Jump to content

The Official ‘Hi-Risk Anus PM’ Clusterfuck Thread


Granny Danger

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Billy Jean King said:

So David Cameron was Cameron, Teresa May was May, Liz Truss was Truss yet Johnson and Sunak are Boris and Rishi. WT actual F is the score there ?

That's like saying why do people say FDR, JFK, LBJ but not RMN.

It just comes down to what's easier or more fun to say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Not all deprived areas are urban.

But that's where ALL the funding was going.

He was talking about rectifying that.

Interesting. Presumably the wealth in the better off areas of the country didn't trickle down to their poorer immediate geographical neighbours... 

Who'd have thought it? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Theroadlesstravelled said:

The only good thing about this is yer Alf Garnett, Brexit Tory voters will be absolutely raging over this.

I know it's the equivalent of going on Follow Follow for a 2-minute hate, but the tears and snotters on Guido Fawkes comments are pretty funny. Through the looking glass stuff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Man becomes UK prime minister because no other c*** wants the job"

What a country.

 

Eta: could have put Hindu or non-white man at the front there just as the BBC is focussing on, but I'm no longer living in the 20th Century.

Edited by Hedgecutter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, picklish said:

I know it's the equivalent of going on Follow Follow for a 2-minute hate, but the tears and snotters on Guido Fawkes comments are pretty funny. Through the looking glass stuff

I always thought the idea of a 2 minute hate was good, it would be very cathartic.

Sunak could be Wee Brother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

The article’s accurate. You can’t pick and choose non dom status. Non dom status lets you pick and choose how you’re taxed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get a these news programmes interviewing any fucker as if we have just elected a new government.

That little cùnt was Chancellor until the 5th off July, the only change being that in the 101 days break that he has had some other clownshoes has made an even bigger mess than he did.

Happy fucking days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Billy Jean King said:

So David Cameron was Cameron, Teresa May was May, Liz Truss was Truss yet Johnson and Sunak are Boris and Rishi. WT actual F is the score there ?

Walter Smith was always called Walter as opposed to Smith. I think it’s when people have unusual, or should I say, less common first names, they refer to them as that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, eindhovendee said:

I don't get a these news programmes interviewing any fucker as if we have just elected a new government.

That little cùnt was Chancellor until the 5th off July, the only change being that in the 101 days break that he has had some other clownshoes has made an even bigger mess than he did.

Happy fucking days.

Have to give the new man a jolly good lift, what? It’s only more starkly shameless than usual because it was - what? - less than two months ago that they were selling us a new dawn following the “election” of Lizbuff.

We’re supposed to forget that this is not a new crew - it’s a little cabin boy snatching up Captain Smith’s hat after the bridge has gone under, and ordering the surviving officers to rearrange the deckchairs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/oct/24/gagging-for-rish-its-a-second-coming-for-sunak-the-silent-messiah

"Not even a parochial, controlled election of the Conservative gerontocratic membership. That hadn’t worked out so well the last time they had tried it. No, now was the time to reduce the electorate from 180,000 down to 357 MPs. That was the way to govern the UK. Men and women who could be trusted to put the interests of themselves and their party ahead of those of the country. A higher calling than simple patriotism."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, oaksoft said:

And if Labour were in power I'm afraid they'd have to do the same thing. If we get independence up here the SNP will have to do the same.

We have already seen in the last couple of weeks what happens to things like mortgage rates when you ignore the market.

Our entire way of life is based on the financial industry. Pensions, mortgages, inflation, jobs, the lot are more dependent on market forces than on Prime Ministers (leaving idiots like Truss aside). And then there's energy prices.

Virtually All the power lies with the market, not government. Of course we could elect someone to change that but as we've seen with the series of strikes, the UK population simply won't tolerate the slightest bit of disruption to their lifestyles. So we're left with where we are I'm afraid.

Except that austerity between 2011-17 cost the UK £100 billion and saw growth fall from 3.1% (following the QE by the Bank of England to shore up the banks in 2008) to an average of 0.3% austerity period. The rise in people using food banks during austerity doubled. It led to 1 in 4 children in the UK being classed as living in poverty. So the Bank of England printing more money as it had to do to maintain the financial system, doesn't necessarily cut growth. 

Once deep cuts are made to the public sector, as they will be under Sunak, and as they are proposed in the SNP's (current) Independence plan, it takes years to recover..

Meanwhile high inflation as we have at present, acts in itself to reduce govt debt, as they are significantly increasing their tax take, from both VAT and income. 

An alternative to austerity to reduce national debt is a tax on capital, essentially bank deposits. If there was a will to do so, there could be say 0% of tax on deposits up to £100,000, and then incremental increases of eg 1% on deposits between £100,000-500,000,  2% on $500,000 to a million. 3 or 4% on £1-2 million etc. Of course those with high levels of deposits could choose to shift their money around, and yes it would need to be well regulated, but it would eliminate the need for austerity.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...