Thursday 3rd May 2018
Posted: Thu 03 May, 2018 7:45 am
Morning.
A bright and glorious day here.In lieu of no elections ,I'm watching Amber.
A bright and glorious day here.In lieu of no elections ,I'm watching Amber.
Council tax isn't exactly the most progressive tax, either.HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -mcdonnell
Voters may be ready to pay higher council tax, says John McDonnell
Hmm, even Labour supporters object to a penny even if specifically for social care according to evidence,here.
Government: You have to let anyone speak. No banning!Dr. Matt Lodder
Verified account
@mattlodder
2m2 minutes ago
More
Also: how will this tally with Prevent? Radical Islamic preachers will presumably also be covered by this kind of blanket provision?
And thankfully no UKIP either I assume.RogerOThornhill wrote:Morning all.
Voted already and had a quick chat with one of our candidates who was canvassing near the school.
I though the ballot paper was a bit short - only Labour & Tories - and apparently this is the first time this has happened...no Green or LibDem.
Loading more and more tax on individuals and communities that can least afford it is the opposite of socialism. It's what the Tories do/are doing. They have reduced the amount paid towards social care etc that comes from central progressive taxation and increased the amount that comes from local regressive taxation. Some people are really going to struggle to find the money to cover the increases in council tax this year out of stagnating wages and incomes. Arguments for higher taxation for better services should be based on taxes that are related to ability to pay. Council tax increases are part of a deliberate Tory policy to reverse the redistribution of wealth from the affluent South East to the rest of the country. I'm not about to apologise for opposing that process on every level. Raising regressive taxes while reducing progressive ones is never acceptable to me.HindleA wrote:Retreading old ground.Suffice to say objecting to contributing via the chosen method on that grounds I find disappointing,shall I politely say.
But people still vote for them and will do so today. The "they only mean nasty other people, not good us" drug remains a powerful one.gilsey wrote:I saw this on twitter yesterday but something went wrong when I tried to post it here. I'm paraphrasing a bit.
Basically, the tories have a hostile environment for all of us, on everything. Immigration, benefits, local govt, NHS, wages etc. They might as well have a manifesto just saying WE HATE YOU ALL.
And the ones using the "Labour drone" will generally be the same people who wouldn't dream of voting anything other than Tory and who tweet incessantly about anything other than Tory cockups and mistakes i.e. Tory drones. For example, Windrush? Not interested.AnatolyKasparov wrote:But people still vote for them and will do so today. The "they only mean nasty other people, not good us" drug remains a powerful one.gilsey wrote:I saw this on twitter yesterday but something went wrong when I tried to post it here. I'm paraphrasing a bit.
Basically, the tories have a hostile environment for all of us, on everything. Immigration, benefits, local govt, NHS, wages etc. They might as well have a manifesto just saying WE HATE YOU ALL.
And not a caca one. (Pre-school slang, you get it all here).PorFavor wrote:cacacacacacacacac
I now have (touch wood) a fully functioning keyboard.
Seriously, if journalists want to do something useful they should inquire into how many are being turned away from polling stations in the "trial" areas because of this.PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.
Voter ID required up the road in Gosport. The local rag mentions this in its election coverage - but fails, with its usual attention to accuracy and detail, to mention what counts as acceptable ID. I await with interest . . .
I notice they've started the lie about me setting up an account called Dr Terror on here. It was used twice and then never again. Why would I do that?HindleA wrote:Rusty Twatterface and his sidekick Ivor Donna Whoopsie,I presume.
Yes - you'd think so, wouldn't you? I expect it will be the usual shambles. Also, I think the Government is gambling (mistakenly, I hope) that disenfranchising people in local elections won't be taken so much to heart by the electorate as would be disenfranchising people in a General Election.Rachel Obordo
Susan who lives in Bromley brought her passport to the polling station this morning:
“There wasn’t a huge amount of publicity about needing to bring ID today but I was fine. I got the impression though that there wasn’t a system in place for recording those who turned up without ID and couldn’t vote. You would think with a pilot scheme that kind of information would be recorded. (Politics Live, Guardian)
Seems to be catching more elderly, than students/BAME. Expect it to be dropped soon.PorFavor wrote:Yes - you'd think so, wouldn't you? I expect it will be the usual shambles. Also, I think the Government is gambling (mistakenly, I hope) that disenfranchising people in local elections won't be taken so much to heart by the electorate as would be disenfranchising people in a General Election.Rachel Obordo
Susan who lives in Bromley brought her passport to the polling station this morning:
“There wasn’t a huge amount of publicity about needing to bring ID today but I was fine. I got the impression though that there wasn’t a system in place for recording those who turned up without ID and couldn’t vote. You would think with a pilot scheme that kind of information would be recorded. (Politics Live, Guardian)
you've done it alreadyHindleA wrote:Could try impersonating a polling station..
Officials counting on everyone uninterested.PorFavor wrote:Good morfternoon.
Voter ID required up the road in Gosport. The local rag mentions this in its election coverage - but fails, with its usual attention to accuracy and detail, to mention what counts as acceptable ID. I await with interest . . .
Ah, could the Law Of Unintended Consequences be about to strike again?refitman wrote:Seems to be catching more elderly, than students/BAME. Expect it to be dropped soon.PorFavor wrote:Yes - you'd think so, wouldn't you? I expect it will be the usual shambles. Also, I think the Government is gambling (mistakenly, I hope) that disenfranchising people in local elections won't be taken so much to heart by the electorate as would be disenfranchising people in a General Election.Rachel Obordo
Susan who lives in Bromley brought her passport to the polling station this morning:
“There wasn’t a huge amount of publicity about needing to bring ID today but I was fine. I got the impression though that there wasn’t a system in place for recording those who turned up without ID and couldn’t vote. You would think with a pilot scheme that kind of information would be recorded. (Politics Live, Guardian)
On something completely different - nearly posted this before but this is clearly a nudge to do so - police in California have recently arrested a man suspected of being a 1970s-80s serial killer 'The Golden State Killer' - through comparing DNA records from scene of crime evidence with DNA samples people have voluntarily submitted to ancestry-tracing and DNA profiling organisations...AnatolyKasparov wrote:Ah, could the Law Of Unintended Consequences be about to strike again?
RogerOThornhill wrote:Right, I'm off out - helping with a session on local history at the library.
I may have mentioned this at some point in the past, but in all of the last eight years or so there is little that has annoyed me more than our local library service closing the reference library, moving the stock into the central library by shifting a lot of the reference material and central library material into storage, and then putting up a sign saying 'At last, all of your library services under one roof.'PorFavor wrote:RogerOThornhill wrote:Right, I'm off out - helping with a session on local history at the library.
At least the library isn't "local history". Yet.
It's a fair bet. Younger people carry ID routinely for pubs etc anyway!refitman wrote:Seems to be catching more elderly, than students/BAME. Expect it to be dropped soon.PorFavor wrote:Yes - you'd think so, wouldn't you? I expect it will be the usual shambles. Also, I think the Government is gambling (mistakenly, I hope) that disenfranchising people in local elections won't be taken so much to heart by the electorate as would be disenfranchising people in a General Election.Rachel Obordo
Susan who lives in Bromley brought her passport to the polling station this morning:
“There wasn’t a huge amount of publicity about needing to bring ID today but I was fine. I got the impression though that there wasn’t a system in place for recording those who turned up without ID and couldn’t vote. You would think with a pilot scheme that kind of information would be recorded. (Politics Live, Guardian)
Only, as in the last couple of days, that they have "no suspects". Haven't heard anything since.PaulfromYorkshire wrote:Any recent news on the Skripal case?