Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ICM: The Tories would be on 40 pc three ahead of LAB if Mag

2

Comments

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Fox News reporting 3 dead, 10 amputations and 1 further unexploded device in Boston.
  • Reports that further unexploded devices have been located. If true, that would rule out the rather hopeful rumours of a gas leak.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 72,098
    Terrible though this news is, this is the first time Al-Qaeda have managed to attack on US soil since 9/11 and on nothing like the same scale, which, while condolences must be sent to the victims, is some achievement. I think it ends all hope of closure of Guantanamo in the imminent future though!
  • At this stage, it's pointless speculating on blame for the Boston explosions. It's just as likely to be some homegrown crazies, and America has a lot of those, as it is some Islamist group.
    I guess the States will have a day or so of chaos, false alarms and flight restrictions, whilst this works through the system.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 72,098
    Wolf Blitzer, though, apparently speculating anti-tax activists to blame!
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    SeanT said:

    Multiple simul-explosions is trademark al-Qaeda - FWIW.

    Attacking a marathon would guarantee extensive realtime news coverage, as well.

    However lots of al Qaeda wannabes are now copying their technique.

    Y0kel posted only a few days ago about Al-Qaeda's leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden's former number two, releasing an internet video. Y0kel noted at the time that such releases were rare and usually correlated with high profile Al-Qaeda terrrorist attacks.

    There is no confirmed link with the bombings in Boston, which may be entirely unrelated to Al-Qaeda, but we should nonetheless note what Y0kel had to say.

  • RobDRobD Posts: 46,521

    The Boston situation looks bad from the pictures.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22160691

    I hope everyone's okay. It seems rather pointless to say much more or speculate at this stage.

    Three reported dead.
    We're watching the BBC coverage. I think they should be slightly more careful about using some of the footage, especially pre-watershed. The same goes for the other broadcasters.

    SeanT: don't make an ass of yourself. You may be right, but we don't know. It could be homegrown terrorists - America's produced enough of those in the past, or any number of other groups or individuals.
    The image BBC have on their live blog at 2055 is pretty unnecessary.

  • HYUFD said:

    Terrible though this news is, this is the first time Al-Qaeda have managed to attack on US soil since 9/11 and on nothing like the same scale, which, while condolences must be sent to the victims, is some achievement. I think it ends all hope of closure of Guantanamo in the imminent future though!

    It's a bit early to say what this is or who is responsible.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 72,098
    Wolf Blitzer: Two huge Boston Marathon explosions at finish line were "unexpected".
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    2 dead 22 injured so far in Boston.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22160978
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,445
    Just heard about the Boston bombings.

    Very tragic events, and let's hope the unexploded device can be safely disposed of.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 19,903
    edited April 2013


    Be pretty bad news for Scottish public finances

    The news, good or bad, applies currently to UK public finances.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 23,283
    Interesting the BBC now joins the other networks in live coverage. Not so long ago they would have waited to present a more informed package. Looking at pictures of bloodied casualties in wheelchairs I'm wondering which approach is better. I don't gain anything from seeing a woman being wheeled along in a wheelchair with blood all over her face.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    To me it has all the hallmarks of jihadists attacks. Shredded clothes on surviving injured show a powerful blast.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 19,903
    SeanT said:


    Unwet your gussets: I specifically say this al Qaeda trademark of multiple explosions has now been copied, so its an unreliable indicator.

    The 'RA (and plenty of other terrorists) were doing multiple bombings when Osama was still in purple disco pants.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    SeanT said:

    Multiple simul-explosions is trademark al-Qaeda - FWIW.

    Attacking a marathon would guarantee extensive realtime news coverage, as well.

    However lots of al Qaeda wannabes are now copying their technique.

    Is this a case of life imitating art? In the four lions film the target was a marathon.

    It will become clear in time I suppose.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 24,348
    SeanT said:

    The Boston situation looks bad from the pictures.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22160691

    I hope everyone's okay. It seems rather pointless to say much more or speculate at this stage.

    Three reported dead.
    We're watching the BBC coverage. I think they should be slightly more careful about using some of the footage, especially pre-watershed. The same goes for the other broadcasters.

