[News] Nigel Farage and Reform

[darkwolf666]

If a policy is unworkable, unaffordable or illegal why wouldn't you pick holes in it??

That would fit Reforms policy to return boat crossers to France, when we opted out of said agreement when we voted for Brexit - at Mr Farage's behest...

I think the expression is what goes around, comes around. Or some such!

 

[Guinness Boy]

Anyone catch Radio 4 about 8.45 this morning with Amol interviewing Tice?

Tice was allowed to start with a monologue unchallenged instead of 'good morning'. He was then asked how net zero immigration would work in the care sector. He said he'd get British workers to do it by paying them more. He was then played an interview with a care group executive who said they can't get any local staff in Cornwall despite raising pay levels. Tice then replied he was only talking about Lincolnshire and, in any case, he'd get people to work in the care sector by paying them more.



And people think this nonsense shouldn't be challenged

 

[Guinness Boy]

Because it's just my opinion. Like music, a film, or anything....what makes your opinion better than that of another?

It isn't, but if you're putting your opinion on a political thread on a message board then I'd expect it to be challenged and holes picked where they exist.

If it's too difficult for you I can just restrict you to music and Albion chatter?

 

[Is it PotG?]

If it's too difficult for you I can just restrict you to music and Albion chatter?

You would really do that?

 

[Guinness Boy]

You would really do that?

Only if you're struggling. I'm sure you can robustly defend any hole picking in your opinion though, right?

 

[Is it PotG?]

Only if you're struggling. I'm sure you can robustly defend any hole picking in your opinion though, right?

Right

 

[BadFish]

I suspect one reason people are supporting Reform is as a reaction to those (like the majority on here) who say that anyone who doesn’t agree with their politics is wrong, thick, racist and so on. This arrogance has created the space for Reform whom are attracting support simply by saying ‘we are listening to and understanding your concerns and you are not thick, but have a right to be heard as much as the ‘lanyard class’ ( an expression coined in an excellent Times column on the subject recently).

So they are voting for reform because someone called them thick for voting for reform?

So the motivation to do something was caused by th doing it?

That's one hell of a chicken and eggs situation.

Or is that a paradox?

 

[abc]

So they are voting for reform because someone called them thick for voting for reform?

So the motivation to do something was caused by th doing it?

That's one hell of a chicken and eggs situation.

Or is that a paradox?

No, its a symptom

 

[SouthSaxon]

So they are voting for reform because someone called them thick for voting for reform?

So the motivation to do something was caused by th doing it?

That's one hell of a chicken and eggs situation.

Or is that a paradox?

If someone votes Reform, but there’s no one there to see it, did it really happen?

 

[nevergoagain]

This is what I don’t like about posters like you.

You think anyone criticising Reform and their policies is “chewing their dungaree straps”.

Yet you whine like a little bitch if anyone suggests Leave voters are thick.

Sort yourself out. Your argument is a shambles.

Chortle, I love posters like you with that oh so pompous holier than thou attitude. Don't like my comments but then more than happy to call people thick or racist for supporting a different party than you. I've put valid points here for discussing such as IR35, sentence reviews etc. but you just want to keep sniping rather than debating.

Just waiting for your little lapdogs to drop in now with a pointless emoji or two.

 

[Gabbiano]

There is a lot of truth in this and the standard of living has been hugely eroded over the last 20 years. In 1999 I purchased a 2 bedroom terraced house for 55k with my partner and we both had entry level office jobs. We afforded holidays, few nights out a week and lived ok. Today that same job I had pays £10k more than 1999 and the house is now £300k. I don’t know even where I would start if I was coming into the market in 2025 and I think it’s a depressing outlook for our young which in itself is a national scandal.

People are desperate and voting for anything that can shake up the system and deliver some change for their lives and the grifters of reform and brexit campaign prey on them for their own selfish interests and advancement.

The truth is this country is broken and peoples living standards are collateral damage in a political system that is self serving. Not sure any of them have the answers to the problems we are all facing but won’t knock people’s desperation for something better.

Beyond the failings of UK government, this suffocation of the working and middle classes is a global problem. Other countries like Portugal have it even worse.

