Jeremy Corbyn

[Ganglandboss]

techiedave said:

And now its a woman I think she is called Angela Rayner (but I'm sure its Catherine Tate in anew role) shouting that that nasty Teresa May wants segregation,segregation,segregation and Tont Blair wanted immigtation immigration immigration
Its so exciting

I have never paid much attention to her until earlier today. I was reading some responses to an article posted on the UK Politics Facebook page; they were praising her for how well she has done for somebody from her background. It seems she is one of Comrade Corbyn's ironic shadow cabinet appointments. He gave the shadow defence secretary job to a CND nutter, shadow minister for agriculture to a vegan, and now education to some thicko who left school with no GCSEs, and up the duff.

I just watched the first five minutes of her speech on Youtube (as much as I could bear), which she opened with:

"Some Tories look down their noses at me, because as you can hear, I wasn't born with a plum in my mouth."

No love - they look down their noses at you because you are a feckless chav, who couldn't be arsed getting any qualifications.

I wasn't born with a plum in my mouth either; I was actually born in her constituency, which is a few miles away from where she grew up. I remember the almighty b*ll*ocking my dad gave me after parents' night: "If your GCSEs results are as bad as your mock exam results, you can kiss goodbye to any chance of getting anything better than some dead-end job!".

I'm glad I knuckled-down and got the grades I needed. F**k me, how right he was! I could have ended up having to settle for a job in Comrade Corbyn's shadow cabinet!

[anonymous-user]

Ganglandboss said:

I have never paid much attention to her until earlier today. I was reading some responses to an article posted on the UK Politics Facebook page; they were praising her for how well she has done for somebody from her background. It seems she is one of Comrade Corbyn's ironic shadow cabinet appointments. He gave the shadow defence secretary job to a CND nutter, shadow minister for agriculture to a vegan, and now education to some thicko who left school with no GCSEs, and up the duff.

I just watched the first five minutes of her speech on Youtube (as much as I could bear), which she opened with:

"Some Tories look down their noses at me, because as you can hear, I wasn't born with a plum in my mouth."

No love - they look down their noses at you because you are a feckless chav, who couldn't be arsed getting any qualifications.

I wasn't born with a plum in my mouth either; I was actually born in her constituency, which is a few miles away from where she grew up. I remember the almighty b*ll*ocking my dad gave me after parents' night: "If your GCSEs results are as bad as your mock exam results, you can kiss goodbye to any chance of getting anything better than some dead-end job!".

I'm glad I knuckled-down and got the grades I needed. F**k me, how right he was! I could have ended up having to settle for a job in Comrade Corbyn's shadow cabinet!

She's a hoot isn't she ?
Gets awfully excited about stuff. Yet she is hailed as "Labours Savour"
They really are as in desperately really and totally fked for around 10 years in my book

[pingu393]

Kermit power said:

Gargamel said:

Indeed a simple change would be to make Private Health care insurance tax free, plenty of companies offer this as a benefit, but we are taxed as part of salary.

I suspect these insurances would have wider uptake if they weren't "double taxed"

That is one thing that really does piss me off. Why should I be taxed for the privilege of placing less load on the NHS?

I understand what you are saying and agree if it were a planned visit to hospital, but where would you be taken if you were smashed up in an accident and required an ambulance and full ITU care? Would your health care provider would be invoiced?

[AJL308]

pingu393 said:

Kermit power said:

Gargamel said:

Indeed a simple change would be to make Private Health care insurance tax free, plenty of companies offer this as a benefit, but we are taxed as part of salary.

I suspect these insurances would have wider uptake if they weren't "double taxed"

That is one thing that really does piss me off. Why should I be taxed for the privilege of placing less load on the NHS?

I understand what you are saying and agree if it were a planned visit to hospital, but where would you be taken if you were smashed up in an accident and required an ambulance and full ITU care? Would your health care provider would be invoiced?

Surely the point he is getting at is that you should get a tax break on insurance products for planned or elective medical procedures?

Yes, the NHS still treats you in case of emergency but it still means you cost it less overall.

I believe (and may be wrong) that even in the USA emergency care isn't down to your insurer but the hospital has to have an emergency department in order to operate as a hospital, or some such?

[pingu393]

techiedave said:

Now that pesky man from Channel 4m is trying to embarrass the divine Emily Thornberry as to why her kids may have gone to something like a grammar school. An utter bd to do that to Emily. And now its a woman I think she is called Angela Rayner (but I'm sure its Catherine Tate in anew role) shouting that that nasty Teresa May wants segregation,segregation,segregation and Tont Blair wanted immigtation immigration immigration
Its so exciting

An utter bd to do that to Emily

Why?

Words and deeds. Her words are "I don't want no segregation". Her deeds are "I can afford segregation and I want my child to be educated in a segregated school". Why should the voters not be told of this hypocrisy?

She's not the only one. Dianne Abbott did it, Chakrabati's son took the Eton entrance exam and Stephen Kinnock's daughter went to Atlantic College.