    SeanT: don't make an ass of yourself. You may be right, but we don't know. It could be homegrown terrorists - America's produced enough of those in the past, or any number of other groups or individuals.
    Unwet your gussets: I specifically say this al Qaeda trademark of multiple explosions has now been copied, so its an unreliable indicator.

    As to the idea that we must not speculate, why the F not? Is there an agreed time-horizon we have to cross before we can ask, er, who did this? We're not a bunch of bishops gathered for solemn prayers. We're just commenters on a blog. Stop being prissy and pompous.

    Moreover, accurate speculation could, of course, save lives.
    Your speculation (whether accurate or not) will not do anything to help the situation.

    I'll let others decide on this debate. On which point, best wishes to everyone involved. Good night.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Fox news say that there were 3 explosions - the third one a controlled explosion.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 19,110
    tim said:

    SeanT learned nothing from his sick Breivik nights performance

    No, Norway didn't seem like an Islamist attack from the offset, lone gunman shooting at people. A bombing at a popular event in the US does scream Islamist attack right now, though we will need to await confirmation before giving it a final label.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    SeanT said:

    tim said:

    SeanT learned nothing from his sick Breivik nights performance

    Right back at you, you bitter old twit.
    I remember being called to watch on TV a broadcast of a plane flying into the World Trade Center on Manhattan.

    As the news commentators were speculating on air traffic control and pilot errors, a second plane hit the other tower.

    Speculation on cause tends to change with our knowledge of events. Does that make the initial theories invalid as options?

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,445
    Mr. K, if only 2-3 are dead then that's quite surprising. Two explosions, right? 7/7 had 4 and circa 50 dead, I think. It's surprising the figure isn't significantly higher.

  • SeanT said:


    Unwet your gussets: I specifically say this al Qaeda trademark of multiple explosions has now been copied, so its an unreliable indicator.

    The 'RA (and plenty of other terrorists) were doing multiple bombings when Osama was still in purple disco pants.
    To be honest, all emergency services are taught to expect secondary devices, and have been since the days of the IRA

  • RobDRobD Posts: 46,521

    SeanT said:

    The Boston situation looks bad from the pictures.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22160691

    I hope everyone's okay. It seems rather pointless to say much more or speculate at this stage.

    Three reported dead.
    We're watching the BBC coverage. I think they should be slightly more careful about using some of the footage, especially pre-watershed. The same goes for the other broadcasters.

    SeanT: don't make an ass of yourself. You may be right, but we don't know. It could be homegrown terrorists - America's produced enough of those in the past, or any number of other groups or individuals.
    Unwet your gussets: I specifically say this al Qaeda trademark of multiple explosions has now been copied, so its an unreliable indicator.

    As to the idea that we must not speculate, why the F not? Is there an agreed time-horizon we have to cross before we can ask, er, who did this? We're not a bunch of bishops gathered for solemn prayers. We're just commenters on a blog. Stop being prissy and pompous.

    Moreover, accurate speculation could, of course, save lives.
    Your speculation (whether accurate or not) will not do anything to help the situation.

    I'll let others decide on this debate. On which point, best wishes to everyone involved. Good night.
    I'd have to agree with SeanT on this, why can't we speculate as to the motives behind this?

    I am sure everyone on this board is thinking of the families of those who were killed, and those that were injured. But saying we can't even begin to think about what might have caused it is a bit OTT. Are we only allowed to speculate about what caused it when the authorities tell us what to think?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 72,098
    Lucian Fletcher - True, and of course that would only apply if it was Al-Qaeda, no doubt we will find out over the next few days, but condolences and prayers for the victims and injured and their families for now!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 46,521

    Mr. K, if only 2-3 are dead then that's quite surprising. Two explosions, right? 7/7 had 4 and circa 50 dead, I think. It's surprising the figure isn't significantly higher.

    7/7 attacks were explosions in very confined spaces.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    Mr. K, if only 2-3 are dead then that's quite surprising. Two explosions, right? 7/7 had 4 and circa 50 dead, I think. It's surprising the figure isn't significantly higher.

    The 7/7 explosions were in confined and enclosed spaces, allowing the blast to have maximum effect. These Boston explosions appear to be in open spaces, hence lessening their damage.

  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    An additional near simultanous explosion took place at the JFK Library in Boston.

    This appears to be a co-ordinated attack seeking maximum international publicity.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    The events of Boston will be sending shivers up the spine of those responsible for security in London on Wednesday.

