Rishi Sunak - Prime Minister
Discussion
valiant said:
768 said:
It's definitely not, I'm guessing you didn't pay over £500k.
Out of a total income of….?Just because you pay a lot of tax doesn’t mean you’re still paying your fair share as a proportion of your salary and income especially when compared to someone on PAYE.
Or only multi-millionaires who use the tax breaks available to them?
President Merkin said:
Nailed on then if his political nouse is any guide.
Lots of hot takes on how a PM 20 points behind in the polls is about to call a GE. He really isn't.
I find it kind of staggering that he has a choice in the matter to be honest.Lots of hot takes on how a PM 20 points behind in the polls is about to call a GE. He really isn't.
How in the f
king hell did we ever let the current leader pick when an election is called and why have we never changed that?It should be mandatory after a certain period.
F1GTRUeno said:
I find it kind of staggering that he has a choice in the matter to be honest.
How in the fking hell did we ever let the current leader pick when an election is called and why have we never changed that?
It should be mandatory after a certain period.
We did change it, it turned out to cause bigger problems when parliament had broken down than the problems it solves in cases like this so it was repealed.How in the f
king hell did we ever let the current leader pick when an election is called and why have we never changed that?It should be mandatory after a certain period.
Mr Penguin said:
F1GTRUeno said:
I find it kind of staggering that he has a choice in the matter to be honest.
How in the fking hell did we ever let the current leader pick when an election is called and why have we never changed that?
It should be mandatory after a certain period.
We did change it, it turned out to cause bigger problems when parliament had broken down than the problems it solves in cases like this so it was repealed.How in the f
king hell did we ever let the current leader pick when an election is called and why have we never changed that?It should be mandatory after a certain period.
Mr Penguin said:
We did change it, it turned out to cause bigger problems when parliament had broken down than the problems it solves in cases like this so it was repealed.
Agreed, for good or ill I’ll stick to the rules.It was interesting when Dave and his chancer, sorry chancellor, didn’t do that and decided to change them. Tories are allowed to change them. Why do some get very worked up at the prospect of other parties doing so? Or is that a stupid question? (It isn’t)
Rishi’s toast, the only question is by how much. But he’s not helping anyone by hanging on and running a lame duck government with some pathetic policies. If he was a horse he’d have been shot by now. ETA because someone will take it the wrong way I’m not suggesting shooting Rishi. I’m talking about the state of his leadership.
I don’t care who you want next, he’s not an effective leader.
Edited by cheesejunkie on Tuesday 30th April 00:23
cheesejunkie said:
Mr Penguin said:
We did change it, it turned out to cause bigger problems when parliament had broken down than the problems it solves in cases like this so it was repealed.
Agreed, for good or ill I’ll stick to the rules.It was interesting when Dave and his chancer, sorry chancellor, didn’t do that and decided to change them. Tories are allowed to change them. Why do some get very worked up at the prospect of other parties doing so? Or is that a stupid question? (It isn’t)
Rishi’s toast, the only question is by how much. But he’s not helping anyone by hanging on and running a lame duck government with some pathetic policies. If he was a horse he’d have been shot by now.
I don’t care who you want next, he’s not an effective leader.
Wombat3 said:
He's not running a Lame Duck government though. He has a comfortable working majority so he can get stuff done & put legislation onto the books. Being unpopular doesn't make it a lame duck.
He has the potential to do so in theory but is time limited. What’s his future policy agenda?Vapes? I tend to agree but give me strength it’s hardly the country’s worst problem.
Fair point they’re not a lame duck but when you’re on a time limited agenda you are a lame duck if you want to get serious policy through. Rishi’s time limited by the looks of it.
cheesejunkie said:
He has the potential to do so in theory but is time limited. What’s his future policy agenda?
Vapes? I tend to agree but give me strength it’s hardly the country’s worst problem.
Fair point they’re not a lame duck but when you’re on a time limited agenda you are a lame duck if you want to get serious policy through. Rishi’s time limited by the looks of it.
I don't think any politician would be laying down detailed proposals for controversial legislation in the long campaign but I also think that the way he became PM (following Liz Truss) means his deal with the party and the country is that he'll be a technocrat who doesn't rock the boat or make big and bold decisions.Vapes? I tend to agree but give me strength it’s hardly the country’s worst problem.
Fair point they’re not a lame duck but when you’re on a time limited agenda you are a lame duck if you want to get serious policy through. Rishi’s time limited by the looks of it.
The setting of a GE has always been within the purview of the PM and governing party. It is one of the strongest tools a govt has and the rules have always been laid out so that is a govt advantage. It’s also a system that works. When we tried to change that, we invoked chaos. It’s like removing the Chairman’s vote, the black ball advantage - you promoted systemic stalemate and the resulting chaos ensued. It was not rocket science for everyone involved to quickly come to the conclusion of not doing that again. And it was a fairly universally shared opinion across Parliament to sod that again!
