The Sikhs I know drink like fishes tbf.
The issue is talking about it in a Sikh temple.The Sikhs I know drink like fishes tbf.
As far as I can tell, the only mainstream outlets covering Hammond's slip are the Mirror and the Canary (hardly mainstream). Bizarre. I guess Labour/Abbot makes for a better story, hated as she is.BBC: Plenty of stuff on Diane Abbott getting her numbers wrong but no headlines on Philip Hammond fecking up the numbers for the cost of HS2.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08q313b
2:10:05 is where the interview starts.
Ah, yeah, I'm not really up on the dos and don'ts of difference religions tbh, apart from being married to a hindu.The issue is talking about it in a Sikh temple.
As far as I can tell, the only mainstream outlets covering Hammond's slip are the Mirror and the Canary (hardly mainstream). Bizarre. I guess Labour/Abbot makes for a better story, hated as she is.
Wiki suggests the German rail subsidy is €17bn (as of 2014), the French €13.2bn (2013), and the UK €4bn. So yeah, does suggest that the "it costs nothing, just let the franchises expire" may not really be the whole story, if we're aiming at that level of service anyway.
True... but to reach a much better level of service would cost the Government a lot more whether train operators are under public ownership or not. It'll almost certainly cost them less under public ownership though than it currently would.
The Sikhs I know drink like fishes tbf.
Really hope he gets reshuffled the feck away from representing us abroad post election.
At that exact moment, he's saying "that could leave some with a loss of up to £23,000". I suppose he wasn't expecting people to screenshot it and remove his actual explanation.
It's a representation of the new tax bands Labour are proposing. You'll be pleased to know he made it clearer for the news at ten, for people that can only get their news via screengrabs of pieces on twitter."...just not the people we've said it is on the screen I'm standing in front of, entirely as a visual representation of the thing I'm explaining."
It's a representation yes, a completely wrong one.It's a representation of the new tax bands Labour are proposing. You'll be pleased to know he made it clearer for the news at ten, for people that can only get their news via screengrabs of pieces on twitter.
It's a representation yes, a completely wrong one.
Or from the sort of places that have BBC News on mute. Say...train stations or airports, you know places very few people are at any point in time.
I'd love to know what the conspiracy theory is with this one, CM.Clutching at those conspiracy straws again dobs.
yeah but come on the Tories don't give a feck about that mate, that's why they seem to think that £7.50 an hour is a liveable living wage![]()
Really hope he gets reshuffled the feck away from representing us abroad post election.
So about 3.75% profit... I guess the follow up to that is do we think a private company might be 3.75% more efficient than a public entity? (Not even taking into account restructuring and reorganisation costs)The subsidy is a red herring. All that matters is how much money is taken out of the system in the form of profits. Last figure I could see was £300M total profits for all TOCs from just under £8bn total operating costs. That figure was 4 yrs ago though, may be different now.
But you've already said that in your opinion, "greedy companies are taking all the profits is not a serious argument" for taking train operations into public ownership? Which in itself is very odd since it is one of the main arguments for it... possibly the biggest.
From my point of view... to maintain the existing service would cost less under public ownership than the current system. For the exact reason you are keen to ignore... we pay billions in subsidies with a significant portion going towards dividends for shareholders. Now, if we want to really improve the current operations and service... we'd still have to put the sums of money in because under the current system, private operators won't invest without demanding reimbursement through subsidies. So do we pay even more in subsidies to fund it? Public sector borrowing is also less expensive than private...
Not really. In long-distance travel the public company SBB has a monopoly. The other companies almost exclusively work in near-distance travel. It's not only a monopoly on rail either, it's a monopoly on long-distance travel per se. There is no competition from the bus. The idea behind the monopoly is that the govt. thinks train is better than bus altogether (various reasons) and it a.) drives up numbers (which is important as you have stated in your previous post) and b.) allows them to subsidize the weaker regions with the stronger ones internally (something that is regulated in their concession). The govt. is thinking about maybe giving one or two of these main routes to a competitor to fire up their asses but nothing decided yet.
What you touch on the last paragraph though is imo the gist of all three of the public services mail/energy/transportation.
There is another debate to be had about the infrastructure in energy (who is going to pay for nuclear waste 10 years down the line?) and rail (too expensive service if infrastructure costs are included in tickets.
No complaints there.Some leaked details from the Tory manifesto, which will be unveiled on Thursday:
- Tax-free personal allowance to continue its planned increase to £12,500
- Similarly, the 40p threshold will rise to £50,000
Ugh. Ugh ugh ugh.
No complaints there.
Since people love talking about costing, wonder what impact this has, particularly the latter.
I have been to some Sikh weddings where alcohol was being served pretty much just outside the Gurudwara.The issue is talking about it in a Sikh temple.
I also don't get why they wouldn't take them out. It's popular even among Tories, and would make the numbers look lower straight away.I know Britain is in an utterly self-destructive cycle, but promising to devastate higher education by cutting international student numbers is just another example of how thick we have become.
Don't worry - on a day that this happened, Amber Rudd says the average police officer's wage is £40k to much jeering and Boris' found time for yet another gaffe none of them have been deemed as newsworthy as Diane Abbott was by the Beeb or ITV News.
Some leaked details from the Tory manifesto, which will be unveiled on Thursday:
- The universal winter payment for pensioners is to now be means-tested, with an estimated saving of 1.7bn
- 1bn in additional investment for Education, paid for by the means-testing of school meal provision
- Tax-free personal allowance to continue its planned increase to £12,500
- Similarly, the 40p threshold will rise to £50,000
- Doubling of the Immigration Skills Charge from £1,000-2,000
Dont fancy mentioning the changes to social care?
The second part of the funding plan is to charge pensioners with assets of more than £100,000 for domiciliary care. For the first time, the value of pensioners’ homes will be taken into account when they are means-tested for care visits, meaning far more people will have to pay towards the cost.
Presumably the Immigrant Skills Charge will go from non-EU to non-UK as of 2019. I'm guessing that the idea is to make resident workers more appealing to employers (or their training). This is the first i've heard about the scheme mind you.
The NHS stuff is one of those stories where the headlines are normally out of proportion with the impact.