    I predict bleatings about the Police shutting down the right to protest as additional security measures are implemented.
  • AveryLP said:

    The events of Boston will be sending shivers up the spine of those responsible for security in London on Wednesday.

    I predict bleatings about the Police shutting down the right to protest as additional security measures are implemented.

    Well there's the London Marathon this upcoming Sunday.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,445
    edited April 2013
    Mr. D/Mr. K, indeed, but surely nearer the start people would've been crammed together and more affected? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the fatalities are currently low for such an incident, I'm just surprised.

    Edited extra bit: just seen this: "4:24 pm ET: A federal law enforcement authority confirms Boston explosions were intentional, using small portable explosive devices."
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    Fox News reporting that a suspect has been identified in Boston and is currently undergoing treatment in a Boston hospital under Police guard.

    Some talk of an official press announcement coming up.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 46,521

    Mr. D/Mr. K, indeed, but surely nearer the start people would've been crammed together and more affected? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad the fatalities are currently low for such an incident, I'm just surprised.

    Edited extra bit: just seen this: "4:24 pm ET: A federal law enforcement authority confirms Boston explosions were intentional, using small portable explosive devices."

    The blast can escape upwards when it is outside, significantly reducing the force. On the tube, the explosion hit the walls/ceilings, and was reflected back into the train causing devastation.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    To be honest SeanT CNN should just shut up.
  • Could scupper NI dissidents' fundraising efforts ahead of the G8 Summit.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Fox also reporting that two additional suspected devices are being attended to.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 33,880
    Horrible news from Boston, a wonderful town. We're due to hold a big conference there in June. Some reports indicate that one of the bombs went off in or next to the hotel where the gala dinner is due to take place. But that's by the by. God bless Beantown and all those affected.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    We'll know the truth of Boston soon enough; My gut tells me it'll be a domestic nutter, but give it 24 hours and we'll know. It seems too low scale for an Al-Q attack. Unless it's a "tribute band" and not the real thing.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276
    On topic, "tories prefer corpse as leader to Cameron"
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    SeanT said:

    AveryLP said:

    Fox News reporting that a suspect has been identified in Boston and is currently undergoing treatment in a Boston hospital under Police guard.

    That would indicate it isn't a suicide attack. Ergo: not al Qaeda?

    CNN now suggesting, however, that the simultaneity IS a signature of al Qaeda.

    Difficult to say, Sean.

    An attempted suicide attack which detonated the bomb but failed to kill the carrier? Possible but unlikely.

    Boston authorities have shut down the mobile telephone networks in the city, which suggests that the bombs may have been detonated by cellphone,

    Impossible at this stage to draw conclusions but if it is known that the incident is not linked to international terrorism I would expect a very early announcement to defuse widespread fear.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 19,903
    AveryLP said:

    The events of Boston will be sending shivers up the spine of those responsible for security in London on Wednesday.

    At least the 'right wing extremists' can be taken out of that equation.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 33,880
    Can't help thinking if it was Al Qaeda there'd be a lot more death and damage.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,445
    Mr. LP, unlikely perhaps, but didn't that happen with the attempted 21/1 bombing a fortnight after 7/7?





  • Boston authorities have shut down the mobile telephone networks in the city, which suggests that the bombs may have been detonated by cellphone,





    I think that shutting off the cellphone network is a precaution in most anti-terror plans.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Mmmmm, the DOW drops 265 points today.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2013
    It being a Saudi official would be no surprise at all, if true.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,259
    @asjohnstone

    I would have thought a 'domestic nutter' would have been targeting a symbol of the government, like McVeigh did. I can't think what any domestic groups would be protesting against at the moment - maybe Obama's proposed gun laws? But again, you would think they would go after a government target, rather than a purely civilian marathon.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Will post later on the Boston stuff when I get in from training. Whilst we wait for the source of attacks, those who think a low death count means that it isn't a jihadist inspired attack are as thick as champ.

    Not all attacks succeed for a start.

    Secondly decent scale spectacular attacks in the USA are harder to execute than in the Europe for reasons I'll explain later. Thus the nature of these incidents suggests a break from the norm.


  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 34,621
    Sad to hear of the blasts in Boston.