As such it isn’t about “spine” or whatever, it’s about seeking the strongest tactical advantage you can for your side as to when you set the GE. It always has been, it always will be. For this cycle that was always going to be autumn - it had to be for Rishi’s bet to pay off. He only had one play and that was time. Time to get inflation down and time to get the IRs down. Well it’s almost half worked, but he’s only going to get *at best* 2 IR reductions before autumn, probably only one. And that won’t be enough to save the day. It still remains the only play he has though. Labour will almost certainly win the GE and yes, SKS et al will inherit much more benign economic conditions than Rishi had to play with. Hunt actually did pretty good remedial work as Chancellor with the limited amount he had to work with. Given that nobody likes Jeremy Hunt it’s amusingly ironic that he might escape from this looking ok.
TLDR: Labour will win, there probably isn’t much Rishi n co can do, but they will try to maximise their advantages as any govt does.
As such it isn’t about “spine” or whatever, it’s about seeking the strongest tactical advantage you can for your side as to when you set the GE. It always has been, it always will be. For this cycle that was always going to be autumn - it had to be for Rishi’s bet to pay off. He only had one play and that was time. Time to get inflation down and time to get the IRs down. Well it’s almost half worked, but he’s only going to get *at best* 2 IR reductions before autumn, probably only one. And that won’t be enough to save the day. It still remains the only play he has though. Labour will almost certainly win the GE and yes, SKS et al will inherit much more benign economic conditions than Rishi had to play with. Hunt actually did pretty good remedial work as Chancellor with the limited amount he had to work with. Given that nobody likes Jeremy Hunt it’s amusingly ironic that he might escape from this looking ok.
TLDR: Labour will win, there probably isn’t much Rishi n co can do, but they will try to maximise their advantages as any govt does.
valiant said:
Out of a total income of….?
Just because you pay a lot of tax doesn’t mean you’re still paying your fair share as a proportion of your salary and income especially when compared to someone on PAYE.
What makes it fair is being subject to the same tax law. Not making CGT the same percentage rate as income tax, SDLT, the same rate VAT on everything, etc. The tax system could do with being simpler but it needs some flexibility.Just because you pay a lot of tax doesn’t mean you’re still paying your fair share as a proportion of your salary and income especially when compared to someone on PAYE.
cheesejunkie said:
Wombat3 said:
He's not running a Lame Duck government though. He has a comfortable working majority so he can get stuff done & put legislation onto the books. Being unpopular doesn't make it a lame duck.
He has the potential to do so in theory but is time limited. What’s his future policy agenda?Vapes? I tend to agree but give me strength it’s hardly the country’s worst problem.
Fair point they’re not a lame duck but when you’re on a time limited agenda you are a lame duck if you want to get serious policy through. Rishi’s time limited by the looks of it.
Running scared of the electorate because he knows exactly what they think of him.
DeejRC said:
The setting of a GE has always been within the purview of the PM and governing party. ...
Removed the rest of that windy guff. It hasn't. The current squatters repealed the Fixed term parliament act, otherwise the GE would have taken place this Thursday and we could have all rejoiced at the flushing of the biggest turd in time for the weekend.cheesejunkie said:
Agreed, for good or ill I’ll stick to the rules.
It was interesting when Dave and his chancer, sorry chancellor, didn’t do that and decided to change them. Tories are allowed to change them. Why do some get very worked up at the prospect of other parties doing so? Or is that a stupid question? (It isn’t)
Rishi’s toast, the only question is by how much. But he’s not helping anyone by hanging on and running a lame duck government with some pathetic policies. If he was a horse he’d have been shot by now. ETA because someone will take it the wrong way I’m not suggesting shooting Rishi. I’m talking about the state of his leadership.
I don’t care who you want next, he’s not an effective leader.
He's like someone who has handed in their notice and just doesn't care. All I want from the next government is one that even slightly knows what they are doing and has a plan, has a sliver of integrity and the ability to answer a fIt was interesting when Dave and his chancer, sorry chancellor, didn’t do that and decided to change them. Tories are allowed to change them. Why do some get very worked up at the prospect of other parties doing so? Or is that a stupid question? (It isn’t)
Rishi’s toast, the only question is by how much. But he’s not helping anyone by hanging on and running a lame duck government with some pathetic policies. If he was a horse he’d have been shot by now. ETA because someone will take it the wrong way I’m not suggesting shooting Rishi. I’m talking about the state of his leadership.
I don’t care who you want next, he’s not an effective leader.
Edited by cheesejunkie on Tuesday 30th April 00:23
king question with a straight answer when asked. Maybe a little compassion wouldn't hurt either. The Tories can FRO just because of their Rwanda plan.Is that too much to ask?
Edited by Tycho on Tuesday 30th April 08:55
Wombat3 said:
He's not running a Lame Duck government though. He has a comfortable working majority so he can get stuff done & put legislation onto the books. Being unpopular doesn't make it a lame duck.
ironically, the legislation he and his fellow no-hopers are trying to push through is pretty lame and targeted not at helping the country, but appeasing the red meat eaters of the tory voters.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff