2024 Election thread
Comments
-
? That is a point about learning, nothing to do with location or snobbery.
Thought you'd appreciated school students going to places of historical interest.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
-
I do. Explain where the snobbery comes in when related to term time holidays..
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I mean, I read your post as "it's ok if you do a typically middle class holiday, but if you do a typical working class holiday it isn't." Which smacks a lot of class snobbery.
I'm relatively libertarian on this; if the parents want to take their kids out of school for a holiday that's their business. though I think the context in which the children are out of school is relevant. Clearly if there is an attendence issue and the parents are not helping improve that, then there are other issues at play and maybe a holiday isn't appropriate.
0 -
Wrong end of the stick. People are claiming a weeks holiday is the educational equivalent of a week at school.
I'm saying it can be, depending on the location. Don't care if it's York or Yucatan but a beach resort is not beneficial.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Oh yeah. No it's not educational in any normal way. Parents are kidding themselves if they say so.
I do think family holidays are great though and great for the kids too. If that's the only way the family can get away then I'm absolutely all for it.
I often missed the first week of school on holiday. The holidays were, to this day, an awful lot more memorable than any week I had at school.
Spending time away from home without the responsibilities of work and school is important for a family. IMO.
0 -
Ultimately it's the kind of thing where codifying it is gonna be extremely difficult.
If the first week/last week of school just becomes an officially sanctioned unofficial holiday week, then it becomes an even more pointless week of schooling.
At the same time, clearly some weeks of school are more important than others.
I'm not really a fan of some holidays being seen as more worthy, because a beach holiday can offer lots of opportunities to engage with a foreign culture, and a bored child being dragged around museums probably isn't really gaining anything useful.
0 -
You haven't been paying attention to Mr Chasey - Tory voters are all over 65 so don't have kids in school and will likely take the view "we didn't do it in our day so why should they now".
0 -
-
Seems to be a correlation between wisdom/life experience and voting Tory based on that chart.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Rick will soon be 39. 😉
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Or being exposed to lead in paint and car exhausts...
0 -
-
I suppose this is a tacit admission that if you are well off then why the hell would you vote Labour.
Anyway, based on your recent posts about your increased annual income, it looks like you're busy fulfilling the key criteria to become a Tory as you see it. The next step is to get a bit of worldly wisdom and realise which side your bread is buttered, so to say 😉
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I thought it was poor people who lived next to main roads who got lots of car fumes? That what Sadiq says.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
-
completely missing the point
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
houses were bought and flipped for profit, public property was converted into profit for all involved
the cost was the loss of social housing, pushing more into the private sector
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny0 -
yes it was bad thing
why should a lucky few get a tax/rate-payer subsidised windfall? especially at the cost of reducing social housing availability long term
those able were always free to work to buy through their own efforts, their choice
my bike - faster than god's and twice as shiny1 -
I'm not convinced that was the case with most of them at the time. Quite a few of my dad's family lived in Council housing back then and they stayed put after buying. I'm sure plenty did move on as Council estates weren't generally desireable locations, the intention was to give people that social mobility after all. I am slightly surprised how much the houses on my nan's old estate are now worth though, it's still not the nicest area in town but the houses are around the same price as others (although they are generally a bit larger). If the housing had been replaced on a like for like basis I still feel it would have been a good scheme.
0 -
As I recall the justification at the time was that a lot of the council houses were aging and would soon need maintenance. Selling them on was a cost-cutting exercise. They just didn't consider the big picture, or long term.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
-
Nope, more that you're going to classed as an 'enemy of the state' with your level of earnings (you mentioned being in the top 1% club recently) if Labour get in and will likely get screwed on income tax and quite possibly your own pension. So wise up...
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
You sound like you need a tin foil hat Stevo.
0 -
I'll be fine, once my kid leaves uni I'll be better off regardless of what 'Starmergeddon' might throw my way. Not sure about you though....
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
We're already having the arse taxed out of us after 13 years of Tories. What planet are you on, as it's not this one.
I think most normal people would tolerate that if the public services they're supposed to fund weren't various shades of sh!t.
The only public service that doesn't seem to be falling over to some degree is the state pension. That's about it.
0 -
Stevo's possibly worried about historical tax levels. In the 1970s, the highest rate of income tax on earned income was 83 per cent. If the past few years have taught you anything it should be that no matter how bad things are right now that can still get even worse.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
This may please Rick, but there was a 15% surcharge for unearned income, meaning that for some lucky souls the effective tax rate was 98%. Lefties to this day are still scratching their heads as to why there was a brain drain and why Dennis Healey had to ask the IMF for a bail-out.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
So you're not happy that you're being taxed too much? Good....
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
