Oh Dear!

ILW

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

:rotfl:

As opposed to my old village pub that goes like this

"Moves to village, goes to local, thinks landlord is a pervert, finds out he is a pervert, doesnt spend one more penny in conveniently located pub, 6 years later finds out said landlord is up on charges for taking advantage of underage staff"

underage staff in a pub?

1984ReturnsForReal_2

ILW wrote: »

underage staff in a pub?

Probably waitressing.

& yep he is a first class t@t.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Phew. That's a bit frightening. Hope it didn't put the willies up you.

Wrong sex mate.

& even if I was the right sex I would have better sense.

Thrugelmir

StevieJ wrote: »

Another U turn on the way? Maggie will be having kittens

While political point scoring is playground fun. It doesn't address the fundamental issues that we all appear to be facing.

Maybe if the country had invested in the boom times we wouldn't be where we are today.

Loughton_Monkey

Poor old Maggie is probably too 'out of it', sadly, to comment.

Imagine she had still been around and with her complete set of marbles, just what she would have said to, and about Brother Brown. They guy would have been complete mincemeat after every PM Question Time. And if she had inherited a situation just as Cameron has. I think she would have 'positioned' the ridiculous overspending so well with the public that the vast majority of the public would have been behind her. She would have then bulldozed the most massive Public Sector and Benefits cuts in world history.

She had something very few of them have now. A backbone.

Thrugelmir

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

She had something very few of them have now. A backbone.

Have we any? All we appear to be left with now is professional politicians none with any real life experience.

chewmylegoff

StevieJ wrote: »

No because they are saying that the economics have now changed, also in Norway exploration costs are tax deductable even if you don't strike oil (makes sense), not so the UK.

yes, the economics have changed, they get to keep less of the profit. pulling the plug on this is rather like someone saying that they'd rather put their money in a bank account with 0% interest so they don't have to pay tax.

of course they could always write off their costs to date and then use their capital investment to make profits elsewhere, perhaps they could spend it in norway and pay 78% tax on the profits of their enterprises.

smells of rubbish posturing to me. i bet they go ahead as originally planned.

Rochdale_Pioneers

lemonjelly wrote: »

'Our plans involve cutting wasteful spending and stopping the National Insurance rise, our plans don't involve an increase in VAT.' David Cameron, April 2010

You missed the fact that he has left in place the NI rise AND increased VAT.

Did he say anything pre-election about slashing the staffing at HMRC so that they are so undermanned that contingency plans need to be drawn up where city accountancy firms will do the work of drawing tax from city accountancy firms customers? Writing off multi-billion pound tax liabilities? Telling everyone that small business is the key whilst slashing corporation tax ONLY for big business?

I also remember a now Prime Minister telling everyone that he was fully committed to spending every single penny that Labour were spending, and would then make the economy grow even faster than planned so that he could share with us the proceeds of that additional growth in the form of tax cuts. Is this the same now Prime Minister so scathing about the levels of spending and growth seen at the very time when he was eulogising about spending and growth? Surely not.

ess0two

Slightly off-topic.......Shell have just sold their only UK refinery at Stanlow to Essar energy.

Essar have a massive refinery in India,which is likely to supply the UK with petro-chemicals and in the long term shut Stanlow.

Not good,time for me to move on,i think.

Thrugelmir

Short selective memories.

I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk
the sustainability of the recovery."
Gordon Brown's 1997 Budget Statement

"Under this Government, Britain will not return to the boom and bust
of the past."
Pre-Budget Report, 9th November 1999

"Britain does not want a return to boom and bust."
Budget Statement, 21 March 2000

"So our approach is to reject the old vicious circle of the...the old
boom and bust."
Pre-Budget Report, 8 November 2000

"Mr Deputy Speaker we will not return to boom and bust."
Budget Statement, 7 March 2001

"As I have said before Mr Deputy Speaker: No return to boom and bust."
Budget Statement, 22 March 2006

"And we will never return to the old boom and bust."
Budget Statement, 21 March 2007

"Let the work of change begin."
On taking over as UK Prime Minister and succeeding Tony Blair, June 27
2007.

Time to move on perhaps.