| If you became PM what would you do?? 19:48 - Dec 20 with 11606 views | Keno |
Me
1, scrap trident and save something like £20billion
2, undo the feck up that is Brexit
3, guarantee nurses etc pay of inflation plus at least 1% every yesr
4, make the use of extendable dog leads and those long training leads a criminal offence
5, reform income tax to a single charge (eg scrap ni)band bring in a higher rate
6, ban sports teams playing in green and yellow
7, allow Irish unity
8, reduce the royals to immediate and heirs making them effectively tax paying staff
9, cut down property and wealth of churches, to create “charity funds” for poor and needy - which is what the f4cking churches should be all about anyway
10, ban Piers Morgan and Nigel Farrage (I not sure I could sanction acts of countryside)
What you got TWTD?
|  |
| |  |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 09:38 - Dec 22 with 1217 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 09:28 - Dec 22 by J2BLUE |
The likes of Amazon and Starbucks are going to withdraw their business?
Don't be silly. |
The upcoming GMCT should help in this regard as there will be less incentive to offshore the profits.
That said 15pc is still too low but it’s a start. |  | | |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 09:48 - Dec 22 with 1196 views | tractordownsouth |
Build 300k+ homes a year and ban all future buy-to-let mortgages. NIMBY tax for those who object to housing in their areas to make up for the shortfall in council tax revenue.
Inflation +1% pay rises for public sector workers for the next 5 years.
Means test the triple lock on pensions and use the money to expand pension credit to those who need it most.
National Care service funded by 10% additional inheritance tax on all estates. So much of our country’s assets is unearned housing wealth.
Long term plan to get back into the Single Market when it’s less politically toxic. |  |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 10:10 - Dec 22 with 1168 views | IpswichKnight |
Cancelling Trident would be a folly almost on a par with Brexit, we’d not build another Submarine until the mid 2040’s leaving us with no attack Submarines until mid 2050’s.
Currently 2 Astute class attack subs are being finished and 2 Dreadnaught trident subs are in build, cancel Trident and the remaining 2 will be cancelled ( we’re building 4 trident subs to replace Vanguards), once the final 2 Dreadnaughts are in build the design and steel will be announced and cut for the replacement Astutes these are not due to be built and at sea until 2035 at the earliest. If we cancel Trident we have nothing on the build books at Barrow until then, the highly skilled workforce will leave for jobs in France ( who are not quitting there nuclear program) USA or Australia.
It’s taken us a good 20 years to upskill our workforce to build 4 submarines at the same time. We are world leaders in Submarines technology and lead the world in propulsion, sonar and making subs almost impossible to detect. Cancel Trident and we’ll leave a dent in our defence that will never be made good. | | | |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 10:26 - Dec 22 with 1141 views | SaleAway |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 09:31 - Dec 21 by J2BLUE |
Sunak wanted to introduce a £10 charge for missed GP appointments and that didn't happen. No way would a £100 A&E charge get through. |
The problem with an A&E charge is that you're attacking the symptom not the cause. The reason people end up at A&E is because they can't get an appointment with their GP.
I still don't quite understand the issue, perhaps I'm just lucky, but my GP runs an online AskMyGP service, where you fill in an online form, and a Dr will either respond online or call you back. Its generally been brilliant. I've always been able to chat to someone, and sometimes they've called me in to the surgery to check something, but mainly I've needed 5 minutes talking to a Dr, and I'm sure they are much more efficient because of it. | |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 11:52 - Dec 22 with 1065 views | J2BLUE |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 10:26 - Dec 22 by SaleAway |
The problem with an A&E charge is that you're attacking the symptom not the cause. The reason people end up at A&E is because they can't get an appointment with their GP.
I still don't quite understand the issue, perhaps I'm just lucky, but my GP runs an online AskMyGP service, where you fill in an online form, and a Dr will either respond online or call you back. Its generally been brilliant. I've always been able to chat to someone, and sometimes they've called me in to the surgery to check something, but mainly I've needed 5 minutes talking to a Dr, and I'm sure they are much more efficient because of it. |
I have been to the doctors once in about 10 years so might be out of touch but i'm always surprised they don't offer zoom appointments. Obviously it wouldn't be suitable for everything but feels like it could ease things a bit. |  |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 12:28 - Dec 22 with 1019 views | Churchman |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 10:10 - Dec 22 by IpswichKnight |
Cancelling Trident would be a folly almost on a par with Brexit, we’d not build another Submarine until the mid 2040’s leaving us with no attack Submarines until mid 2050’s.
Currently 2 Astute class attack subs are being finished and 2 Dreadnaught trident subs are in build, cancel Trident and the remaining 2 will be cancelled ( we’re building 4 trident subs to replace Vanguards), once the final 2 Dreadnaughts are in build the design and steel will be announced and cut for the replacement Astutes these are not due to be built and at sea until 2035 at the earliest. If we cancel Trident we have nothing on the build books at Barrow until then, the highly skilled workforce will leave for jobs in France ( who are not quitting there nuclear program) USA or Australia.
It’s taken us a good 20 years to upskill our workforce to build 4 submarines at the same time. We are world leaders in Submarines technology and lead the world in propulsion, sonar and making subs almost impossible to detect. Cancel Trident and we’ll leave a dent in our defence that will never be made good. |
Add in the fact that Putin’s war has shown the need to hold a form of ultimate deterrence and the idea of scrapping Trident is beyond me.
The argument that it makes us a target doesn’t wash. If Ukraine had kept its nuclear capability, Russia would never have invaded it. |  | | |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:21 - Dec 22 with 990 views | jeera |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 09:48 - Dec 22 by tractordownsouth |
Build 300k+ homes a year and ban all future buy-to-let mortgages. NIMBY tax for those who object to housing in their areas to make up for the shortfall in council tax revenue.
Inflation +1% pay rises for public sector workers for the next 5 years.
Means test the triple lock on pensions and use the money to expand pension credit to those who need it most.
National Care service funded by 10% additional inheritance tax on all estates. So much of our country’s assets is unearned housing wealth.
Long term plan to get back into the Single Market when it’s less politically toxic. |
See, I disagree about the NIMBY tag somewhat.
There was some beautiful land opposite where I live in which all sorts of wildlife thrived.
I would see kestrels hunt there of a day and owls of a night.
Hedgehogs would wander over here every evening because they knew residents put food out for them and the place was alive, buzzing with all sorts on a summer's day.
It's now a bunch of houses. No sign of a kestrel anymore let alone a hedgehog. They won't all have just happily moved on to new ground as I seen suggested before when this came up. I should think most just froze in fear and died when the machinery moved in. Or just didn't know what to do if that place had been home to their species for generations.
I objected which I suppose would make me a NIMBY in this case.
People who object to new buildings often do so with some reason, and one would assume they know the area better than most and that their reasoning will often be valid to anyone who cared.
Those behind the buildings won't share that local knowledge nor care about much other than the money the project will generate.
Yes I know we need housing, of course we do, but my main complaint is how much of the existing stock is owned by so few of the same people.
I wish we were a bit more selective on where this new housing goes. I don't think that's too unreasonable.
Edit: a NIMBY who can't spell NIMBY apparently. [Post edited 22 Dec 2022 13:43]
|  |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:44 - Dec 22 with 962 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 09:28 - Dec 22 by longtimefan |
As I understand it you pay no tax on dividends below £2k. Any thing above that is at something close to your marginal rate. |
Whatever the details, people to play the system and the system is set up to allow them to play it.
If the dividends were taxed to the same extent that their salaries would be they would simply draw it as salary instead except where it is done to incentivise the making of even higher profits in order to pay greater dividends. I am not anti-capitalist but those wo can most afford to pay higher tax often seem to be the loudest at complaining about paying anything at all.
A fairer society that looks after the most vulnerable would benefit everyone. Dickens' Christmas Carol is as relevant today as it ever was. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:47 - Dec 22 with 952 views | tractordownsouth |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:21 - Dec 22 by jeera |
See, I disagree about the NIMBY tag somewhat.
There was some beautiful land opposite where I live in which all sorts of wildlife thrived.
I would see kestrels hunt there of a day and owls of a night.
Hedgehogs would wander over here every evening because they knew residents put food out for them and the place was alive, buzzing with all sorts on a summer's day.
It's now a bunch of houses. No sign of a kestrel anymore let alone a hedgehog. They won't all have just happily moved on to new ground as I seen suggested before when this came up. I should think most just froze in fear and died when the machinery moved in. Or just didn't know what to do if that place had been home to their species for generations.
I objected which I suppose would make me a NIMBY in this case.
People who object to new buildings often do so with some reason, and one would assume they know the area better than most and that their reasoning will often be valid to anyone who cared.
Those behind the buildings won't share that local knowledge nor care about much other than the money the project will generate.
Yes I know we need housing, of course we do, but my main complaint is how much of the existing stock is owned by so few of the same people.
I wish we were a bit more selective on where this new housing goes. I don't think that's too unreasonable.
Edit: a NIMBY who can't spell NIMBY apparently. [Post edited 22 Dec 2022 13:43]
|
My NIMBY tax idea was slightly in-jest because I don’t see how it would be workable. I also get your point about some particular developments attacking wildlife and I wouldn’t count genuine objections as being part of the problem, without knowing the details of the case.
However, it’s cases like this one below which are all too common; rich people blocking anything which might give young people a crumb of hope just because it might make a dent in the value of their unearned property wealth (which, unless they have more than one house, is largely worthless anyway.) People complaining about buildings being “out of character with the local area” are usually concerned about their own pockets and nothing else - there are recent notable cases in Barnet and Peckham of development on land which has already been concreted over being considered “inappropriate” by local residents.
While this continues to happen, we’ll continue with poor growth rates and people of my generation will have zero hope for the future.
| |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:51 - Dec 22 with 935 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:21 - Dec 22 by jeera |
See, I disagree about the NIMBY tag somewhat.
There was some beautiful land opposite where I live in which all sorts of wildlife thrived.