    Meanwhile, there's docu on the coordinated Mumbai attacks in 2008 on "Yesterday" channel (Freeview 19) right now.
  • I hope China is telling North Korea, right now is not the time to mess with the USA
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    Fox reporting that FBI are treating the explosions in Boston as a terrorist incident.

    Statement of the obvious or a pointer?
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    @SeanT

    How much of that goes to landlords?

    Mostly to South Korean manufacturers of flat screen televisions I suspect.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Boston police confirm third explosion at JFK library. Assumption is it is connected to other two.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    If it's yet another atrocity by the Right, it would be part of a worrying growing trend.

    It's getting time for the mainstream Right to stop ignoring this violent monster they've created.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    JFK Library explosion was at 4:35 local time. It has not yet been established whether this explosion is connected with the two devices which exploded to the side of the marathon route.

    Also suspect in custody may be an innocent bystander injured in the blast.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    "Authorities tell the New York Post that a suspect, a Saudi national, is being detained in a Boston hospital after suffering shrapnel wounds in today’s blast. At this point, however, the Post is the only outlet reporting that a suspect has been detained"

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/345645/boston-marathon-updates-eliana-johnson
  • Life_ina_market_townLife_ina_market_town Posts: 2,319
    edited April 2013
    SeanT said:

    There are 20,000 households in the UK receiving more in benefits than the average working income of £26,000 a year - BBC News.

    This is not a rare and minor problem. 20,000??

    Ridiculous.

    Even supposing that the average family in question was receiving £52,000 pa, double the benefit cap, then the total cost to the Exchequer of those families would be just over £1 billion pa. So if the cap were implemented it would save just £500 million pa. Not peanuts, but still not a lot when compared to the size of the fiscal deficit. Middle class welfare remains the most costly area, and the area in which the most savings ought to be made.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    tim said:

    @Avery

    IDS was touting 56,000 when he launched the campaign, no wonder the savings estimates have fallen by over half.

    Would never have happened if Margaret had still been alive.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,217
    Boston Globe footage of bomb:

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 53,445
    Mr. Johnstone, it's deeply depressing and (in the true meaning of the word) infuriating.

    Blaming society or having a single (and apparently rubbish) parent is a pathetic excuse.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    The Boston Globe reports more than 100 people have been treated at hospitals in the Boston area.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,223
    Initial estimates had suggested 56,000 would be affected by the controversial limit, losing an average of around £90 per week. However, the forecast has now been cut to 40,000. Officials suggested 8,000 people have found jobs while others have moved to cheaper properties.
    Since the aim of the cap is to achieve these two things (although it would prefer work to moving out, 50/50 would I think be fine) that much of a reduction is a success and not as Tim suggests, a failure (if you assume the goals of the policy are good ones and success is not failure and failure not success).
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 14,553
    SeanT said:



    This fight is doomed. There. Ain't. No. Money. Left.

    But seemingly enough to give a tax cut to millionaires. Odd.

    We're a lot richer when the welfare state was founded.

    It. Is. A. Good. Thing. And. It. Is. Here. To. Stay. Get. Over. It.

  • SeanT said:


    This fight is doomed. There. Ain't. No. Money. Left.

    That may well be the case. If the government didn't spend every budget throwing money at special interest groups while missing its deficit reduction targets, I might be more convinced. There appears no end to big spending by the government any time soon.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    Fox: JFK Library 'explosion' related to a fire and is probably not linked to the marathon explosions.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,223
    In my opinion if the government divides benefits into those required by need and those by desert, then it could argue both more effectively for those changes it is planning to put in place or has done so, such as the child benefit cuts, and more topically childcare subsidies, and if it did want to change universal benefits for older people then this as well.

    If you take pensions, for example, then many people if their pensions were reduced/retirement age put up argue in favour of desert - they've paid in under the expectation of retiring at 65 for example - than of need. With regard to other benefits, I consider most of them need-based and believe the discussion would be much clearer if that (or some other basis) were agreed: does a family on £60,000 need child benefit? Does a working or stay at home mother need childcare subsidies? On the latter it was when desert came in that the government's position seemed so much weaker.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    tim said:

    No money left, except for increased rents

    "The Office for Budget Responsibility is predicting further increases in housing benefit despite government attempts to cut the bill.