As capital and investment patterns have become global and mobile, it has become easier to concentrate assets among ever fewer people and any measures that governments take to resist this are met with those with the means, simply moving the money and jobs to somewhere else with lower taxes, which just punishes those same middle and working classes. Meanwhile global competition means that our economies have become more specialised as certain industries can't compete.

The only way to resist this is through some kind of coordinated action by a large and powerful bloc of nations acting in their common interest to punish tax avoiders by limiting their access to one of the largest markets on earth. If only such an organisation existed, surely the UK would choose to be a part of it!

Though of course the EU isn't currently doing anything really meaningful here, but this is the only viable mechanism for it. International problems require international solutions.

Edit: and the real kicker, is that this has to be done very delicately, because international markets are now so intertwined with our individual fortunes (or lack thereof), even without people being really aware of it. Drastic and sudden measures will cause markets to drop, and the ordinary person will lose a big chunk of their pension, or eventually house value. So governments are terrified to do anything, because they'll get it from both sides.

Is Nige the man to solve this problem?

 

[The Clamp]

Chortle, I love posters like you with that oh so pompous holier than thou attitude. Don't like my comments but then more than happy to call people thick or racist for supporting a different party than you. I've put valid points here for discussing such as IR35, sentence reviews etc. but you just want to keep sniping rather than debating.

Just waiting for your little lapdogs to drop in now with a pointless emoji or two.

I’m simply commenting on your posts.

You write them, not me.

I do think people who voted for Brexit are thick.

I understand the reasons they voted for it.

I still think they’re thick for thinking Brexit was the answer.

 

[BadFish]

Ss

Beyond the failings of UK government, this suffocation of the working and middle classes is a global problem. Other countries like Portugal have it even worse.

As capital and investment patterns have become global and mobile, it has become easier to concentrate assets among ever fewer people and any measures that governments take to resist this are met with those with the means, simply moving the money and jobs to somewhere else with lower taxes, which just punishes those same middle and working classes. Meanwhile global competition means that our economies have become more specialised as certain industries can't compete.

The only way to resist this is through some kind of coordinated action by a large and powerful bloc of nations acting in their common interest to punish tax avoiders by limiting their access to one of the largest markets on earth. If only such an organisation existed, surely the UK would choose to be a part of it!

Though of course the EU isn't currently doing anything really meaningful here, but this is the only viable mechanism for it. International problems require international solutions.

So they shouldn't vote for a shyster who built his political capital from campaigning to leave such an entity?

That would be. . . . Well let's say 'daft'.

 

[dsr-burnley]

Beyond the failings of UK government, this suffocation of the working and middle classes is a global problem. Other countries like Portugal have it even worse.

As capital and investment patterns have become global and mobile, it has become easier to concentrate assets among ever fewer people and any measures that governments take to resist this are met with those with the means, simply moving the money and jobs to somewhere else with lower taxes, which just punishes those same middle and working classes. Meanwhile global competition means that our economies have become more specialised as certain industries can't compete.

The only way to resist this is through some kind of coordinated action by a large and powerful bloc of nations acting in their common interest to punish tax avoiders by limiting their access to one of the largest markets on earth. If only such an organisation existed, surely the UK would choose to be a part of it!

Though of course the EU isn't currently doing anything really meaningful here, but this is the only viable mechanism for it. International problems require international solutions.

I don't understand that one. You're a little bit cryptic, but as I read it, you're saying that the UK and Portugal (among others) have problems that could be resisted if we joined the EU?

 

[schmunk]

I don't know anything about IR35, so can't comment on that, however I have read some of the replies on here that indicate scrapping it could lead to all sorts of evasive ruses - who ever would have thought Nigel would be in favour of schemes that had less control and could make the rich richer, without checks and balances!

I do know lots about IR35 and believe it's a good piece of anti-avoidance legislation, but it was mismanaged by HMRC for the first 20+ years of its existence. The more recent clarification and tightening of the rules - particularly the requirements for medium and large business end clients to become responsible for contractor compliance - have made this a perfectly sound and workable set of rules.