I would see kestrels hunt there of a day and owls of a night.
Hedgehogs would wander over here every evening because they knew residents put food out for them and the place was alive, buzzing with all sorts on a summer's day.
It's now a bunch of houses. No sign of a kestrel anymore let alone a hedgehog. They won't all have just happily moved on to new ground as I seen suggested before when this came up. I should think most just froze in fear and died when the machinery moved in. Or just didn't know what to do if that place had been home to their species for generations.
I objected which I suppose would make me a NIMBY in this case.
People who object to new buildings often do so with some reason, and one would assume they know the area better than most and that their reasoning will often be valid to anyone who cared.
Those behind the buildings won't share that local knowledge nor care about much other than the money the project will generate.
Yes I know we need housing, of course we do, but my main complaint is how much of the existing stock is owned by so few of the same people.
I wish we were a bit more selective on where this new housing goes. I don't think that's too unreasonable.
Edit: a NIMBY who can't spell NIMBY apparently. [Post edited 22 Dec 2022 13:43]
|
The issue is that wherever you build it involves habitat destruction, even with disused brownfield sites. The creatures you describe are not rare so it would not be cause to fail to develop. It is a sad reality of human existence but development will have that impact.
That said, there are genuine sites that deserve special protection for a variety of reasons and it would be good if developments were increasingly done with environmental sensitivity such as wildlife corridors, etc. | |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:52 - Dec 22 with 932 views | jeera |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 09:28 - Dec 22 by J2BLUE |
The likes of Amazon and Starbucks are going to withdraw their business?
Don't be silly. |
As is the argument that their investment is needed to create jobs when the amount of independent business that don't/no longer exist because of them must be pretty damned high.
Potential tax-paying independents at that.
People complain society has broken down whilst not venturing outside enough to support the kind of places that used to be the core of communities.
I can't hold the door open for someone at a shop/post office that is no longer there. | |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:53 - Dec 22 with 926 views | Clapham_Junction |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:51 - Dec 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
The issue is that wherever you build it involves habitat destruction, even with disused brownfield sites. The creatures you describe are not rare so it would not be cause to fail to develop. It is a sad reality of human existence but development will have that impact.
That said, there are genuine sites that deserve special protection for a variety of reasons and it would be good if developments were increasingly done with environmental sensitivity such as wildlife corridors, etc. |
The view from some ecologists I used to work with was that brownfield sites can be more biodiverse than farmland (which is often a monoculture with farmers trying to kill off anything that gets in the way!). |  | | |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 14:01 - Dec 22 with 891 views | jeera |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 13:51 - Dec 22 by Nthsuffolkblue |
The issue is that wherever you build it involves habitat destruction, even with disused brownfield sites. The creatures you describe are not rare so it would not be cause to fail to develop. It is a sad reality of human existence but development will have that impact.
That said, there are genuine sites that deserve special protection for a variety of reasons and it would be good if developments were increasingly done with environmental sensitivity such as wildlife corridors, etc. |
As far as I'm concerned for every development a bunch of Buddhist monks should be shipped in to scour to site first with a view to safely and responsibly relocate every living creature there.
In truth, in terms of biodiversity I don't doubt there would be countless varieties of living beings of some form or another on any given site, brownfield or otherwise, but if they were to be scaled from cute and meaningful to some micro organisms that are only of interest to science geeks...
Caveat being that some of those things might be food to the cute ones I mention isn't entirely lost on me.
This should probably be in reply to Clapham. | |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 14:08 - Dec 22 with 850 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 14:01 - Dec 22 by jeera |
As far as I'm concerned for every development a bunch of Buddhist monks should be shipped in to scour to site first with a view to safely and responsibly relocate every living creature there.
In truth, in terms of biodiversity I don't doubt there would be countless varieties of living beings of some form or another on any given site, brownfield or otherwise, but if they were to be scaled from cute and meaningful to some micro organisms that are only of interest to science geeks...
Caveat being that some of those things might be food to the cute ones I mention isn't entirely lost on me.
This should probably be in reply to Clapham. |
Yes, indeed. Barn owls, kingfishers and kestrels need protection whilst pigeons, crows, rats, blackbirds and snakes can fend for themselves!
The reality is that we should protect biodiversity as much as we can. We do need a degree of development too, though. | |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 17:49 - Dec 22 with 780 views | sotd78 |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 21:23 - Dec 20 by J2BLUE |
Compulsory voting? Why? |
Compulsory voting is coming for sure. The new law about to enter the Lords says no voting without photo ID or a "form". It's all part of the step towards doing as the Aussues claim to do - compulsory. |  |
| Blue shirts/white shorts - sotd78 |
| |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 18:04 - Dec 22 with 762 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| If you became PM what would you do?? on 17:49 - Dec 22 by sotd78 |
Compulsory voting is coming for sure. The new law about to enter the Lords says no voting without photo ID or a "form". It's all part of the step towards doing as the Aussues claim to do - compulsory. |
Why would that be a step towards compulsory voting? It is designed to deter those without ready access to the correct ID (the poor) from voting. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
