Mailwatch(ed) Forum

There's a lot of "but Jeremy was always right"... and of course, the usual cybernats.

There's times BTL when it looks like the exchanges under Fuckwit Fenton's tedious drag 'n' drop blogs.

I’ve bookmarked one poster who hunts down Cybernat drivel very efficiently. His username is a jumble of letters and numbers.

Here's Stephen bloody Bush.

Student loan repayments went up, he’s right about that. But so what? They had promises about what they’d not raise tax on, like every party has felt it needed to make. So you get stuff like this. Cameron put tax up on well off professionals with kids, who were a core voting group. They won the next 3 elections elections (albeit one without an overall majority). Cameron calculated that it was more important politically to reduce the deficit.

Labour are putting up some taxes up on their base to pay for better public services and hoping that works politically.

What’s the difference? Why are Labour uniquely clueless?

Part of Stephen Bush's problem with Labour is that he sees them as hostile to business- he's made that clear. Which is his prerogative, and we'll have to see how the new labour market settles down. But another part of the "Labour are really shit" media coalition would have a massive problem with Bush's policies if he were in power. So the idea there's all this simple stuff they could do and be much less unpopular is a myth. They could certainly have a bigger base than they do, but they'd still be getting very low approval rates. It's what happens to politicians nowadays. And this is just talking about people we recognize as mainstream. We're not talking about the right populism and left populism yet, which probably takes about a 35% of the population out of the equation.

I like Jim Pickard, but this is a sort of classic of the "government shouldn't change anything ever" genre.

I guess we have to keep giving rich couples a £40k a year tax free savings allowances, do we? As things stand, I think they'll still get £24k tax free. Isn't that enough?

Some stuff on salary sacrifice for pensions here.

https://moneyweek.com/personal-finance/ ... ion-limits

Government guidance shows the cost as a relief has increased markedly from £2.8 billion in forgone National Insurance contributions in tax year 2016/2017, rising to £5.8 billion in 2023/2024.

The Government's changes are expected to bring in £4.8bn in 2029/30. If it ever happens- at present it's just there as something to help meet the fiscal rule.

So we won't be that far from 2016/7 really. When, according to Stephen Bush, hardly anyone must have tried hard to save for a pension.

I have a friend who works in pensions and he's I'd guess a natural finance conservative, and he said that he didn't think you could justify some of the tax treatments for pensions at the top end, and could understand if there restrictions from the Labour Government. The one thing he didn't like was politicians who ignore trade offs with changes. I'll ask him where he stands on this.

Yep. This stuff is absolutely ridiculous.

She's also appointed herself an expert on taxation, and opposed "stealth taxes" on ordinary workers, doubtless to be avoided by someone else paying for all the public sector workers she wants. How does she think this ends, I wonder? Probably not with someone else sweeping to power and giving her members a pay rise and a tax cut.

The Weeping Angel wrote: ↑Sun Dec 21, 2025 7:52 pm I'd have more sympathy if the landlords featured weren't being such gits.

Strangely unconcerned about pub closures under the Tories.

We're one solid thunderstorm from the re-animation of the Taxpayer's Franken-lliance.

A lot of people BTL are really helping to prove Jeremy's point.

Dear God, it serves to remind me why I hate nothing to do with the hate-mongering of this particular branch of the socials.

X for the right, Bluesky for the left; but cunt farms, both.

Latest in "Rachel form Accounts crashed the economy".

FTSE 100 hits 10,000 mark for first time

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c87r05143dzo

The FTSE 100 index has climbed above 10,000 points for the first time, passing a significant stock market milestone, on the first trading day of the year.

Shares included in the index performed strongly in 2025, leaving the benchmark more than 21% higher than a year ago, when it stood at just over 8,260.

I know it's a crude measure, with little to do with the cost of living.

More "this is what they're doing wrong", from the recently departed Strategy Director, Paul Ovenden. Or Jimmy Hill Chinny Reckon, as we should probably call him.

Labour was distracted from core issues by.... discussion of this Egyptian dissident guy, who by a happy coincidence, is in the news now amid disingenuous attacks on Starmer. This would have mostly likely come up under Any Other Business a few times. Anyway, the amount of time you discuss something isn't really a sign of how serious you take something. You don't need endless debate to take inflation seriously. Most people in the Cabinet would probably agree that they needed to get it down. Do you really need the Minister for Paperclips interjecting with something they've read on the internet.

Bones McCoy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 02, 2026 11:33 am Latest in "Rachel form Accounts crashed the economy".

FTSE 100 hits 10,000 mark for first time

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c87r05143dzo

The FTSE 100 index has climbed above 10,000 points for the first time, passing a significant stock market milestone, on the first trading day of the year.

Shares included in the index performed strongly in 2025, leaving the benchmark more than 21% higher than a year ago, when it stood at just over 8,260.

I know it's a crude measure, with little to do with the cost of living.

The FTSE can rise when the pound dives as that makes it cheaper to buy British shares. The pounds fallen a bit against the Euro, but is up (by more) against the dollar, so that's not a factor here.

The Government can't win. There's a chunk on the left now who look at the FTSE rising and just see inequality getting worse, and/or another 2008 Crash. The latter is something of a left stable now- some remarks Reeves made on compliance/regulation was evidence that she was "thick", and that we might as well all prepare to bail out banks already.

Yes, how dare Rachel make my modest little S&S ISA gain 10% in nine months!

It’ll be her fault if it falls, mind.

Ha ha ha.

The Government tricked itself. When people/media say they want the deficit cut, they mean at the expense of groups they don't like. Unless it's George Osborne as Chancellor, and raising VAT to 20% is fine.

Ignore the sceptics: with this new vaccine, chickenpox could become a thing of the past
Wes Streeting

This is excellent news. It seems hard to believe now, but the US was pioneering in chickenpox vaccines at one time, and they more than proved their worth, in health and financial terms. Funny that while we've finally caught up where they were in 1995, they're heading back to 1895 as fast they can.

Is Farage going to oppose this? Depends if he's after power or wingnut welfare- I'm genuinely doubtful which.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Fri Jan 02, 2026 12:25 pm More "this is what they're doing wrong", from the recently departed Strategy Director, Paul Ovenden. Or Jimmy Hill Chinny Reckon, as we should probably call him.

Labour was distracted from core issues by.... discussion of this Egyptian dissident guy, who by a happy coincidence, is in the news now amid disingenuous attacks on Starmer. This would have mostly likely come up under Any Other Business a few times. Anyway, the amount of time you discuss something isn't really a sign of how serious you take something. You don't need endless debate to take inflation seriously. Most people in the Cabinet would probably agree that they needed to get it down. Do you really need the Minister for Paperclips interjecting with something they've read on the internet.

I saw Chaminda Jayenetti go to town over this.