Monday 19th February 2018

A home from home
Forum rules
Welcome to FTN. New posters are welcome to join the conversation. You can follow us on Twitter @FlythenestHaven You are responsible for the content you post. This is a public forum. Treat it as if you are speaking in a crowded room. Site admin and Moderators are volunteers who will respond as quickly as they are able to when made aware of any complaints. Please do not post copyrighted material without the original authors permission.
User avatar
refitman
Site Admin
Posts: 7691
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:22 pm
Location: Wombwell, United Kingdom

Monday 19th February 2018

Post by refitman »

Morning all.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

I suggest an immediate ban for a designated period for knowingly and with intent posting links others cannot see.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

The morality of a dickhead.
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

Excellent on cutting/eliminating student fees

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/busi ... -j5mchbwgx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A sop to the rich, a natural Tory policy, that Labour can no longer oppose because they put it forward first.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

The murky world of student loans, the national debt and a fiscal illusion
paul johnson



Today we are promised (yet another) review of university tuition fees. Yesterday the Treasury select committee launched its own report on student loans. As a cross-party committee, it shies away from the high politics, but it still makes important recommendations, including reducing the interest rates charged on loans and looking again at the funding of part-time degrees after a collapse in the number of part-time students.

The most interesting part of the report, though, explores the weird and wonderful world of government accounting for student loans. Believe me, this really is fascinating and important stuff. In fact, it is genuinely bizarre. And it may well explain more of current policy than is sensible. So please bear with me.

The first thing you need to understand . . . no, understand isn’t the right word, there is not enough logic here to allow understanding . . . the first thing you need to know is that when the government spends about £14 billion this year on loans to students, government debt rises by £14 billion but government borrowing does not. That £14 billion does not count against the deficit. That’s because the national accounts treat student loans as financial transactions. A loan is issued. It is due to be paid back in the future. There is no impact on the deficit unless and until the borrower fails to pay back.

But wait a minute. The student loan system is not devised even on the basis that all these loans will be paid back. The whole point of the system is that if you don’t earn very much, you won’t pay back very much. It is designed that way for a reason: it helps to ensure that people are not put off attending university. They don’t bear the risk of having to make large repayments from small amounts of earnings. Perhaps 80 per cent of graduates will not repay in full, given existing rules. Jo Johnson, minister for higher education until the recent reshuffle, thinks that under present rules between 40 per cent and 45 per cent of the value of loans will not be repaid.

This is, in fact, reflected in the Department for Education’s own accounts, which are likely this year to write off more than £6 billion of the loans that it makes to students. It is, nevertheless, not reflected at all in government borrowing figures.


In principle, this would all wash out in 30 years’ time when the unpaid loans are finally written off. That is when, formally, any unpaid student debt would be added to the government deficit. Of course, few governments care much about deficits 30 years hence. As the Treasury select committee says, “policy decisions taken today will have no impact on the public finances for the next 30 years . . . £6 billion to £7 billion of annual write-offs are missing from the deficit”.

Yet that’s just the beginning of the story. Things get quite a lot stranger and murkier than that. The government is not actually holding on to the loans; it is selling them. Private investors pay the government for the right to receive the loan repayments. If, perhaps because graduates end up earning more than expected, repayments are higher than expected, then those purchasing the loan book will do well; conversely if graduates have a bad 30 years. Note that this is a purely financial transaction. The repayments are still made through Revenue and Customs in exactly the same way. There is no additional debt collection going on. There is no pretence of gaining any private sector expertise here.

There are two curious aspects to this financial transaction.

First, when this happens, any impact on the deficit simply disappears altogether. The process of selling off student loans, before they are written off, means that the losses are never recognised in the deficit. Magic or what?