    The latest forecast from the independent monitoring body, issued alongside the Budget, has increased its predictions by £0.5 billion in 2013/14, £0.6 billion in 2014/5, £0.8 billion in 2015/16 and 2016/17, and £1 billion in 2017/18.

    The total rise of £3.7 billion over the five year period comes on top of a £2.3 billion increase in the OBR’s forecast in December released alongside the autumn statement."

    Not really the time to be debating housing benefit costs, but if the increases in benefit payment result from uprating rents on social housing to market prices, then the "additional cost" is merely moving entries (and cash) between different public sector accounts.

    Even if an increased rent is paid to a private sector landlord leasing state propety, the impact of the rent increase would be likely to increase the asset value of the property in the state's books. It would also make the property freehold more marketable enabling, for example, local councils to raise funds through asset sales.

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 33,626
    tim said:

    No money left, except for increased rents

    "The Office for Budget Responsibility is predicting further increases in housing benefit despite government attempts to cut the bill.

    The latest forecast from the independent monitoring body, issued alongside the Budget, has increased its predictions by £0.5 billion in 2013/14, £0.6 billion in 2014/5, £0.8 billion in 2015/16 and 2016/17, and £1 billion in 2017/18.

    The total rise of £3.7 billion over the five year period comes on top of a £2.3 billion increase in the OBR’s forecast in December released alongside the autumn statement."

    Rents almost always go up which is why its important to take the actions you can. How does the increase compare to increases under Labour? What would the increases be like if no action was taken?

    When you have escalating costs its sometimes important to minimise the costs that you can rather than just stick your head in the sand.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Channel4News Reports that a 20 year-old suspect has been detained in connection with the Boston bombings. #Boston
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 3,334

    SeanT said:

    There are 20,000 households in the UK receiving more in benefits than the average working income of £26,000 a year - BBC News.

    This is not a rare and minor problem. 20,000??

    Ridiculous.

    Even supposing that the average family in question was receiving £52,000 pa, double the benefit cap, then the total cost to the Exchequer of those families would be just over £1 billion pa. So if the cap were implemented it would save just £500 million pa. Not peanuts, but still not a lot when compared to the size of the fiscal deficit. Middle class welfare remains the most costly area, and the area in which the most savings ought to be made.
    Well over half the DWP budget goes on pensions and other benefits paid to over-65s. All of these are protected from cuts. The benefits bill cannot be significantly reduced unless pensioner benefits are brought in to the equation.
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,223
    edited April 2013
    Tim, when the government made the change you mention, it did so on the basis that it had already saved the difference. Do you dispute the figures? Do you perhaps think it merely overestimated the number of families originally and this is a mere correction of that?
    Initial estimates had suggested 56,000 would be affected by the controversial limit, losing an average of around £90 per week. However, the forecast has now been cut to 40,000. Officials suggested 8,000 people have found jobs while others have moved to cheaper properties.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    ChrisMasonBBC Respect MP George Galloway&Lab MP D Skinner tonight objected to govt plans to cancel PMQs on Wednesday, the day of Lady Thatcher's funeral
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 19,903
    RT Wings Over Scotland ‏@WingsScotland 6m
    Just by the by - at least 31 killed in explosions in Baghdad today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863 … But, y'know, brown people, so who cares?
  • GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,223
    tim said:

    @LifeInAMarketTown. £1.5 Billion for the nanny subsidy, 83% of which goes to the top half of taxpayers.

    Where's the 83% from? I hope it includes the effect of reduced unemployment since that is the raison d'etre of the programme - the "nanny subsidy" is the NI £2000 thing right?
  • ChrisMasonBBC Respect MP George Galloway&Lab MP D Skinner tonight objected to govt plans to cancel PMQs on Wednesday, the day of Lady Thatcher's funeral

    Maybe they could be invited to hold a debate between themselves while everyone else ignores them?
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited April 2013
    Ed Miliband should be pitching a bigger tent (hope you got paywall ;-) )

    Labour would be unwise to rely on a coalition of left-wing voters. A ‘35 per cent strategy’ may backfire

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/rachelsylvester/article3740136.ece
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    edited April 2013


    The BBC just had some absurd "victim" of the cuts on TV news. A sniffy south London woman demanding "how am I expected to pay for my children's shoes now?"

    How does she think the rest of us pay for our f*cking kids' shoes??? We work, and earn the money. She does nothing, and gets the cash off the state - i.e. off the rest of us.





