FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > 1p petrol price drop
1p petrol price drop
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
was a penny ever going to be enough anyway and had they took a penny off at the pumps it would be put back on again next wk with interest.when osborne says hes watching the pump prices like a hawk if and when the pump prices rise just what is he going to do about it ??????????? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"was a penny ever going to be enough anyway and had they took a penny off at the pumps it would be put back on again next wk with interest.when osborne says hes watching the pump prices like a hawk if and when the pump prices rise just what is he going to do about it ???????????"
Not a damn thing. Gideon (to give him the name his father - Sir Peter Osborne, 17th Baronet [a title Gideon will inherit] gave him) Osborne knows sweet f a about people being unable to afford anything. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Not a damn thing. Gideon (to give him the name his father - Sir Peter Osborne, 17th Baronet [a title Gideon will inherit] gave him) Osborne knows sweet f a about people being unable to afford anything."
Says you. As usual. Drone Drone  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
One thing I can't understand about Osbourne and the Vat.....
He ups the 17.5% Vat rate to 20%, then when it is suggested that he drop the fuel duty Vat rate back down to 17.5% he declares that they looked at it but it is illegal under EU law.
Now try as I might, and I have looked into EU regulations on Vat, I read it that we are only beholdent to the EU on Vat alignment if we are part of the single currency....and as we all know, we ain't!
Now as far as I can see with researching Osbournes decision to raise our basic Vat rate to 20%, there was no application made to the EU in order to do so....so why would it be illegal for elements of Vat to now be lowered?
After all, we already have different classes of Vat and different Vat rates.
Anyone shed light on this?
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Not a damn thing. Gideon (to give him the name his father - Sir Peter Osborne, 17th Baronet [a title Gideon will inherit] gave him) Osborne knows sweet f a about people being unable to afford anything.
Says you. As usual. Drone Drone "
Sometimes the only way to get the truth into the closed minds of those unwilling to learn is to keep telling them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"One thing I can't understand about Osbourne and the Vat.....
He ups the 17.5% Vat rate to 20%, then when it is suggested that he drop the fuel duty Vat rate back down to 17.5% he declares that they looked at it but it is illegal under EU law.
Now try as I might, and I have looked into EU regulations on Vat, I read it that we are only beholdent to the EU on Vat alignment if we are part of the single currency....and as we all know, we ain't!
Now as far as I can see with researching Osbournes decision to raise our basic Vat rate to 20%, there was no application made to the EU in order to do so....so why would it be illegal for elements of Vat to now be lowered?
After all, we already have different classes of Vat and different Vat rates.
Anyone shed light on this?
"
My instinct is that he's lying. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Or......the proposed member state Vat alignment for those in the single currency is in the back of his mind?
It is widely believed that in 2014 /15 all EU states in the single currency will align their Vat rates....a figure of 20% has been banded about, with a reduced rate of 5% for food and childrens clothing, books etc.
This raises the question....does Georgey boy intend to drag us into a single currency referendum at the same time as the people go to the polls for the next general election?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"..........
This raises the question....does Georgey boy intend to drag us into a single currency referendum at the same time as the people go to the polls for the next general election?
"
His own party would have him shot for even suggesting such a thing and the way things are going in Greece, Ireland, Portugal and (very soon) Spain there may not be a eurozone by May 2015. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
lol the representatives of the Petrol stations says they cant all drop the 1p off as they have already paid for the fuel underground ,but in other budgets they have put the charges UP at a specific time ie midnight or 6 pm and the stations have complied .
re europe,fuck em ..lets get out its so crooked they havent had there books signed off for years no one will do it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"One thing I can't understand about Osbourne and the Vat.....
He ups the 17.5% Vat rate to 20%, then when it is suggested that he drop the fuel duty Vat rate back down to 17.5% he declares that they looked at it but it is illegal under EU law.
Now try as I might, and I have looked into EU regulations on Vat, I read it that we are only beholdent to the EU on Vat alignment if we are part of the single currency....and as we all know, we ain't!
Now as far as I can see with researching Osbournes decision to raise our basic Vat rate to 20%, there was no application made to the EU in order to do so....so why would it be illegal for elements of Vat to now be lowered?
After all, we already have different classes of Vat and different Vat rates.
Anyone shed light on this?
"
Your seat awaits you in the chamber Madam  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago
glasgow |
"
Not a damn thing. Gideon (to give him the name his father - Sir Peter Osborne, 17th Baronet [a title Gideon will inherit] gave him) Osborne knows sweet f a about people being unable to afford anything.
