isnt it best to do these things legally...Yes, its best to do this kind of thing when you have most leverage....remember, these people have done nothing wrong, they're heroes.
But it's ok for the employer to make these decisions themselves without consulting their employees?isnt it best to do these things legally...
you know having a ballott in line with the regulations
giving due notice to the employer (in this case NHS) so they can ensure an adequate level of care is available to patients in the middle of a pandemic
rather than just walking out ... and potentially killing a lot of people who have done nothing wrong (which would go against the heroic description a tad)
You're odds on for retaining your Worst Poster award, you know?
Just tell us what it said ffs Elvis.
pretty sure its a government decision and essentially they have stuck to what they always said ... (income thresholds / who is entitled to what etc in the immigration bill)But it's ok for the employer to make these decisions themselves without consulting their employees?
isnt it best to do these things legally...
you know having a ballott in line with the regulations
giving due notice to the employer (in this case NHS) so they can ensure an adequate level of care is available to patients in the middle of a pandemic
rather than just walking out ... and potentially killing a lot of people who have done nothing wrong (which would go against the heroic description a tad)
Can't help but think this will end up back firing massively. Heckling from Conservative backbenchers against a calm opposition leader focused on the facts of just how terrible the government's coronavirus response has been will only serve in making the opposition look like the grown ups in the debate. Especially since this new format has exposed Boris Johnson and his cabinet for the lying chancers that they are.
It literally doesn't matter as no one sadly cares about PMQ's.
Agree with you here, its far better than the norm and it's going to be pretty awful when it returns back.Admittedly I didn't care much for it until the virtual format was introduced. It's so much more productive and watchable without the childish booing and heckling over ministers raising important questions. I'll be sad to see it go back to normal.
Hopefully it's just them still riding high due to the pandemic. In times of crisis people tend to rally around the government(Almost all western governments have had a massive polling boost since the pandemic).On YouGov's polls, it truly baffles me that people would still vote Conservative. They may not be watching PMQ's but the media is certainly not giving them an easy ride on the way they have handled this situation.
Guardian said:According to Sky’s Tamara Cohen, the Independent Office for Police Conduct will announce shortly that it will not be launching a criminal investigation into Boris Johnson and his relationship with the American businesswoman Jennifer Arcuri when he was mayor.
Maybe they should just write a strongly worded email instead? All workers rights have been won that way, right?isnt it best to do these things legally...
you know having a ballott in line with the regulations
giving due notice to the employer (in this case NHS) so they can ensure an adequate level of care is available to patients in the middle of a pandemic
rather than just walking out ... and potentially killing a lot of people who have done nothing wrong (which would go against the heroic description a tad)
Can't help but think this will end up back firing massively. Heckling from Conservative backbenchers against a calm opposition leader focused on the facts of just how terrible the government's coronavirus response has been will only serve in making the opposition look like the grown ups in the debate. Especially since this new format has exposed Boris Johnson and his cabinet for the lying chancers that they are.
BBC news saying no evidence to investigate further but record keeping at the mayor's office has been criticised while Johnson was in office.Boris Johnson will not face criminal inquiry over Jennifer Arcuri
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ot-face-criminal-inquiry-over-jennifer-arcuri
We laugh at America, but this shit has been going on over here for longer. But.....clap, clap
I'm just picturing huge stacks of paper being tossed by Boris' team into a bonfire with the independent investigators standing beside it ticking a few boxes in their notebooks and shouting "nothing to see here"BBC news saying no evidence to investigate further but record keeping at the mayor's office has been criticised while Johnson was in office.
Hmmmmmmmm.
Sweet hates old people. If he comes across anything on twitter he thinks might show them in a bad light he'll post it.Of course the older generation would want them to pay.
This is literally so dumb. I don't know if anyone has done a take down of his points but anyway.
Firstly, his house isn't going to be on the hook. Fine but that's normally the case anyway with regards to limited liability companies. Weird to be crying over it. Sure in theory banks could require guarantee/collateral on a loan and the Govt is instead guaranteeing the loans, but yeah. Noting particularly abnormal about being somewhat insulated from personal loss if your business collapses.
Anyway, onto the Bounce Back loans and why it's a shitty policy.
- Government guarantees the loans, but is not itself the lender.
