vast majority as opposed to the silver spoon brigade? The richest paying the most in taxes, be they companies or individuals. Looking after those who can't look after themselves.

To me, that was always the right way, the human way, the decent way. I have no truck with paying taxes to help those who can't help themselves. I abhor paying taxes to help those who won't help themselves. I also abhor tax evasion and tax avoidance and the using of loopholes to not have to pay taxes. IMO, that make me sensible rather than left/right/whatever.

We invariably have much in common, MA, in terms of both political and sporting views.
I always respect your views, but do you really think he’s ‘hit’ pensioners and farmers or is that just the view of the anti Labour press?

As someone of an almost identical age to you I could easily make a case for being a poor hard done to pensioner where the winter fuel allowance is concerned, but it wouldn’t be true.
I’m comfortable, as opposed to well off, and we don’t actually need that 300GBP WFA. It’s something that I understand the country can’t currently afford in terms of a universal benefit for all those over 70. There are lots of folk in the same position as us and a great many who are much better off and I can’t for the life of me understand why millionaires should be entitled to the WFA just on the basis of being over seventy years of age. Like you, all in favour of decency, fairness and support for those who need it, but I can understand the logic of cancelling the WFA as a universal benefit especially IF by doing so those in genuine need are better supported.

As regards farmers. I’m not knowledgeable enough to pass genuinely informed comment, but while I wouldn’t want genuine farmers to be ‘hit’ and believe that it should be possible to pass on the rewards of generations of family farmers…there are, as I understand it, a group of posturing ‘farmers’ who are in fact nothing more than people who have recently acquired large amounts of land in an ultimate attempt to avoid inheritance tax. If they get ‘hit’ I couldn’t honestly care less.

[SithHappens]

I think the farmers and expenses/ gifts issues are 'mostly' figment of msm and chancers imagininations. Pensioners, I still think they got it wrong on WFA. I believe means testing it was right but the way it was done was wrong and more time (and notice) should have been afforded to the decision .

[Andy_Faber]

We invariably have much in common, MA, in terms of both political and sporting views.
I always respect your views, but do you really think he’s ‘hit’ pensioners and farmers or is that just the view of the anti Labour press?

As someone of an almost identical age to you I could easily make a case for being a poor hard done to pensioner where the winter fuel allowance is concerned, but it wouldn’t be true.
I’m comfortable, as opposed to well off, and we don’t actually need that 300GBP WFA. It’s something that I understand the country can’t currently afford in terms of a universal benefit for all those over 70. There are lots of folk in the same position as us and a great many who are much better off and I can’t for the life of me understand why millionaires should be entitled to the WFA just on the basis of being over seventy years of age. Like you, all in favour of decency, fairness and support for those who need it, but I can understand the logic of cancelling the WFA as a universal benefit especially IF by doing so those in genuine need are better supported.

As regards farmers. I’m not knowledgeable enough to pass genuinely informed comment, but while I wouldn’t want genuine farmers to be ‘hit’ and believe that it should be possible to pass on the rewards of generations of family farmers…there are, as I understand it, a group of posturing ‘farmers’ who are in fact nothing more than people who have recently acquired large amounts of land in an ultimate attempt to avoid inheritance tax. If they get ‘hit’ I couldn’t honestly care less.

Doesn?t sound very caring that youre happy with the genuinely needy OAPs and genuinely marginal farmers being collateral damage just because HMG can?t be bothered with implementing a nuanced approach. It wouldn?t have been difficult in either case.

[ramAnag]

Doesn?t sound very caring that youre happy with the genuinely needy OAPs and genuinely marginal farmers being collateral damage just because HMG can?t be bothered with implementing a nuanced approach. It wouldn?t have been difficult in either case.

I wouldn’t have been at all happy about genuinely needy OAPs being ‘collateral damage’, but I did think the Government made a point of ensuring that all those in genuine need were aware of their entitlements.

You’ll have to clarify what ‘genuinely marginally farmers’ actually means. I assume it doesn’t include the likes of Mr. Clarkson.

[swaledale]

Starmer has, thus far, hit the pensioners, the farmers, Shut down the one oil refinery in Scotland and moved its refining to an English refinery despite most of UK oil being "Scottish". Then there's all the expensegate crap that's been going on. He's upset more folk by temporarily postponing some of the local elections so proposed boundary changes can take place and the elections will happen between 6 and 12 months down the road. Doesn't really matter when they take place, he'll lose them.