Says you. As usual. Drone Drone "
can't win the argument,so get personal,
good tact.
although it might not work so well,when you go to secondary school.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
can't win the argument,so get personal,
good tact.
although it might not work so well,when you go to secondary school. "
Pot, kettle, black?
Ring any bells? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
After the Great Depression of the 1920s regulations were brought in to stop commodities being traded as a speculative gamble. Oil was considered a rock-solid commodity that was traded purely on a supply and demand basis.
Goldman Sachs changed all that when it persuaded the CFTC (Commodities Futures Trading Commission) to permit them to trade oil as a speculative product. The CFTC agreed which led to Goldman Sachs trading oil like it was going out of fashion. It became common practice for a single barrel of oil to change hands 25-30 times before it was ever delivered to the end user, ie the garage forecourt.
This practice ramped up the price of a barrel of crude because all the trades in between the producer and the end consumer needed to make a profit on those trades.
Today, nearly 1 trillion barrels of oil have been bought and sold without ever being delivered, and if you do the maths you'll realise that oil producers will have to pump oil continually for decades just to satisfy those contracts, and that is before they can even begin to even think about pumping oil for any new deals made after today.
Now you know why the price of petrol is so high, and it has sod all to do with supplies drying up because the Middle East is in turmoil. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"lol the representatives of the Petrol stations says they cant all drop the 1p off as they have already paid for the fuel underground ,but in other budgets they have put the charges UP at a specific time ie midnight or 6 pm and the stations have complied .
............... "
Doesn't the duty apply at the actual point and moment of sale? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"lol the representatives of the Petrol stations says they cant all drop the 1p off as they have already paid for the fuel underground ,but in other budgets they have put the charges UP at a specific time ie midnight or 6 pm and the stations have complied .
...............
Doesn't the duty apply at the actual point and moment of sale?"
Listening to 5 Live yesterday, one forecourt cashier rang in and said she couldn't put the price down by 1p and she didn't know how operate the display outside and couldn't adjust the tills to reflect the new price. It would be done in the morning by the manager.
But, as you say, they always put it up at the correct time don't they. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
can't win the argument,so get personal,
good tact.
although it might not work so well,when you go to secondary school.
Pot, kettle, black?
Ring any bells?"
A perfect example of what saucy said. No argument so resort to name calling.
This is the same sort of mindlessness which brought us Tony Bliar and the assertion that Gordon was a "one-eyed Scotch git" |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Can someone tell me how much petrol was this time last year? Please"
U/L: 116.1p
Diesel: 116.9p
http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuel/fuel-price-archive.html |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
can't win the argument,so get personal,
good tact.
although it might not work so well,when you go to secondary school.
Pot, kettle, black?
Ring any bells?
A perfect example of what saucy said. No argument so resort to name calling.
This is the same sort of mindlessness which brought us Tony Bliar and the assertion that Gordon was a "one-eyed Scotch git""
On the contrary, I was simply highlighting the monotonous drone of you well worn and oft used mantra "Osbourne is little rich boy blah blah blah" - which is hardly a credible argument as to why the guy shouldn't be Chancellor of the Exchequer, and many EXPERTS believe George Osbourne is rapidly becoming a formidable Chancellor doing a good job in exceptionally trying circumstances. These are experts that know an awful lot more about economics than you and have all sorts of qualifications to prove it.
Now who was it that forced George to make the cuts he's had to make? Um... oh yeah.. None other than the one-eyed scotch git and his cohort Tony B Liar.
But YOU'LL never admit that in a million years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"For every EXPERT who reckons that Osbourne is playing it right with the time frame for his cuts there is another EXPERT who feels he is stifling growth.....
"
The only critics I've heard so far have been Labour MPs.
I was listening to Ed Milliband today and he said that Labour would have made cuts too but not as hard as Osbourne has, yet Milliband seems to have forgotten that had Labour won the election Brown would still be PM and I clearly remember Brown saying the only way to tackle the recession was to "spend, spend, spend". So, does Ed believe Brown was wrong, that Labour were not at fault for allowing the banks to trade recklessly and unregulated, or is he simply a bit of dimwit who just plain forgot that Labour would NOT have had a policy of cuts if they'd won the election?
I can't see Ed Milliband as Labour Party boss beyond another year or two. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
.........."Osbourne is little rich boy blah blah blah" - which is hardly a credible argument as to why the guy shouldn't be Chancellor of the Exchequer, "
Gideon shouldn't be Chancellor 'cos he's completely effin clueless - nothing to do with having a title and a bit money.
