The UK Politics & Brexit Thread

[markjay]

I wonder, at what point does a self-employed builder or plumber or other type of tradesman stop being 'working people'? When they employ an apprentice? When they become VAT-registered? When they incorporate themselves as a Limited company?

And, are taxi drivers 'working people'? Some of London's cabbies lead a very comfortable life. What about people who earn well because they have two jobs? Etc.

 

[DSM10000]

, at what point does a self-employed builder or plumber or other type of tradesman stop being 'working people'? When they employ an apprentice? When they become VAT-registered? When they incorporate themselves as a Limited company?

And, are taxi drivers 'working people'? Some of London's cabbies lead a very comfortable life. Etc.

Or, if you own a factory making tools?

 

[poormansporsche]

I wonder, at what point does a self-employed builder or plumber or other type of tradesman stop being 'working people'? When they employ an apprentice? When they become VAT-registered? When they incorporate themselves as a Limited company?

And, are taxi drivers 'working people'? Some of London's cabbies lead a very comfortable life. What about people who earn well because they have two jobs? Etc.

Or people like me who earn £1 per hour more than minimum wage plus £3 more than minimum wage for overtime but work 60 hours a week so the Wife doesn't have to. This puts me in the higher rich bugger tax bracket, obvs not a working man anymore

 

[mattc]

Edit - bobbins from me

 

[MrGreedy]

All this working man and gifts jabber is doing a great job at distracting from 2tK and the total failure in regard to...

pick you list

 

[m80]

Sir Starmer is clearly not a working man,
and so I guess neither are any MP's.

Lazy money fleecing baztards.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

True, but I don't this it's a Left vs Right issue.

Trump is (almost) universally disliked in Europe, because of his personality, and not because he's the leader of the Republican party.

In fact, he is also disliked by half of the American voters........ more than half, probably, if you take into account those Republican voters who do not want him as president and have no choice but to vote for him because the alternative is having a Democrat as their president.

Love him or loath him, you have to admit that Trump is Marmite.

Marmite for sure, but still the Presidential candidate to get the highest ever vote in any US presidential election, bar just one - a chap called Joe Biden in 2020. Yes, Trump got more votes than all our traditional heroes: Obama, Clinton, Bush, JFK etcetera etcetera…

And your criticism of him as being unpopular with the majority is even more true of the dull Kamala. It’s the nature of politics that the party elects a leader and the electorate has to like it or lump it. (See also Starmer, Bad Enoch etc etc)

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

“Data from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) reveals that in the first quarter of the year, 42% of new mortgage lending extended beyond the state pension age of 67.”

And we have a Prime Minister that wants to discourage investment and saving?

Let’s hope that the Doctors, and Lawyers manage to kick them back into line with their threats of early retirement and part time working if these taxes are brought in.

“Still, we got what we voted for.” Labour instead of the Conservatives.

 

[flying haggis]

 

[John N]

Are the Train Drivers on £70,000 per annum classed as Working Men/Women?

If so, the Unions will be "Up in Arms" when their Member start to get hammered for Extra Tax!

Or will they be classed as "Exempt" From Tax Rises as it appears that Public Sector Workers are set to be?

 

[190]

The definition of working people seems to be changing on a daily basis. This morning we a had a labour spokesmen telling the BBC it included anyone who goes to work as opposed to those that don't go to work and derive their income from investments. That's a huge change from what Starmer said yesterday. At this rate we might all be working people by Wednesday.

For once the Guardian seems to have hit the spot with this headline that sums up the state of play:

Working people definition is work in progress for No10

​

 

[Harrythedog]

The definition of working people seems to be changing on a daily basis. This morning we a had a labour spokesmen telling the BBC it included anyone who goes to work as opposed to those that don't go to work and derive their income from investments. That's a huge change from what Starmer said yesterday. At this rate we might all be working people by Wednesday.

For once the Guardian seems to have hit the spot with this headline that sums up the state of play:

Working people definition is work in progress for No10

​

Are those two types described going to be treat differently is a question that’s never asked

 

[ToeKnee]

I think I'll get a second job and risk paying extra! I'm going to start selling t-shirts with the slogan "I didn't vote Labour!" I should make a killing cos who's going to admit they did in the next week or two after the budget?? (Yes, I know there's one on here who'll excuse labour for anything.......)

 

[Dryce]

The definition of working people seems to be changing on a daily basis.

The turning and twisting on this show what utter idiots they actually are.

Unnecessary semantics are more important to them than actual governance.

 

[MSG2004]

Working people definition is work in progress for No10

As I've said before on this thread, this bunch of incompetent clowns with a shared brain cell that is still telling them that they are
in opposition. Therefore, when they, rant, and bleat about this, that and the other, they assume they will get away with it like they
had done in the 14 years of opposition and without consequences.

In my view there will be a lot of nasty news for those who scrimped and saved to avoid the benefits system. We've already had the destruction of the winter fuel payments which did not include any research into the impact and ignored what there was about the negative impact. The bleating in the press, some of it is a distraction and its often a ply used by all weak governments to to deliver the scenario of when the bad news arrives, "oh, it is not as bad as we thought it was going to be."

They remove the winter fuel payments without a single thought for the millions that will be impacted and any of whom are
just about managing. Yes, being millionaires and/or having salaries well in excess of 100k and a free rental and cars to hand,
they did not see anything wrong in accepting gifts of clothing from others .

 

[JHS]

How Wikipedia’s Pro-Hamas Editors Hijacked the Israel-Palestine Narrative

a powerful group of editors is hijacking Wikipedia, pushing pro-Palestinian propaganda, erasing key facts about Hamas,

www.piratewires.com

"...a powerful group of editors is hijacking wikipedia, pushing pro-palestinian propaganda, erasing key facts about hamas, and reshaping the narrative around israel with alarming influence"

This can explain why so many people are misinformed about the conflict.

Only if you believe that the article is factual.

 

[markjay]

Only if you believe that the article is factual.

Of course. It's worth reading and then making your own judgement, rather than just accepting the headline and moving on.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

The turning and twisting on this show what utter idiots they actually are.

Unnecessary semantics are more important to them than actual governance.

He’s a Human Rights lawyer.

It’s all about bluffing through an excuse.

 

[st13phil]

The turning and twisting on this show what utter idiots they actually are.

Unnecessary semantics are more important to them than actual governance.

Exactly. This is (another) hole of their own naïve making, and - as with the "gifts" fiasco - they've forgotten Dennis Healey's first rule of politics: once you realise you're in a hole, stop digging.

Furthermore, they will keep creating and falling into these holes because they're focussed on ideology and virtue-signalling sound bites instead of the hard yards of proper governance.

 

[John N]

The definition of working people seems to be changing on a daily basis. This morning we a had a labour spokesmen telling the BBC it included anyone who goes to work as opposed to those that don't go to work and derive their income from investments. That's a huge change from what Starmer said yesterday. At this rate we might all be working people by Wednesday.

For once the Guardian seems to have hit the spot with this headline that sums up the state of play:

Working people definition is work in progress for No10

​

The statement: "those that don't go to work and derive their income from investments" Encompasses all Retired Folk that either Paid Extra into the State Pension, or had the stupid Gumption to save into a Private Pension, the Private Pension was an Investment and I for one am now using it as Income!

Put me down for the Revolution Draft!