Second, this happens despite the fact that the loan book is sold off at way below its value, as recognised in the Department for Education’s accounts. When the first tranche of the present loan book was sold off, at the end of last year, it was sold at a discount of 50 per cent on its face value. An asset valued at £3.5 billion on the Department for Education’s books was sold for £1.7 billion. The main reason for this difference is that government uses a very low discount rate in valuing future repayments, in large part because it can borrow so cheaply. The private sector applies a higher discount rate. But that is just another way of saying that this asset is worth more to the government than it is to the private sector.

So why sell at all? The explanation may well lie with our old friend the national accounting rules. Selling the loans, even for less than they are worth, reduces the national debt as measured in the accounts. That’s because while the value of the loan book is not netted off against the national debt, any cash for which it is sold is netted off. Not surprisingly, both the International Monetary Fund and the Office for Budget Responsibility have described this sort of thing as a fiscal illusion.

In one sense this is all just a bunch of numbers. Who cares what the accounts say? The problem is that this bunch of numbers, rather than underlying economic considerations, can drive policy decisions. We’ve been here before. Both the Private Finance Initiative and the structuring of Network Rail were to a large degree driven by accounting rules. It may be pure happenstance that current policy on student loans minimises their impact on recorded borrowing. Maybe this has had nothing to do with decisions to turn maintenance grants and nurse bursaries into loans. But who could be blamed for wondering whether the accounting rules tail is wagging the policy dog?


"Thirty seconds of my superior valuable time."
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

Actually easier and less time consuming.not to be an arse.
PorFavor
Prime Minister
Posts: 15167
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:18 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by PorFavor »

Good morfternoon.
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

Very interesting

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reflects this place, and Another of Which We Must Not Speak.
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by Willow904 »

https://amp.theguardian.com/money/2018/ ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Time running out for homeowners set to lose mortgage income support in April
Concern for vulnerable grows as those on lifeline benefit face ‘second mortgage’
As with so many policies since 2010 - remember the chaos of poorly advertised changes to car tax - part of the issue is the lack of proper communication of this policy change. It's a very complex financial arrangement which will require people to access independent financial advice in order to properly understand how it could affect them, yet many still don't appear to know the change is happening (despite HindleA's valiant efforts to highlight it).
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
PaulfromYorkshire
Site Admin
Posts: 8329
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:27 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by PaulfromYorkshire »

SpinningHugo wrote:Very interesting

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reflects this place, and Another of Which We Must Not Speak.
I for one very rarely block anyone.

In fact I recently went back and unblocked the few Twitter accounts I had blocked. A couple I vaguely remember feeling stalked by. That isn't pleasant, whenever you post anything, the person jumps on it. The others were probably because they had shared some unpleasant content. I can't even remember.

Anyway, none of that blocking was politically motivated, it was to do with behaviours.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

Unlike the proven hypocritical discriminator,I go by evidence.As closed mind as you can get.
howsillyofme1
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3374
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by howsillyofme1 »

SpinningHugo wrote:Very interesting

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reflects this place, and Another of Which We Must Not Speak.

I never block you I just think you post shit and should be called out on it

Oh, and the reason you are not welcome over at the other forum is because we all think you are a lying troll and think you pollute good debate. You have been kicked off many other places too so it is not just there you are not welcome

People on here are slightly more tolerant

Oh and Good Morning to the rest of the posters on here
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

V good on housing

https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2018 ... k.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th Februay 2018

Post by HindleA »

As with the related social care charging musings,the message is quite clear you really should be in "more appropriate" housing even if it doesn't exist,adapted home,dialysis room,can't move,decades of contributions,tough titties,you are being unfair to hard working families mysteriously exempt from the work harder thing,unlike the not expected to.
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Very interesting

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reflects this place, and Another of Which We Must Not Speak.
I for one very rarely block anyone.

In fact I recently went back and unblocked the few Twitter accounts I had blocked. A couple I vaguely remember feeling stalked by. That isn't pleasant, whenever you post anything, the person jumps on it. The others were probably because they had shared some unpleasant content. I can't even remember.

Anyway, none of that blocking was politically motivated, it was to do with behaviours.
I block HindleA but only to make the board readable, not because of any particular views.