" These are experts that know an awful lot more about economics than you and have all sorts of qualifications to prove it."
My experts are bigger than your experts Is that the argument now? More to the point - how do you what I did for my MA - or the PhD?
Osborne's BA is in Modern History and he went on to work in Selfridges.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"For every EXPERT who reckons that Osbourne is playing it right with the time frame for his cuts there is another EXPERT who feels he is stifling growth.....
The only critics I've heard so far have been Labour MPs.
..............."
There are none as deaf as those who will not hear. Check out the words of the Governor of the Bank of England. Read the IFS.
Even Osborne himself downgraded his growth forecast whilst he was still on his feet on Wednesday. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I think you are either spending far too much time reading Right Wing papers Wishy, or alternatively you are guilty of 'Selective Reading'
Start reading the FT and the Economist, you will see articles written by plenty of international financial analysts who believe that cutting the deficit over an Eight or Ten year period would stimulate real growth and mean up to Half a million jobs won't be lost.
You can't have it both ways, one day you are on here slating people who are on the dole...the next you agree with Osbournes plan which already has Unemployment at a 17 year high...and rising. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aucy3Couple
over a year ago
glasgow |
"
can't win the argument,so get personal,
good tact.
although it might not work so well,when you go to secondary school.
Pot, kettle, black?
Ring any bells?"
thanks wishy.teacher gave me a gold star.
just one more thing.
strange how the manager,always manages to be there on time,when the price goes up,hmmmmmmmmmm. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I think you are either spending far too much time reading Right Wing papers Wishy, or alternatively you are guilty of 'Selective Reading'
Start reading the FT and the Economist, you will see articles written by plenty of international financial analysts who believe that cutting the deficit over an Eight or Ten year period would stimulate real growth and mean up to Half a million jobs won't be lost.
You can't have it both ways, one day you are on here slating people who are on the dole...the next you agree with Osbournes plan which already has Unemployment at a 17 year high...and rising. "
Unemployment is currently standing at 8.0% of the workforce. In April 2010, just before the Election and under a Labour govt, the unemployment figure was 8.0% of the workforce.
The Tories stated clearly that it was going to get harder before it got better. Osbourne believes that growth can be achieved by unshackling businesses with tax breaks and ridding cumbersome planning obstacles and I think he's right. More firms hiring = more people working = more tax collected = in the black and out of the red sooner rather than later.
I'm sure we'd love to see what Labour would do to tackle the deficit but so far they haven't said a dicky bird about how they'd achieve it, and I think that's because they haven't got a scooby how to. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
........Gideon shouldn't be Chancellor 'cos he's completely effin clueless - nothing to do with having a title and a bit money."
So who should have the job then?
If not Osbourne who should be Chancellor?
(pssst.. it has to be either a Tory or a LibDem cos they actually won the election remember.)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Actually no One party won a working majority in the election.....not withstanding that I would prefer to see Vince Cable in the job, but that was NEVER going to happen as the Lib Dems can only imagine they truly have any real say in governemnt policy.....the 1922 Committee know differently. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Actually no One party won a working majority in the election.....not withstanding that I would prefer to see Vince Cable in the job, but that was NEVER going to happen as the Lib Dems can only imagine they truly have any real say in governemnt policy.....the 1922 Committee know differently."
The same Vince Cable who thought he was powerful enough to contradict the PM publicly, the same guy who thought his policies were better than anybody else's - and tried to railroad them in?
I'd hate to think of the mess we'd be in if he was at the helm. Maybe he's effin clueless eh?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
........Gideon shouldn't be Chancellor 'cos he's completely effin clueless - nothing to do with having a title and a bit money.
So who should have the job then?
If not Osbourne who should be Chancellor?
(pssst.. it has to be either a Tory or a LibDem cos they actually won the election remember.)
"
Psssst. As any Tory or Fib Dem, when asked why they're seeking to implement policies which failed to feature in either of their manifestos, continually points out - NOBODY won the election. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Actually no One party won a working majority in the election.....not withstanding that I would prefer to see Vince Cable in the job, but that was NEVER going to happen as the Lib Dems can only imagine they truly have any real say in governemnt policy.....the 1922 Committee know differently."
Vince has all but vanished from sight. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Remember his name....he'll be the one that brings the coalition crashing down when Osbourne spirals out control...
"
He probably will, but it won't be for the good of the country. He strikes me as quite a bitter man who doesn't like being slapped down and holds grudges. I wouldn't put it past him to secretly plot and plan just to have his own personal revenge.