    It was hard to be very sympathetic, How do her employed neighbours pay for school shoes?

    Perhaps she could ask her childrens father(s) to contribute to the cost of footwear.
  • RT Wings Over Scotland ‏@WingsScotland 6m
    Just by the by - at least 31 killed in explosions in Baghdad today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863 … But, y'know, brown people, so who cares?

    Labour care about the brown people.

    I mean, who else would they use to make the white people angry?
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    edited April 2013
    SeanT said:

    Grandiose said:

    Initial estimates had suggested 56,000 would be affected by the controversial limit, losing an average of around £90 per week. However, the forecast has now been cut to 40,000. Officials suggested 8,000 people have found jobs while others have moved to cheaper properties.
    Since the aim of the cap is to achieve these two things (although it would prefer work to moving out, 50/50 would I think be fine) that much of a reduction is a success and not as Tim suggests, a failure (if you assume the goals of the policy are good ones and success is not failure and failure not success).
    The BBC just had some absurd "victim" of the cuts on TV news. A sniffy south London woman demanding "how am I expected to pay for my children's shoes now?"

    How does she think the rest of us pay for our f*cking kids' shoes??? We work, and earn the money. She does nothing, and gets the cash off the state - i.e. off the rest of us.

    It is Benefits Whores like her who shame the rest of the deserving unemployed.

    Cap the Bloody Benefits. If they have to move, tough. Life's a bitch, and then we die.



    You need Loadsamoney's rear window sticker for your new Mini Cooper, Sean

    I upped my income

    Up Yours!
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Don't want to sound flippant but the explosions seem a little on the amateurish side to be a genuine Al-Qaeda attack.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    SeanT said:

    RT Wings Over Scotland ‏@WingsScotland 6m
    Just by the by - at least 31 killed in explosions in Baghdad today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863 … But, y'know, brown people, so who cares?

    Baghdad still a bloody mess, ten years later. TEN YEARS.

    What a sordid, grotesque disaster that was. It is a wonder Blair hasn't retired in shame to a monastery in Mount Athos.
    Did you support the Iraq War?

    Take the line that those who opposed were hand wringing lefties, or commies, or appeasers of Islamism or whatever, as the Tories, Murdoch, Dacre did?

    Bet you did.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    I notice the cops have arrested a second party. Whether its someone unlucky or a genuine suspect we'll see.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Obama said to broadcast to the nation in about 7 mins.
  • BlueberryBlueberry Posts: 408
    Re housing, getting a council house in London is financially like winning the jackpot on the lottery.

    I live in a two bed ex-council flat in London zone two. Market rent is £1200 a month. My neighbours who are tenants pay £300. So they get £900 a month of free housing. Which over sixty years (cos they've got that place for life) is worth over ONE MILLION POUNDS.

    And all because they got over 26 points or whatever is. Pity the person only got 24 points. It's a massively unfair system with big incentives for applicants to exaggerate their poverty. As it happens, my neighbours aren't poor at all. They run two cars, wear all the latest clothes and use old Selfridge's carrier bags for the recycling.

    The whole system for allocating council housing is a joke. Southwark found 300 people last year who were breaking the terms (sub letting, fraudulent applications etc.) but that'll be the tip of the iceberg. The faster we move away from social housing the better. People need to take pride in standing on their own two feet.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    TimMontgomerie Patience Wheatcroft for @TimesOpinion: Maggie would NOT cut faster or deeper than Osborne thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/co… #WhatWouldThatcherDoToday
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307

    RT Wings Over Scotland ‏@WingsScotland 6m
    Just by the by - at least 31 killed in explosions in Baghdad today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863 … But, y'know, brown people, so who cares?

    You don't care.
  • Ave_itAve_it Posts: 2,055
    Let's scrap benefits!
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Ave it - nice to see you back, ;-)
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    tim said:

    @Foxinsox

    The fastest way to increase benefit spending.

    1.Cut social housebuilding
    2.Raise rents to 80% of market rents
    3.Stoke up property prices and rents with state subsidised mortgages.

    That is what Osborne has done.

    But let's all concentrate on the £110 million rather than the tens of billions.

    How many of the 3 did labour do tim ?