2026 should see both shades of Tory ousted at the Holyrood elections. Hopefully the SNP will get more than 50% of the seats and can push for Indy via the UN as Wastemonster won't permit another referendum. This despite the NI Law on this permits one after 7 years there if the Secretary of State for NI decides to call one.

I have no idea what it is Starmer et al are trying to do but I do not believe it's going to work out positively for the general population. It wil, I fear, see Reform get in next time and that scares the living daylights out of me.

Meanwhile, here in Clogland, we have a 4 party right wing coalition, led by the ultra right PVV of Geert Wilders and they are not doing what they said they'd do in their manifesto. In fact they've done the opposite. Not increased the minimum wage. Not scrapped the excess on medical insurance bills. What they have done, which wasn't in the manifesto, is to give tax breaks to the rich, big business and the multinationals. A similar thing to what right wing Meloni is doing in Italy.

Have the right wing and the rich got a stranglehold on the rest of us or can we get back to common sense and doing what's best for the vast majority as opposed to the silver spoon brigade? The richest paying the most in taxes, be they companies or individuals. Looking after those who can't look after themselves.

To me, that was always the right way, the human way, the decent way. I have no truck with paying taxes to help those who can't help themselves. I abhor paying taxes to help those who won't help themselves. I also abhor tax evasion and tax avoidance and the using of loopholes to not have to pay taxes. IMO, that make me sensible rather than left/right/whatever.

Reform won't get in as a majority party, albeit they might win a few more seats, though given "our" Nige's preponderance for falling out with most people who work with him, its more than likely reform will have imploded before the next GE. Unless of course the Tories do a deal with them, which is not impossible.

We may well have a hung parliament which might not be so bad. As for Scots independence, the appetite for that is dwindling within Scotland, together with distaste for the shambles the SNP is making of government.

The NI referendum is based upon whats stated in the Good Friday agreement and that s not within 7 years.

INEOS and our Brexit loving Monaco based tax exile Ratcliffe shut down the Oil refinery not Labour and the oil is British not Scottish.

Mm not sure I necessarily concur that poor pensioners have been hit, the impact of removing the WFA, is much less than is made out, there are those on the margins who see an effect, but how much of a fuel bill does ?300 cover anyway?
Farmer frankly deserve what they get, tax payer have been subsidising them for years and as for the IHT, genuine family farms over ?3 million can avid a big hit by using trusts and inheritance planning, but in any case get 10 years to pay at 0% interest. Of bigger concern is what replaces the payments made before Brexit, but then many farmers voted for it.

[Andy_Faber]

I wouldn’t have been at all happy about genuinely needy OAPs being ‘collateral damage’, but I did think the Government made a point of ensuring that all those in genuine need were aware of their entitlements.

You’ll have to clarify what ‘genuinely marginally farmers’ actually means. I assume it doesn’t include the likes of Mr. Clarkson.

I think you let personality get in the way of your line of reasoning too much rA but, ignoring that, IMO people/entities who just jump onto the latest and most lucrative vehicle for tax manipulation without any passion for the industry in question deserve to have their financial wings clipped but purely IMO there are enough farmers BEING FARMERS in a capital intensive, low margin, high physical effort, high exposure to criminal exploitation, difficulty in retaining professionals to do the work etc profession, where the capital thresholds for taxation are all too easily met, to be given a break - of some sort, I don?t know what

[ramAnag]

I think you let personality get in the way of your line of reasoning too much rA

Not sure what the evidence for that suggestion is. If you’re referring to me mentioning Clarkson, he’s just a name that most people can put a face to who appears indicative of the issue that’s been raised.

[Andy_Faber]

Not sure what the evidence for that suggestion is. If you’re referring to me mentioning Clarkson, he’s just a name that most people can put a face to who appears indicative of the issue that’s been raised.

Just a perception. Clarkson is a divisive figure but he does to some extent ?get his wellies dirty?, my time in commercial property revealed him to be a League2 level operator, there really are folk outside the public eye who dwarf him in terms of both cash at hand and lack of interest in the industry (farming or whatever) other than a means of maximising income.