It's safe to say that I neither like nor trust the man, and his demotion so soon after the Election shows that the PM and the Cabinet have seen something about the man that sets alarm bells ringing.
A ticking bomb would be a good analogy to describe him. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
........Gideon shouldn't be Chancellor 'cos he's completely effin clueless - nothing to do with having a title and a bit money.
So who should have the job then?
If not Osbourne who should be Chancellor?
(pssst.. it has to be either a Tory or a LibDem cos they actually won the election remember.)
Psssst. As any Tory or Fib Dem, when asked why they're seeking to implement policies which failed to feature in either of their manifestos, continually points out - NOBODY won the election."
Ok, Labour lost it then. And if Labour lost then someone else must have won - that's the nature of these things, and in our current first past the post system the Conservatives were always going to form a new government with or without the LibDems. Brown knew it, and so did Clegg, which is why he hopped into bed with Cameron as he also knew that to align himself to Labour may give him a taste of power but it would be a very brief one - even more brief than the taste he's enjoying now.
The Labour Party and the Libdems were/are so far apart in policy that Brown would have asked for more than Clegg was prepared to concede and Clegg would have got absolutely nothing in return because all Brown wanted Clegg for was to stop the Tories taking office.
The only time I'll ever view an outright majority as comprehensive and without argument is when we have a 100% turnout at the elections - and that is just not going to happen.
To anyone with a basic understanding of elections - The Conservatives won, but if it placates your sense of injustice, we'll agree that it wasn't with an outright majority, but then who has ever held the office of Prime Minister with the backing and support of 51% of the entire populace who are eligible to vote. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Oh Wishy.....do you need reminding about 1997 when Labour had a RESOUNDING overall majority?
It doesn't matter what a majority means to YOU, it's what it means in Parliamentary terms that matters.
Thirteen years of Labour rule...
Iraq...
Expenses Scandal...
Recession...
Afghanistan...
Record Deficit....
Yet still your mob coudn't win an outright victory, an overall majority in the house....Piss poor show from a piss poor political party.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Remember his name....he'll be the one that brings the coalition crashing down when Osbourne spirals out control...
He probably will, but it won't be for the good of the country. He strikes me as quite a bitter man who doesn't like being slapped down and holds grudges. I wouldn't put it past him to secretly plot and plan just to have his own personal revenge.
It's safe to say that I neither like nor trust the man, and his demotion so soon after the Election shows that the PM and the Cabinet have seen something about the man that sets alarm bells ringing.
A ticking bomb would be a good analogy to describe him."
Vince Cable a ticking time bomb?
I really hope so. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Yet still your mob coudn't win an outright victory, an overall majority in the house....Piss poor show from a piss poor political party.
"
I do so hope the electorate remember those points you mentioned come 2015. Osbourne will have bought a lot of votes by then anyway and everything will look nice and rosy.
Labour have a nice long long long period out in the wilderness to look forward to. What a warming pleasant thought that is. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
.......... the Conservatives were always going to form a new government with or without the LibDems. Brown knew it, and so did Clegg, which is why he hopped into bed with Cameron "
Hopping into bed with Cameron is one thing but it might have been polite if Cameron had waited a wee while before fucking Clegg so unceremoniously up the ronson.
"The Labour Party and the Libdems were/are so far apart in policy
"
That simply isn't true. Both parties worked well in coalition in Scotland for many years.
"The only time I'll ever view an outright majority as comprehensive and without argument is when we have a 100% turnout at the elections - and that is just not going to happen."
........and YOU accused ME of being a Trot????????
"To anyone with a basic understanding of elections "
That excludes you then. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Osbourne is upsetting all quarters of society with his disasterous policies on cutbacks......I doubt if they could get back into power at an election next week even if only Tories were allowed to vote.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
The Labour Party and the Libdems were/are so far apart in policy
That simply isn't true. Both parties worked well in coalition in Scotland for many years.
"
Oh do me a favour! Since when has Scotland ever been harmonious about anything. They argue over what time of the fookin day it is.
And if they were so in love, how come Alex Salmond is top dog up there now?
Not being a religious man, I still pray to whatever powers there are that Scotland will one day get it's independance so that we English won't have to send any more English money north of the border to 'pay' for the priviledge of having the hand that feeds the Scots continually biting us.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Osbourne is upsetting all quarters of society with his disasterous policies on cutbacks......I doubt if they could get back into power at an election next week even if only Tories were allowed to vote.