- So the taxpayer takes on 100% of the risk of the loan meanwhile the lenders (all private companies) take 100% of the reward
- The loans have a 2.5% interest rate, which… given the base rate just dropped by a factor of 7 to 0.1% is probably going to look pretty pricey in 6 months time.
- Why isn't the Government itself backing these loans and charging say 0.5% interest on them? Instead the real winners of this policy are the lenders who make a guaranteed 2.5% return on the loans until the businesses either collapse or the balance is paid off. And that's a policy that is being emotionally praised?
The framing of this question is utter shite. It's making it sound like every single immigrant doesn't work and pay taxes like everyone else, or that immigrants are somehow more likely to rely on the welfare state.
It would also be nice to see a proper poll that breaks down how many of the older pollers are descended from immigrants.
The framing of this question is utter shite. It's making it sound like every single immigrant doesn't work and pay taxes like everyone else, or that immigrants are somehow more likely to rely on the welfare state.
It would also be nice to see a proper poll that breaks down how many of the older pollers are descended from immigrants.
Here's a tweet from the yougov account which links to the same pageThe question seems quite poorly worded. It doesn't seem to make clear that this is about an extra surcharge, and not just asking "Should immigrants be required to work and pay NI/taxes in order to use the NHS"
Why ?It would also be nice to see a proper poll that breaks down how many of the older pollers are descended from immigrants.
Here's a tweet from the yougov account which links to the same page
Which makes it seems like they've potentially asked about the surcharge(''Comfortable majority of Brits say immigrates should pay the NHS surcharge''). The framing is a bit all over the place tbf.
Why ?
This hypocrisy(People from immigrate families hating new immigrates)never works, sadly. It anything it strengthens anti immigration feelings.
Here's a tweet from the yougov account which links to the same page
Which makes it seems like they've potentially asked about the surcharge(''Comfortable majority of Brits say immigrates should pay the NHS surcharge''). The framing is a bit all over the place tbf.
Why ?
This hypocrisy(People from immigrate families hating new immigrates)never works, sadly. It anything it strengthens anti immigration feelings.
Same. It would just bit a weird to add it onto the graph if wasn't part of the question.Even on the YouGov poll the questions don't directly mention the surcharge, only the titles that they've added for the graphs. Though to be fair with these polls, I have no idea how much extra information the participants are given other than the questions quoted
The link to the yougov site has a breakdown of region, gender, social grade(Although yougov grading is rubbish) and political party. The reason I posted that tweet is 1)It was the first that came on twitter and 2)I'm rubbish with I.T and can't be arsed to copy the results off the site. But fair enough.Because it would be interesting to see for exactly the reason you say. You've got me wrong if you think I'm looking for the hypocrisy angle. It would be interesting to see if it's a general consensus amongst all older pollers to see if just basing these pills purely on age is a reflection of our society. Where I come from most immigrant families are welcomed quite quickly to the area, same with where I'm living now. But, fifty miles up the road when I was at Uni, I remember three different families that moved out because they were getting harassed by the locals.
But wouldn't this be considered by the members public answering the question ? You're right that smacks of reinforcing the boogeyman bashing but the very basic nature of the question can at times be a far better reflexion of people views.My point is that we're all descended from immigrants. This poll, like others, using the term immigrants with no mention of these "immigrants" employment status, job classifications, mental and physical well-being, age group, just smacks of reinforcing the boogeyman bashing that we seem to get all the time when it comes to the dreaded "immigrant coming over here and taking all the free stuff they can get".
Good news that the government has abandoned the surcharge for some workers, but an opportunity to remind people of what the Labour party’s previous idea of ‘opposition’ used to look like. It can never be allowed to return to those days.
Good news that the government has abandoned the surcharge for some workers, but an opportunity to remind people of what the Labour party’s previous idea of ‘opposition’ used to look like. It can never be allowed to return to those days.
Shame he could only be bothered standing up for the migrants in the focus group approved professions, if this is the outcome.They absolutely would not have backtracked if Starmer had not raised it yesterday during PMQ.
Shame he could only be bothered standing up for the migrants in the focus group approved professions, if this is the outcome.
Sorry, the focus group and Tory MP approved professions.A lot of Tories had to vote for the amendment.