[ramAnag]

Just a perception. Clarkson is a divisive figure but he does to some extent ?get his wellies dirty?, my time in commercial property revealed him to be a League2 level operator, there really are folk outside the public eye who dwarf him in terms of both cash at hand and lack of interest in the industry (farming or whatever) other than a means of maximising income.

Sure you’re right, but my (only) point is, while I have sympathy for genuine farmers and would like to see them get a fair deal from both politicians and supermarkets etc…I have no sympathy for those you speak of who acquire land simply to maximise income.

Imo Labour hasn’t ‘hit’ farmers or pensioners but certainly needs to communicate better.

[Geoff Parkstone]

Sure you’re right, but my (only) point is, while I have sympathy for genuine farmers and would like to see them get a fair deal from both politicians and supermarkets etc…I have no sympathy for those you speak of who acquire land simply to maximise income.

Imo Labour hasn’t ‘hit’ farmers or pensioners but certainly needs to communicate better.

Extraordinary. How can you say they haven't hit farmers or pensioners? Next you'll be saying they haven't hit employers by increasing ERNI.

The question isn't one of "have they hit" so much as "is what they have done fair". For pensioners I find it hard to say it's unfair to effectively means test it. For genuine family farms I think it's short sighted and harsh. Short sighted in that it's a relatively minor quick cash grab that will likely get wasted on some vanity project or another, but one which could have adverse consequences on future food security.

[ramAnag]

Extraordinary. How can you say they haven't hit farmers or pensioners? Next you'll be saying they haven't hit employers by increasing ERNI.

The question isn't one of "have they hit" so much as "is what they have done fair". For pensioners I find it hard to say it's unfair to effectively means test it. For genuine family farms I think it's short sighted and harsh. Short sighted in that it's a relatively minor quick cash grab that will likely get wasted on some vanity project or another, but one which could have adverse consequences on future food security.

Sorry. I interpreted ‘hit’ as meaning ‘unfairly targeted’. I don’t think those two groups have been unfairly targeted and I think you agreed with my differentiation between genuine farmers and the alternatives we’ve mentioned some weeks ago, but I do bow to your greater knowledge of all things agricultural and accept that the Government have failed to explain things well enough.

[swaledale]

Extraordinary. How can you say they haven't hit farmers or pensioners? Next you'll be saying they haven't hit employers by increasing ERNI.

The question isn't one of "have they hit" so much as "is what they have done fair". For pensioners I find it hard to say it's unfair to effectively means test it. For genuine family farms I think it's short sighted and harsh. Short sighted in that it's a relatively minor quick cash grab that will likely get wasted on some vanity project or another, but one which could have adverse consequences on future food security.

Well they haven't really. They reversed the cut to employers NI which the Tory government made without being able to fund it. IMO they should ahve reversed the employee cut as well on the same grounds, but hey ho. Those businesses moaning about increased costs are correct, in as much the costs have returned to where they were 12 months ago. But its handy excuse for business to increase prices, despite the fact virtually none of them reduced prices after the NI cut!!

Not sure how you think the IHT on farms is going to hit food security, are you suggesting that if a farm goes out of business due to IHT that the land wont then be bought by another party and used to grow food? I mean if a business can't manage their tax affairs by succession planning then frankly do they deserve to be in business? Plus just how do these family farms manage to survive on the meagre profits they claim to make? Makes me wonder how they afford basics like food, new range rovers etc. etc. if they make so little money, perhaps they would be better off selling up?

[swaledale]

Another Brexit bonus, is that the Uk is now unable to acquire and develop enough treatments for cancer due to the appalling deal that the blonde twit negotiated. So now people are suffering and more than likely dying due to Brexit.

[SithHappens]

Another Brexit bonus, is that the Uk is now unable to acquire and develop enough treatments for cancer due to the appalling deal that the blonde twit negotiated. So now people are suffering and more than likely dying due to Brexit.

Can't be true as Farage stated that fears of drug shortages was 'utter tosh' and i believe everything he says.

[ramAnag]

It is generally accepted now that five or nine years on - whichever way you look at it - the disadvantages of Brexit far outweigh any perceived advantages but, at a time when Western Europe is said to be benefitting from a ‘golden age’ in terms of breakthroughs in cancer treatment it is shameful that the UK is being left behind in this way.

IMO this represents one of the greatest tragedies of Brexit and is something that those responsible should be being held accountable for.