"
The local govt and devolved administration elections on May 5th will be very interesting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Osbourne is upsetting all quarters of society with his disasterous policies on cutbacks......I doubt if they could get back into power at an election next week even if only Tories were allowed to vote.
The local govt and devolved administration elections on May 5th will be very interesting."
A Libdem wipeout is expected. Good job too. Weaken them and then Dave can tell them to bog off. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Osbourne is upsetting all quarters of society with his disasterous policies on cutbacks......I doubt if they could get back into power at an election next week even if only Tories were allowed to vote.
The local govt and devolved administration elections on May 5th will be very interesting.
A Libdem wipeout is expected. Good job too. Weaken them and then Dave can tell them to bog off. "
See my comment (above) about your lack of understanding of elections.
Remember Barnsley |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Osbourne is upsetting all quarters of society with his disasterous policies on cutbacks......I doubt if they could get back into power at an election next week even if only Tories were allowed to vote.
The local govt and devolved administration elections on May 5th will be very interesting.
A Libdem wipeout is expected. Good job too. Weaken them and then Dave can tell them to bog off.
See my comment (above) about your lack of understanding of elections.
Remember Barnsley "
blah blah blah .. snooze. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"..........
Remember Barnsley
blah blah blah .. snooze. "
So long as you continue to bury your head in the sand there'll be someone parking their bicycle in the crack of your arse. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"..........
Remember Barnsley
blah blah blah .. snooze.
So long as you continue to bury your head in the sand there'll be someone parking their bicycle in the crack of your arse."
Still have a TORY govt though don't we. And it will be so for a good many year yet. Oh deep joy.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
And in your ref to Barnsley... A Labour safe seat, allegedly. At the Gen Election just over half the electorate turned out. At the by election it was down to just over 30%. So Labour gets the north of the UK, it still won't be enough once the govt have redrawn the political boundaries and reduced the number of MPs to 600 ... and you can bet your bottom dollar which constituencies will be carved up.. Barnsley perhaps? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
........Gideon shouldn't be Chancellor 'cos he's completely effin clueless - nothing to do with having a title and a bit money.
So who should have the job then?
If not Osbourne who should be Chancellor?
(pssst.. it has to be either a Tory or a LibDem cos they actually won the election remember.)
Psssst. As any Tory or Fib Dem, when asked why they're seeking to implement policies which failed to feature in either of their manifestos, continually points out - NOBODY won the election."
so a lose - loose situation and guess who are the biggest losers. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Oh deary me....
Remember the 'Independent' body Georgey Boy set up to back up his dodgy monetary policies just a few months ago?
After the honeymoon period is over they are now starting to betray Georgeys old boys act he displayed when he set them up.
'Households face falling standards of living for at least another two years as rising prices outstrip wage increases, the Government’s official economic forecaster has warned.
Inflation will exceed expected salary increases until the middle of 2013, more than five years after the onset of the recession, figures from the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) suggest.
The predicted squeeze is far worse than ministers had previously signalled. A typical middle-class family will see their disposable income fall by more than £1,500 this year as a result.
In one possible scenario, the OBR, set up by George Osborne to provide economic forecasts, suggests that high inflation could result in a twelvefold rise in Bank of England interest rates, up to six per cent, plunging many households into difficulty'.
Source Daily Telegraph
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Oh Wishy.....do you need reminding about 1997 when Labour had a RESOUNDING overall majority?
It doesn't matter what a majority means to YOU, it's what it means in Parliamentary terms that matters.
Thirteen years of Labour rule...
Iraq...
Expenses Scandal...
Recession...
Afghanistan...
Record Deficit....
Yet still your mob coudn't win an outright victory, an overall majority in the house....Piss poor show from a piss poor political party.
"
Iraq? kuwait 1991? it was a continuation................last govt.....tory
Expenses? going on for years ...........last govt,toy b4 labour.
Afghanistan? going on for centuries.....blame the tories
Record Deficit?............blame the bankers......money people....blame the tories
its the new future, blame the past
Theres still a seat for you in the chamber,you know your stuff |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"And in your ref to Barnsley... A Labour safe seat, allegedly. At the Gen Election just over half the electorate turned out. At the by election it was down to just over 30%. So Labour gets the north of the UK, it still won't be enough once the govt have redrawn the political boundaries and reduced the number of MPs to 600 ... and you can bet your bottom dollar which constituencies will be carved up.. Barnsley perhaps? "
I believe that's known a gerrymandering and is what caused the (how many?) years of conflict in the Six Counties.
I doubt that's what you, or anyone, wants for the UK on an ongoing basis. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
