Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

[Destination]

just look at their record and what they have sold off already. Do you honestly think they are suddenly going to change and stop selling off public assets?

No I don't.
You can't name anything though, can you?
You've deflected several times already. Go on have a go.

 

[Destination]

That's just retarded and you know it. The tory's very rarely announce what they sell and when they do its a few weeks before (royal mail for example). A lot of the nhs contracts that have been sold off have been behind closed doors with the media only reporting on it after it has happened.
So it is very hard to factfully say what they will sell off, but no doubt they will definetely sell it off. I've now admitted that, now do you admit that with their track record of selling, that it is very likely they will continue with it
edit:
http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1518..._beauty_spot_Seven_Sisters_could_be_sold_off/
conservative council plan to sell off beauty spots, which reminds me of the conservatives selling off natural beauty spots for fracking

Glad you finally found something, that might eventually be sold off, in a small region online newspaper.
Good source, well researched.
Makes that big poster of drivel you linked all the more pertinent and authoritative.

 

[Destination]

You can't trust any politician.
Corbyn can't even be trusted to keep the same shadow cabinet for 8 weeks, let alone an actual cabinet, or actual governing.

 

[Destination]

May gave Boris Foreign Secretary.

Perfect position for him, the **** away from us.

 

[Destination]

This poll has done over 140k of people and Corbyn is winning by a lot

http://www.itv.com/thismorning/hot-topics/poll-who-do-you-want-to-be-the-next-prime-minister?

ITv so Jeremy Kyle non-voting audience?

 

[Destination]

it's from the viewers of that 'this morning' or whatever show it's called which has a big viewing audience from many different backgrounds throughout the country which is good for a poll. It's been shared on social media quite a lot which adds to the diversity even more.

Not a great many people will full time employment though, cuts a fair bit of your 'diversity'.
I find great solace in you utilizing a single poll that has results so radically insane compared to anything else.
70% Corbyn, great, hope he achieves that, that would be a very interesting mandate for the country.

 

[Destination]

Urgh no it wouldn't. I for one will not be voting for a terrorist sympathisor and apologist.

Think of the mandate. with 70% of the vote, labour would have 90% of the English seats, and in having so, they would then have absolutely no idea if they are pro- or contra brexit, no idea what they want internationally, no idea what they want for foreign affairs, all they would know is they all want rid of the man at the top.
All they would be sure of is they want to tax people at the top, more, because 'reasons'.
It would be utter hilarity, and Len McCluskey could run the country. Gabbatek would be in heaven

 

[Destination]

Open polls are easily skewed. You can literally open new incognito/private browser sessions and keep voting.

Time to push Corby to 90%

 

[Destination]

It will be the labour leadership vote all over again!

Come on we're in it together, let's get him up to 90%, then quote the poll EVERYWHERE!
Big community, big skewed result, lets go.

 

[Destination]

Energy is balls anyway, because they are all providing the same thing. It's not even like it's similar, it's literally the same thing from the same places delivered by the same infrastructure. There should be no competition because there is basically nothing to compete over. It's utter nonsense.

Quite, and use of 'units' of electricity, should be defined by the production rate. Madness that anyone can setup a company anywhere and randomly assign a value to their sell on price, then try to baffle people with so many different tariffs they don't know which to choose.

 

[Destination]

I'm surprised Ofcom isn't the one providing the definitions and keeping them in line. Are all our regulators toothless pansies, or just energy?

That would be Ofgem.
Ofcom are the ones that allow them to charge us £21 a month line rental for phones we don't need, and have no desire to use, yet couple BS broadband with other packages.
It is only now they've forced them all into advertising rates which include their BS line rental charge as part of the package.

-edit ninjaed!

 

[Destination]

indeed - could just have a federal system... in fact I'd quite like to see England broken down into a few different regions - why should the South East have to fund/subsidise the rest?

Agree you could refer to the capital as district one. Give the other regions various numbers.....
Maybe organise some annual event involving people from each district.

 

[Destination]

^^great post Alan.
Also v true with regards the French healthcare system.
I don't understand how they can be so much better in what they do, at virtually all levels, yet have a similar funding structure.
They are not spending massive amounts more than we do.

 

[Destination]

An extra 10% per person will make a massive difference for the NHS.

Aye I see your point 4k per person in UK versus 4.4K per person in France, yet in France 20% of the funding is from mutual schemes or pvt schemes, in the Uk our figure isn't anywhere near as much as that.
So the difference is made by additional expenditure, but not by the state.
Even at that 10% increased funding won't slash Norn iron waiting lists to see consultants from 56 weeks down to a reasonable figure.
They must do things differently, or more efficiently.

 

[Destination]

That is rather incredible.

I think she had forgotten midsentence where she is, then rather than say where she might be, and get it wrong and be lambasted later, she's used random fits anything phrase, and has been caught out by that instead.
Tiss very amusing.

 

[Destination]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-39736310?SThisFB
Wow conservatives just sneaked through more university fees. They're so awesome

Nothing new about this, the interest rate rise and the fee rise has been known for some time.
Personally I think the rate of interest on the loans is utterly insane, and shows the issues with the underlying repayment values, and 30 year write off for the loans.
Its a dirty black hole they are trying to fill in with stupid rates.
The fees might be appropriate, I don't know, but the manner of collection and repayment and rates is insane.
Over the repayment course of 30 years, a three year course fees will generate a debt of 175K if no repayments are made, tuition only, not maintenance.
System was flawed before they even brought it in.

 

[Destination]

Is income tax a debt too?

The system is currently setup to automatically instigate a loan for tuition fees.
The loan only becomes payable, through tax contributions or PAYE after you earn a set amount.
Stacks of these loans are projected to never be paid off, thus the interest rate appears to now be set as a level to compensate.
This is bad business. generation of another tax disaster for later on is not a good thing.

Loans used to be base plus a bit, and repaid at lower values.
This is more acceptable as there is at least a chance everyone will pay some of the value of their education back.

If you can't pay your tax and contact HMRC, they'll do an installments loan system for you. The rate isn't over 6%.

 

[Destination]

I disagree, if you choose a good course and university, then the loan term could be set much shorter, and repaid at a lower rate of initial earnings, and couple it with a lower interest rate.
The utter twaddle of a process we have now is due to the perceived massive amount of under or non-payment expected by the end of a thirty year rolling block.
Deal with the problem, not overcharge those who aim to succeed.

 

[Destination]

Someone paste in the great chaos 40k pictures I had from the other thread.
On ipad pasting is awful.
Coalition of chaos sounds great, khorne all the way, blood for the blood God!

 

[Destination]

That sort of tax was tried in Sweden. It completely destroyed their stock exchange's futures trading.

I wonder at this.
Does it mean most of the transactions are based on microchanges? Small flucuations, and massive amounts being shifted up and down regularly?
I can't see what else a 0.003 tax would bring upon things otherwise. If trading was cut 85% who was doing such trading, and what type was left doing the remaining trading?

I just ponder is such a market actually beneficial to the nation at all?