On twitter I do try to follow people I disagree with,and it does occasionally annoy me.

Living in an echo chamber is terrible do independent thought.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

28,116
howsillyofme1
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3374
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by howsillyofme1 »

SpinningHugo wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
SpinningHugo wrote:Very interesting

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reflects this place, and Another of Which We Must Not Speak.
I for one very rarely block anyone.

In fact I recently went back and unblocked the few Twitter accounts I had blocked. A couple I vaguely remember feeling stalked by. That isn't pleasant, whenever you post anything, the person jumps on it. The others were probably because they had shared some unpleasant content. I can't even remember.

Anyway, none of that blocking was politically motivated, it was to do with behaviours.
I block HindleA but only to make the board readable, not because of any particular views.

On twitter I do try to follow people I disagree with,and it does occasionally annoy me.

Living in an echo chamber is terrible do independent thought.
Nothing to do with this 'echo chamber' nonsense - we just think you are a liar and don't want you about to be honest

You add nothing to the debate and ignore most of what other people write anyway and then insult them with a sneer and snide comment

Anyway now you know why, so stop all this 'echo chamber' crap - the people who run other boards just don't want you there (and the other trolls we have seen on here over the years)....just be thankful for what you have access to
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

"I purposefully post links in full knowledge some cannot access to make the forum more readable"
gilsey
Prime Minister
Posts: 6174
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 10:51 am

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by gilsey »

SpinningHugo wrote:Very interesting

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reflects this place, and Another of Which We Must Not Speak.
In general, left-wingers are more principled than right-wingers, who'd have thought it.

How does it reflect this place when you're still posting here?
One world, like it or not - John Martyn
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

Day 1 tropical fish sitting.Mary reading Satre,Mungo and Midge vociferously debating Brexit in obvious disagreement.
gilsey
Prime Minister
Posts: 6174
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 10:51 am

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by gilsey »

HindleA wrote:The murky world of student loans, the national debt and a fiscal illusion
paul johnson
We had a discussion here a couple of months ago didn't we, very much along those lines. Create an income stream so they can flog it off, there's no other explanation for the 6% interest rate.
One world, like it or not - John Martyn
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

It was my "blocker's" link for those that cannot access.Amazingly coincidentally positioned.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2018/02/child ... ning-dots/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Children Act and Housing – (not) joining the dots.
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by Willow904 »

From the article I linked above:
“Over time, someone’s house is likely to increase in value, so it’s reasonable that anyone who has received financial help towards their mortgage should be asked to pay that back if there is available equity when the property is sold.”
Just struck me how there are similarities with the so-called "dementia tax". Treating someone's home as an asset is just wrong, because while they live in it that asset can't be realised because they need it to put a roof over their head. It's not an asset until they don't need it and until it's sold there is no way of knowing for certain what that asset will be worth. After years of receiving help with mortgage interest, the house could be sold for less than was paid for it, because house prices can also go down. If the government are really that worried that people are getting free unearned dosh out of house price growth they could lower the inheritance tax threshold and look at making changes to capital gains tax. I think what they're really worried about is that while a low paid person is being helped to stay in their home it's stopping a property speculator from cashing in on that free unearned dosh from house price inflation instead. Getting people to give up and sell their properties, burn through the cash and become dependent on housing benefit is probably the aim of the policy rather than an unfortunate side effect.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
PorFavor
Prime Minister
Posts: 15167
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:18 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by PorFavor »

SpinningHugo talking a load of blocks - as is almost always the case.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

It was minimal,average is about £30 p.w.ours was less.Far more the message and the total ignoring of cost saving otherwise,sensible accounting for circumstances in often a shortened life presented as selfish/unfair,to me.The removal of the ability to also work is bat shit crazy a sort of creating what supposedly is the case now to justify.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

Boost extra costs allowances via housing supplement or via health/NHS ?Knee jerk to benefits regardless highly pernicious.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

Of course in effect extra costs allowances having to being used for housing costs,totally counter for purpose.
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

All Governments play the "double accounting" for need card,whether stated or not.
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by Willow904 »

Not much is being made in the media of the fact that the overly expensive student loans system that needs a review was introduced by the Tories in 2012.