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2013
    Most people don't have children until they're in a financial position to support them, and it annoys them to see a minority of people who don't seem to live according to that stricture. Of course you could say that some people would never be able to have children if they waited until they could afford to support them themselves but that probably doesn't cut much ice with the majority.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,115
    I doubt a Catholic would be able to retire to Mount Athos.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,217
    carl said:

    SeanT said:

    RT Wings Over Scotland ‏@WingsScotland 6m
    Just by the by - at least 31 killed in explosions in Baghdad today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863 … But, y'know, brown people, so who cares?

    Baghdad still a bloody mess, ten years later. TEN YEARS.

    What a sordid, grotesque disaster that was. It is a wonder Blair hasn't retired in shame to a monastery in Mount Athos.
    Did you support the Iraq War?
    "Support" is not the same thing as 'carte blanche to screw it up'!

  • carlcarl Posts: 750

    carl said:

    SeanT said:

    RT Wings Over Scotland ‏@WingsScotland 6m
    Just by the by - at least 31 killed in explosions in Baghdad today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863 … But, y'know, brown people, so who cares?

    Baghdad still a bloody mess, ten years later. TEN YEARS.

    What a sordid, grotesque disaster that was. It is a wonder Blair hasn't retired in shame to a monastery in Mount Athos.
    Did you support the Iraq War?
    "Support" is not the same thing as 'carte blanche to screw it up'!

    Ah so you're another snivelling Tory who cheered us into Iraq and now uses it to score points without having the grace to admit you were horribly wrong.
  • BlueberryBlueberry Posts: 408
    Tim, subletting has always been illegal for council tenants. And if you're not using the room that the State has provided, and you don't want to pay for it then take in lodger. Or take a job. Or move. But don't expect largesse off of everyone else.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Channel4News Boston police commissioner says no suspect is in custody in marathon explosions.
  • antifrank said:

    I doubt a Catholic would be able to retire to Mount Athos.

    I'm sure "Mount Athos" was a scene from the Erotic adventures of the three musketeers, starring Ron Jeremy.

    And dammit, I'm trying to write the morning thread whilst thinking about Ron Jeremy.
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 1,939
    The Boston business screams disaffected loner to me. Oklahoma again.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 40,217
    carl said:

    carl said:

    SeanT said:

    RT Wings Over Scotland ‏@WingsScotland 6m
    Just by the by - at least 31 killed in explosions in Baghdad today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863 … But, y'know, brown people, so who cares?

    Baghdad still a bloody mess, ten years later. TEN YEARS.

    What a sordid, grotesque disaster that was. It is a wonder Blair hasn't retired in shame to a monastery in Mount Athos.
    Did you support the Iraq War?
    "Support" is not the same thing as 'carte blanche to screw it up'!

    Ah so you're another snivelling Tory who cheered us into Iraq and now uses it to score points without having the grace to admit you were horribly wrong.
    No you are a whining leftie who hasn't got the courage to admit that Blair & Bush screwed it up by doing it on the cheap & ignoring military advice.
  • carlcarl Posts: 750
    SeanT said:

    carl said:

    SeanT said:

    RT Wings Over Scotland ‏@WingsScotland 6m
    Just by the by - at least 31 killed in explosions in Baghdad today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22149863 … But, y'know, brown people, so who cares?

    Baghdad still a bloody mess, ten years later. TEN YEARS.

    What a sordid, grotesque disaster that was. It is a wonder Blair hasn't retired in shame to a monastery in Mount Athos.
    Did you support the Iraq War?

    Take the line that those who opposed were hand wringing lefties, or commies, or appeasers of Islamism or whatever, as the Tories, Murdoch, Dacre did?

    Bet you did.
    I supported the Iraq war until about 2006, IIRC, then I publicly recanted on here, apologised for my crass stupidity, craved forgiveness from the world, and went on to comment quite a lot about Iraq, in an attempt to atone.

    My defence is that I thought a prime minister like Blair would never lie to us, as it now turns out is the case. However, at least I didn't vote for him.

    But you did.
    Fair play to admitting how stupidly, catastrophically wrong you were to support Blair, Murdoch, Dacre, Cameron, Tories, Bush and all the rest.

    But the Tony lied to me, poor innocent me, snivel snivel, defence is pathetic. Most people weren't stupid enough.
This discussion has been closed.