The problem with IR35 is that because of the previous laxity by HMRC, far too many people (particularly e.g. labourers and IT bums on seats) became 'contractors' to cheat the system. They're now complaining when the system has bitten back, leaving them in a worse position than if they had been employees as they should have been all along. Much of the blame lies with the end clients and recruitment agents who, spying a quick buck, encouraged this behaviour, but this has almost entirely gone away now with the 'new' rules.

 

[dsr-burnley]

I’m simply commenting on your posts.

You write them, not me.

I do think people who voted for Brexit are thick.

I understand the reasons they voted for it.

I still think they’re thick for thinking Brexit was the answer.

I suppose "they are stupid because they disagree with me" is less offensive than some other people's view of "they are evil because they disagree with me". Still not a vote winner, though.

One reason why Reform gets a lot of support is because the Tories and Labour (in practice if not in theory) are in favour of policies of high benefits, high house price inflation, high immigration, high government spending, and high taxes on working people to pay for it. Reform claims to be different.

 

[Gabbiano]

I don't understand that one. You're a little bit cryptic, but as I read it, you're saying that the UK and Portugal (among others) have problems that could be resisted if we joined the EU?

I'm suggesting that the EU if it actually acted in a coordinated manner to readjust the distribution of wealth, would be far more successful than the UK acting alone.

Neither the EU nor UK is doing anything near enough. But the EU could if it got it's act together, Britain on its own is powerless. We are too exposed to globalised markets and dont have enough weight to make any real mark. So the measures we implement are just lip service that make no difference.

 

[nevergoagain]

I do know lots about IR35 and believe it's a good piece of anti-avoidance legislation, but it was mismanaged by HMRC for the first 20+ years of its existence. The more recent clarification and tightening of the rules - particularly the requirements for medium and large business end clients to become responsible for contractor compliance - have made this a perfectly sound and workable set of rules.

The problem with IR35 is that because of the previous laxity by HMRC, far too many people (particularly e.g. labourers and IT bums on seats) became 'contractors' to cheat the system. They're now complaining when the system has bitten back, leaving them in a worse position than if they had been employees as they should have been all along. Much of the blame lies with the end clients and recruitment agents who, spying a quick buck, encouraged this behaviour, but this has almost entirely gone away now with the 'new' rules.

It was implemented incredibly badly. I get and agree that those people sitting on auto renew contracts for the same client for years on end are absolutely disguised employees and should be reigned in but they are few in my experience compared to those who are genuine contractors who move around different companies/assignments working on change programmes which have defined outcomes and dates. These people are not getting any employee benefits and are taking all the risk themselves but IR35 put the onus on the employer who in the main just put all those roles inside. In my experience the tax income I generated as a Ltd Company when you include VAT, Corp Tax, & Dividend Tax far outweighed the tax generated by PAYE/Employers NI if I went inside and still had none of the employee benefits.

 

[BadFish]

I suppose "they are stupid because they disagree with me" is less offensive than some other people's view of "they are evil because they disagree with me". Still not a vote winner, though.

One reason why Reform gets a lot of support is because the Tories and Labour (in practice if not in theory) are in favour of policies of high benefits, high house price inflation, high immigration, high government spending, and high taxes on working people to pay for it. Reform claims to be different.

The crux of this discussion is right at the point you swerved away from it.

Are they different?

Are their policies going to improve the lot of those people voting for them?

Their leader has form for promising to change for the better working people lives. (He failed at that, did brilliantly for his own wealth and political profile though).

So the question remains the same, why do you think Reform will be different?

 

[dsr-burnley]

I'm suggesting that the EU if it actually acted in a coordinated manner to readjust the distribution of wealth, would be far more successful than the UK acting alone.

Neither the EU nor UK is doing anything near enough. But the EU could if it got it's act together, Britain on its own is powerless. We are too exposed to globalised markets and dont have enough weight to make any real mark. So the measures we implement are just lip service that make no difference.

I'm sure if the EU wanted to take such action, it would be easy for the UK to apply the EU rules in concert. The EU has always been willing for the UK to accept EU regulations if nothing is demanded in return.