Significant is the very high interest rates since 2012. Originally interest on student loans was pegged at inflation, so the value of the loan wouldn't grow in real terms. Later it was the BofE base rate plus 1%, which would currently make it less than inflation, I believe, although that wouldn't always be the case. Either way, though, the current charge of 3%+RPI sounds like a pretty shitty deal and has never been properly justified by the government, given they are the original lenders and can access debt at well below that kind of rate.
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

Interestingly when change was first mooted originally,two years(as JSA always has been) then loan option it was enivisaged pensioner numbers would drop off,now looking at why the opposite to expected occurred.You could argue as to the wisdom of post pensioner mortgage continuation but I just think to apply,given small numbers and circumstances otherwise to apply to the sick/disabled/carers,at a time when we should be facillitating care/self care in own home viewing as a tad of housing cost support as chargeable,a bespoke death tax if you will doesn't make sense.
User avatar
AngryAsWell
Prime Minister
Posts: 5852
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by AngryAsWell »

Who knew the GFA was failing ?

The GFA is not failing!

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Andrew Adonis‏Verified account
@Andrew_Adonis
Following Following @Andrew_Adonis
More
BREXIT & IRELAND: Coordinated effort by Brexiters & DUP seems to be underway to end Good Friday Agreement. See statements by Arlene, Daniel Hannan & Owen Paterson (an ex NI Secretary!). This really is playing with fire.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

AngryAsWell wrote:Who knew the GFA was failing ?

The GFA is not failing!

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Andrew Adonis‏Verified account
@Andrew_Adonis
Following Following @Andrew_Adonis
More
BREXIT & IRELAND: Coordinated effort by Brexiters & DUP seems to be underway to end Good Friday Agreement. See statements by Arlene, Daniel Hannan & Owen Paterson (an ex NI Secretary!). This really is playing with fire.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
All to do with the Customs Union. If you want to keep the GFA then you have to stay in the Customs Union (and not just on a transition basis).

No doubt the current Labour Labour leadership will come out in full throated support of the GFA, and accept the inevitable consequence of permanently remaining in the Customs Union. [Owen Smith will of course, but he is Core Group Hostile.]
User avatar
AngryAsWell
Prime Minister
Posts: 5852
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by AngryAsWell »

Property Spotter‏
@PropertySpot
Property Spotter Retweeted Daniel Hannan
Hannan joins the ranks of the Brexiteers putting the Good Friday Agreement in doubt.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thread that quotes Hannon's despicable views in his Times article (possibly today - not sure when he wrote it)
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

Willow904 wrote:From the article I linked above:
“Over time, someone’s house is likely to increase in value, so it’s reasonable that anyone who has received financial help towards their mortgage should be asked to pay that back if there is available equity when the property is sold.”
Just struck me how there are similarities with the so-called "dementia tax". Treating someone's home as an asset is just wrong, because while they live in it that asset can't be realised because they need it to put a roof over their head. It's not an asset until they don't need it and until it's sold there is no way of knowing for certain what that asset will be worth. After years of receiving help with mortgage interest, the house could be sold for less than was paid for it, because house prices can also go down. If the government are really that worried that people are getting free unearned dosh out of house price growth they could lower the inheritance tax threshold and look at making changes to capital gains tax. I think what they're really worried about is that while a low paid person is being helped to stay in their home it's stopping a property speculator from cashing in on that free unearned dosh from house price inflation instead. Getting people to give up and sell their properties, burn through the cash and become dependent on housing benefit is probably the aim of the policy rather than an unfortunate side effect.
the government should take a charge over the homes (with interest0. It should take the same approach with an LVT.
User avatar
Willow904
Prime Minister
Posts: 7220
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by Willow904 »

