I love the asda ad...

maman

Birdy12 wrote: »

I happen to like the advert even if, after I hear the 'dad' saying 'what's for tea, love?,' I found myself answering him out loud (every time) with the words, 'p*ss off'...

Birdy

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I said earlier that it's nothing like the advert at my house, so I suppose I laughed because it's amusing to me that anyone should still behave like that. DH and I share chores all the year round so why would I want to do everything at Christmas?

Maybe anyone who is living in that way and dislikes it (it seems many people have posted that they enjoy doing all the Christmas bits) should use it as a motivation to put their foot down with a firm hand!!

lallysmum

Callie22 wrote: »

I saw that yesterday and it's the creepiest advert I've EVER seen. The snowman is terrifying! And why does he want to keep his girlfriend warm?

I think it's supposed to be parent and child, lol

shiny76

Callie22 wrote: »

I saw that yesterday and it's the creepiest advert I've EVER seen. The snowman is terrifying! And why does he want to keep his girlfriend warm?

Depends on your interpretation, I guess.

You may see it as reflecting what a caring human may do for another and an attempt to keep them warm.

Alternatively, it may be what a caring snowman may do for another in keeping them insulated (rather than warm) and therefore reducing their rate of deterioration.

...or am I thinking too much about the ad

mumps

margaretclare wrote: »

. Although we did achieve a few positive results - my personal triumph was being involved in the change to independent personal taxation (although obviously I was only one small voice).

When was this? I remember when the tax breaks for couples went, and before that when it could be transferred to the wife. Before that we chose to separate our tax affairs, my husband lost the married mans tax allowance but we were treated as two single people for tax purposes. From memory this was the early 80s. Didn't everyone have this option? We gained as our combined income put us so far into higher tax that it wasn't worth having the married mans tax allowance.

Wootball

I've decided I don't like the advert at all. Not because of the content, but because it's obviously angered a lot of the 'quick, burn your bra' brigade and taking precious time away from them that could be better spent in the kitchen making the dinner or cleaning up after herself.

margaretclare

mumps wrote: »

When was this? I remember when the tax breaks for couples went, and before that when it could be transferred to the wife. Before that we chose to separate our tax affairs, my husband lost the married mans tax allowance but we were treated as two single people for tax purposes. From memory this was the early 80s. Didn't everyone have this option? We gained as our combined income put us so far into higher tax that it wasn't worth having the married mans tax allowance.

It was changed in the 1990 Budget following a victory of the Conservative party. I spoke to the outgoing, and successive, Chancellor Nigel Lawson on BBC 'Election Call' and he agreed with the points I made. That was my small contribution.

Basically, up to then a woman's earned income fell, for tax purposes, outside the remit of the Married Women's Property Acts of the 1880s. That was because it was never envisaged that a married woman would have her own earnings and, up to that change, whatever a married woman earned was considered for tax purposes to be part of her husband's income. By the end of the 1980s at that General Election, I had a file of correspondence going back 20 years, the then Equal Opportunities Commission had taken up the issue. Every time there was a change in anything at all to do with the tax on my earned income my husband was written to about it. When I objected about this to the tax office I was told that 'for tax purposes my earnings were part of his income'.

After that Budget we had independent personal taxation.

louise3965

Wootball wrote: »

I've decided I don't like the advert at all. Not because of the content, but because it's obviously angered a lot of the 'quick, burn your bra' brigade and taking precious time away from them that could be better spent in the kitchen making the dinner or cleaning up after herself.

I've decided I don't like you.

molerat

shiny76 wrote: »

......

...or am I thinking too much about the ad

There are quite a few like you on this thread then

Errata

Every time there was a change in anything at all to do with the tax on my earned income my husband was written to about it. When I objected about this to the tax office I was told that 'for tax purposes my earnings were part of his income'.

Why on earth didn't you elect to be taxed separately? It was possible to chose that from at least the mid 70's to my knowledge.

margaretclare

Why on earth didn't you elect to be taxed separately? It was possible to chose that from at least the mid 70's to my knowledge.

Why on earth didn't the tax office, with whom I had reams of correspondence in those years, tell me that was possible? They didn't. It might possibly have had something to do with the fact that, from 1976 anyway, he had no earned income of his own and was on sickness benefits. But they still wrote to him about mine.