[pingu393]

AJL308 said:

pingu393 said:

Kermit power said:

Gargamel said:

Indeed a simple change would be to make Private Health care insurance tax free, plenty of companies offer this as a benefit, but we are taxed as part of salary.

I suspect these insurances would have wider uptake if they weren't "double taxed"

That is one thing that really does piss me off. Why should I be taxed for the privilege of placing less load on the NHS?

I understand what you are saying and agree if it were a planned visit to hospital, but where would you be taken if you were smashed up in an accident and required an ambulance and full ITU care? Would your health care provider would be invoiced?

Surely the point he is getting at is that you should get a tax break on insurance products for planned or elective medical procedures?

Yes, the NHS still treats you in case of emergency but it still means you cost it less overall.

I believe (and may be wrong) that even in the USA emergency care isn't down to your insurer but the hospital has to have an emergency department in order to operate as a hospital, or some such?

I don't disagree with a tax break of some kind, but it would be all down to the numbers. The amount of tax relief would probably be so low that you would think it an insult.

There is the whole debate about should you only pay taxes for services that you use - and this could be where it starts

[Kermit power]

pingu393 said:

AJL308 said:

pingu393 said:

Kermit power said:

Gargamel said:

Indeed a simple change would be to make Private Health care insurance tax free, plenty of companies offer this as a benefit, but we are taxed as part of salary.

I suspect these insurances would have wider uptake if they weren't "double taxed"

That is one thing that really does piss me off. Why should I be taxed for the privilege of placing less load on the NHS?

I understand what you are saying and agree if it were a planned visit to hospital, but where would you be taken if you were smashed up in an accident and required an ambulance and full ITU care? Would your health care provider would be invoiced?

Surely the point he is getting at is that you should get a tax break on insurance products for planned or elective medical procedures?

Yes, the NHS still treats you in case of emergency but it still means you cost it less overall.

I believe (and may be wrong) that even in the USA emergency care isn't down to your insurer but the hospital has to have an emergency department in order to operate as a hospital, or some such?

I don't disagree with a tax break of some kind, but it would be all down to the numbers. The amount of tax relief would probably be so low that you would think it an insult.

There is the whole debate about should you only pay taxes for services that you use - and this could be where it starts

In some areas, I think there is much to be said for only being taxed for what you use. Abolishing VED and increasing fuel duty, for example (massive efficiency savings to be had there), or significantly reducing income tax and increasing VAT - gets more out of visiting foreigners who don't pay tax but use services whilst they're here, and also encourages people to save more for their retirement.

I don't, however, think we can ever have a situation of only paying for use in the NHS, simply because so much of health is arbitrary, and some things cost a bloody fortune to treat. My wife's insulin pump alone costs over £3k per annum, for example, and that's before adding on all of the costs of her checkups and other procedures related to her diabetes. It would be pretty unfair to expect individuals to pay the cost of keeping themselves alive when a disease like that strikes to arbitrarily.

I'm not even suggesting a tax break for private medical insurance contributions. Just don't tax it as a BIK! Quite apart from anything else, it would almost certainly increase the number of people taking out medical insurance, thus decreasing the load for elective consultations and surgeries on the NHS, quite possibly saving more than is currently taken in BIK tax.

[Guybrush]

pingu393 said:

techiedave said:

Now that pesky man from Channel 4m is trying to embarrass the divine Emily Thornberry as to why her kids may have gone to something like a grammar school. An utter bd to do that to Emily. And now its a woman I think she is called Angela Rayner (but I'm sure its Catherine Tate in anew role) shouting that that nasty Teresa May wants segregation,segregation,segregation and Tont Blair wanted immigtation immigration immigration
Its so exciting

An utter bd to do that to Emily

Why?

Words and deeds. Her words are "I don't want no segregation". Her deeds are "I can afford segregation and I want my child to be educated in a segregated school". Why should the voters not be told of this hypocrisy?

She's not the only one. Dianne Abbott did it, Chakrabati's son took the Eton entrance exam and Stephen Kinnock's daughter went to Atlantic College.

The left have always been completely hypocritical. (The BBC will never highlight it that's for sure, many of them are the same.) Their policy is 'keep the fools in their place, pretending to be on their side (implementing policies which keep them in their place) while we quietly live it up'.

[BlackLabel]

"Seumas Milne is set to stand down as Jeremy Corbyn's closest adviser by the end of the week, PoliticsHome understands."

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-par...

[98elise]

AJL308 said:

pingu393 said:

Kermit power said:

Gargamel said:

Indeed a simple change would be to make Private Health care insurance tax free, plenty of companies offer this as a benefit, but we are taxed as part of salary.

I suspect these insurances would have wider uptake if they weren't "double taxed"

That is one thing that really does piss me off. Why should I be taxed for the privilege of placing less load on the NHS?

I understand what you are saying and agree if it were a planned visit to hospital, but where would you be taken if you were smashed up in an accident and required an ambulance and full ITU care? Would your health care provider would be invoiced?