A good news story, they do still exist (sometimes):

https://inews.co.uk/news/entertainer-to ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Entertainer toy stores have started hosting ‘quiet hours’ for autistic children
"Fall seven times, get up eight" - Japanese proverb
User avatar
adam
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3210
Joined: Wed 27 Aug, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by adam »

HindleA wrote:https://nearlylegal.co.uk/2018/02/child ... ning-dots/


Children Act and Housing – (not) joining the dots.
There was an interesting case in the early 90s about this - a couple with children presented as homeless and in priority need to the council and were rejected as intentionally homeless - they reapproached making a request under the terms of s17 of the Children Act requireing a LA to take steps to protect the interest of a child in need and were refused. They sought a judicial review that they lost and then an appeal to the Court of Appeal which they won, but the council appealed to the House of Lords and the CA opinion was reversed. Don't know about the case law since then, but this case said that the CA wasn't a route around other legislation.
I still believe in a town called Hope
User avatar
adam
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3210
Joined: Wed 27 Aug, 2014 9:15 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by adam »

Willow904 wrote:A good news story, they do still exist (sometimes):

https://inews.co.uk/news/entertainer-to ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Entertainer toy stores have started hosting ‘quiet hours’ for autistic children
It's run by a religious bloke who shuts all the stores on sundays and public holidays, regardless of the centres they tend to be in all being open - saying he wants his employees to enjoy time with their families.
I still believe in a town called Hope
HindleA
Prime Minister
Posts: 27400
Joined: Tue 26 Aug, 2014 12:40 am
Location: Three quarters way to hell

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by HindleA »

http://metro.co.uk/2018/02/18/disabled- ... witter-top" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
AnatolyKasparov
Prime Minister
Posts: 15626
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:26 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by AnatolyKasparov »

Its not about "echo chambers", it is about arguing in good faith (or otherwise, as the case may be)
"IS TONTY BLAIR BEHIND THIS???!!!!111???!!!"
gilsey
Prime Minister
Posts: 6174
Joined: Thu 28 Aug, 2014 10:51 am

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by gilsey »

Boundary review in doubt
The government is facing calls for an early Commons vote on plans to cut the number of MPs from 650 to 600. One is due in the autumn but a committee of MPs is warning it is unlikely to pass. If that happens, they say, it would be too late to carry out a fresh boundary review in time for the 2022 general election.
Good.
One world, like it or not - John Martyn
User avatar
AngryAsWell
Prime Minister
Posts: 5852
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 7:35 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by AngryAsWell »

Brexit: A Guide for the Perplexed

Medicines
Brexit: A Guide for the Perplexed, Series 3 Episode 1 of 5

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09rx3vw#play" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

AnatolyKasparov wrote:Its not about "echo chambers", it is about arguing in good faith (or otherwise, as the case may be)

Sorry, what is?
AnatolyKasparov
Prime Minister
Posts: 15626
Joined: Mon 25 Aug, 2014 9:26 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by AnatolyKasparov »

gilsey wrote:
Boundary review in doubt
The government is facing calls for an early Commons vote on plans to cut the number of MPs from 650 to 600. One is due in the autumn but a committee of MPs is warning it is unlikely to pass. If that happens, they say, it would be too late to carry out a fresh boundary review in time for the 2022 general election.
Good.
Still no guarantee the DUP will back them despite the NI proposals now being distinctly more favourable from their point of view.
"IS TONTY BLAIR BEHIND THIS???!!!!111???!!!"
howsillyofme1
First Secretary of State
Posts: 3374
Joined: Thu 18 Sep, 2014 11:34 am

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by howsillyofme1 »

SpinningHugo wrote:
AngryAsWell wrote:Who knew the GFA was failing ?

The GFA is not failing!

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Andrew Adonis‏Verified account
@Andrew_Adonis
Following Following @Andrew_Adonis
More
BREXIT & IRELAND: Coordinated effort by Brexiters & DUP seems to be underway to end Good Friday Agreement. See statements by Arlene, Daniel Hannan & Owen Paterson (an ex NI Secretary!). This really is playing with fire.

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
All to do with the Customs Union. If you want to keep the GFA then you have to stay in the Customs Union (and not just on a transition basis).

No doubt the current Labour Labour leadership will come out in full throated support of the GFA, and accept the inevitable consequence of permanently remaining in the Customs Union. [Owen Smith will of course, but he is Core Group Hostile.]
What is the mechanism for joing THE EU CUSTOM'S UNION?

Point me to the treaty giving an example how this is done for a 3rd country (and no Turkey isn't an example) - isn't a more correct way of looking at it in sayuing that we will intend to have be in a custom's union with the EU that allows the nmaintenance of the GFA (that includes 'the EU CU' as well but accepts that the actual institution may be different)

The transition period is all that an opposition party could reasonably propose at the moment to that level of detail - I mean one that is actually in with a chance of forming the UK Government - as they are not party to any of the negotiations with the EU.

You are also a proponent of the Labour Party committing to 'the Single Market' by which I assume sign up to EFTA and EEA (we will not go into any possible hurdles with that and just assume it can be done as easily as some indicate).

If that was done tomorrow then how would you respond to the question 'that would leave us subject to all the rules and regulations with no reasonable level of influence on the rules - how would you explain our future role as a vassal state to the electorate'?
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
gilsey wrote:
Boundary review in doubt
The government is facing calls for an early Commons vote on plans to cut the number of MPs from 650 to 600. One is due in the autumn but a committee of MPs is warning it is unlikely to pass. If that happens, they say, it would be too late to carry out a fresh boundary review in time for the 2022 general election.
Good.
Still no guarantee the DUP will back them despite the NI proposals now being distinctly more favourable from their point of view.

Still not radical enough. We have far far too many MPs. The only argument in favour of their bloated number is the payroll vote. So we need to cut the payroll and cut the number of MPs (both would be a good thing). The cabinet (and its shadow) are far too big with too many non-roles created for political purposes (hello Liam Fox and Barry Gardiner). We'll have fewer disasters like O'Mara and Morris if we had around 500 MPs (as an absolute maximum, my preference would be for around 350).

It goes almost without saying that we similarly need to cut the ridiculous number of members of the House of Lords. Aim for a combined total similar to that of the US Congress, around 435.
User avatar
citizenJA
Prime Minister
Posts: 20648
Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by citizenJA »

gilsey wrote:
HindleA wrote:The murky world of student loans, the national debt and a fiscal illusion
paul johnson
We had a discussion here a couple of months ago didn't we, very much along those lines. Create an income stream so they can flog it off, there's no other explanation for the 6% interest rate.
It's unacceptable government has sold student loan debt off to who knows who. The exploitative repayment potential is great.
User avatar
citizenJA
Prime Minister
Posts: 20648
Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by citizenJA »

Good-afternoon, everyone
SpinningHugo
Prime Minister
Posts: 4211
Joined: Mon 16 Feb, 2015 1:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by SpinningHugo »

citizenJA wrote:
gilsey wrote:
HindleA wrote:The murky world of student loans, the national debt and a fiscal illusion
paul johnson
We had a discussion here a couple of months ago didn't we, very much along those lines. Create an income stream so they can flog it off, there's no other explanation for the 6% interest rate.
It's unacceptable government has sold student loan debt off to who knows who. The exploitative repayment potential is great.

Is it capable of exploitation? Why?

They shouldn't have sold it off because it makes no economic sense to do so. a political move to lower the headline debt figure.
User avatar
citizenJA
Prime Minister
Posts: 20648
Joined: Thu 11 Sep, 2014 12:22 pm

Re: Monday 19th February 2018

Post by citizenJA »

Demanding access to others' groups following rules compliance failure is harassment
It's also creepy as hell
Locked