Surely the point he is getting at is that you should get a tax break on insurance products for planned or elective medical procedures?

Yes, the NHS still treats you in case of emergency but it still means you cost it less overall.

Exactly.

If your company provides you with private healthcare then you get taxed on its value, even though its something that you don't actually benefit from financially.

To give an example I was diagnosed with chronic back pain and needed 6 months of physio. I saw our private company doctor for the initial diagnosis, then had private physio sessions twice a week for the following 6 months.

That didn't cost the NHS a penny. I got the same treatment I would have through the NHS yet HMRC see this as a cash benefit to me. The NHS benefited financially, not me.

[Stickyfinger]

BlackLabel said:

"Seumas Milne is set to stand down as Jeremy Corbyn's closest adviser by the end of the week, PoliticsHome understands."

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-par...

Safe seat, a deselected MP, parachute......ummmmm

[mccrackenj]

fblm said:

AstonZagato said:

I'm not sure. I think that if you got a bill that read:

GP Appointment: £100.00
NHS Contribution: £100.00
Prescription cost: £78:00
NHS Contribution: £78:00
Total: £178.00
To pay: £0.00

Or

Coronary bypass surgery: £80,000
Anaesthetic: £10,000
Intensive care: £130,000
Drugs: £5,000
NHS Contribution: £225,000
To pay: £0.00

Then I think people would value the service more than they do currently ("it's my right").

If you sit people down with the commissioning groups they start off wanting their pet service funded to gold-plated levels. When you start to ask them what they would cut to fund it, they start to realise the limitations.

If people knew what it cost, they would be more circumspect about how they used it (turning up to appointments for a start).

Great idea. (although I shudder to think how much the NHS would spend on an IT system to actually impliment it!)

Both our kids were born outside the UK, the breakdown of costs was incredible (20k each, 18 insurance, 2 to pay)

Actually most of the data is readily available, the NHS has had well developed unit costing systems for years. As you're not actually billing anyone the cost wouldn't have to be the precise cost for their own individual treatment, just an average for the same clinical procedures either nationally or in their trust area or in that actual hospital. All that info is readily available - a lot of it is even available to the public if you know where to look. So it could be done quite easily, no need for a new national database or info collection systems. Would probably have to hire a couple more staff though, then everyone would complain that the NHS is all "managers" and no nurses. . .

[Europa1]

techiedave said:

Now that pesky man from Channel 4m is trying to embarrass the divine Emily Thornberry as to why her kids may have gone to something like a grammar school. An utter bd to do that to Emily.

Has she called him a sexist yet?

[anonymous-user]

Europa1 said:

techiedave said:

Now that pesky man from Channel 4m is trying to embarrass the divine Emily Thornberry as to why her kids may have gone to something like a grammar school. An utter bd to do that to Emily.

Has she called him a sexist yet?

How unreasonable

[anonymous-user]

Europa1 said:

techiedave said:

Now that pesky man from Channel 4m is trying to embarrass the divine Emily Thornberry as to why her kids may have gone to something like a grammar school. An utter bd to do that to Emily.

Has she called him a sexist yet?

I didn't hear her say that so don't think so.
I do know that Newsnight was a bit of a Labour love -fest last night. I tend to get really turned on when they interview labour women but I didn't see any on it last night apart from one in this 3 person panel thing with Owen Jones and Matthew Paris.
I just don't think enough airtime is given over to Emily Thornberry shes a real woman with curves. That Shabriata girl looks like the lad who works at the local 6 to 11. Nice lad he is told me the special offer they had on Bobbi version of Mars Bars and stuff.

[anonymous-user]

techiedave said:

I just don't think enough airtime is given over to Emily Thornberry shes a real woman with curves.

[Gargamel]

Well if there was any doubt that Corbyn is out of touch with the majority of Labour voters, I think today's message on Migration will confirm just how unelectable he is.

Pledging to spend more money on those areas most impacted by migration, but not committing to any policy on migration numbers, but instead going with an "unlimited ideology" is not a vote winner.

Given how many labour supporters went to UKIP or voted for Brexit in the hope of proper immigration controls, this surely is a policy at odds with his core vote (the 30%) not the Socialist Worker sellers.

Labour has totally descended into a party for the few die hards of the hard left, than any possibility to win an election.

I hope Theresa May has the right stuff, to continue with her own policy agenda and NOT get dragged to the left. Mrs May has a once in a generation opportunity to reform the economic and social model, and must not let the howls of a few socialists in the wilderness frighten the horses.

[Europa1]

V6Pushfit said:

techiedave said:

I just don't think enough airtime is given over to Emily Thornberry shes a real woman with curves.

I've just been a bit sick in my mouth.

[AstonZagato]

Whilst this is amusing, I can't think anyone wants to see politicians of either sex (or any party) in swimwear. I always think that women are given a poor deal in the public world, often being judged as much on their appearance as their deeds.

I know this is sounds a bit "right on" but I'm to the right of Genghis Kahn and it still annoys me.

[Halb]

I really shouldn't but that just kept me laughing.