Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
37 minutes ago, rallyboy said:

spoonfeeding it to simpletons who will greedily gobble it down before spewing it all over the internet.

You calling Batman a gullible simpleton? Never

  • Haha 3
Posted

Surprised there is isn’t an obvious term for the thick UK equivalent of the MAGA lot. Angry gammons but also gullible pussies scared of everything. Society is producing very weak men

  • Like 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, whelk said:

It was worse although due to colossal net worth it is irrelevant 😃

one of my biggest annoyances at the credit score is if you have say three credit cards, one is interest free and the two other are normal, if you do a balance transfer, so two cards have zero one has 5.1k on it with a 10k limit even thought the debt is the same and you're in a better postion due to zero interest for the period your score goes down as you're using over 50% of the available credit on one account. It doesn't make sense. Anyway with your net worth and credit score it doesn't impact you.

Posted
8 minutes ago, whelk said:

Surprised there is isn’t an obvious term for the thick UK equivalent of the MAGA lot. Angry gammons but also gullible pussies scared of everything. Society is producing very weak men

Thankfully, you are hard enough to make up for the rest of us.

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

If armed with his belt buckle, Sadoldgit.

back in the day i reckon he was right handful, get a couple of pints down him i bet he was the Ronnie Pickering of the area the King of Romney Marsh

Edited by Turkish
Posted
39 minutes ago, Turkish said:

one of my biggest annoyances at the credit score is if you have say three credit cards, one is interest free and the two other are normal, if you do a balance transfer, so two cards have zero one has 5.1k on it with a 10k limit even thought the debt is the same and you're in a better postion due to zero interest for the period your score goes down as you're using over 50% of the available credit on one account. It doesn't make sense. Anyway with your net worth and credit score it doesn't impact you.

It is a con - ClearScore, Experian are just selling services. I genuinely never look or open any email bait from them anymore. You can use credit card abroad for something oblivious it is going through as a cash transaction and you will be scored down with the reasoning you are short of cash and taking out at mental interest rates.

 

Posted
42 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Who do you reckon is the hardest poster on here? 

I don’t know - you do your cross fit stuff but don’t know if you have a glass jaw or not so could be in the reckoning

Posted
3 minutes ago, whelk said:

I don’t know - you do your cross fit stuff but don’t know if you have a glass jaw or not so could be in the reckoning

im too old and slow these days, i reckon i'd give 98% of the forum a run for their money in a power clean, burpee over bar and double under triplet workout but dont have the interest or desire to be angry with the world these days. I always thought @Raging Bull was a bit of reformed tough guy who found god, they are always the ones to watch, like Pulp Fiction characters. Of course MLG would bore everyone to death.

Posted
Just now, Farmer Saint said:

Who's Batman?

Some guy that used to post on here ages ago, long gone, no idea why he's been brought up, think his real name was Brett and he lived in Camden.

Posted
1 hour ago, whelk said:

Surprised there is isn’t an obvious term for the thick UK equivalent of the MAGA lot. Angry gammons but also gullible pussies scared of everything. Society is producing very weak men

You normally use the word ‘cunt’.

  • Haha 2
Posted
4 hours ago, Turkish said:

one of my biggest annoyances at the credit score is if you have say three credit cards, one is interest free and the two other are normal, if you do a balance transfer, so two cards have zero one has 5.1k on it with a 10k limit even thought the debt is the same and you're in a better postion due to zero interest for the period your score goes down as you're using over 50% of the available credit on one account. It doesn't make sense. Anyway with your net worth and credit score it doesn't impact you.

I had 960 odd score with my mortgage. When I paid it off it dropped to 500 odd when nothing else changed. I went from being good with money to being shit just by paying off my biggest debt! 

I don't pay any attention to it now.

  • Like 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I had 960 odd score with my mortgage. When I paid it off it dropped to 500 odd when nothing else changed. I went from being good with money to being shit just by paying off my biggest debt! 

I don't pay any attention to it now.

I keep a tiny residential mortgage to avoid that. Payments are about a tenner a month, but if keeps my credit rating up. I also carry a small credit card debt (zero percent) for the same reason. 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Wow, so he's got a whole number of logins. Why's he got so many?

Who has? They’re all separate people. One was on the navy, one lived in Camden and I don’t know who else you’re referring to

Edited by Turkish
Posted
33 minutes ago, Farmer Saint said:

Wow, so he's got a whole number of logins. Why's he got so many?

Think Batman got whacked by Steve Grant for moaning. And an alter ego Alex sprang to life soon after. We love him though really 

  • Like 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Tamesaint said:

Graciousness and Badenich do not go together.

I went back and watched it. Not quite the free hits as the article led me to think. Much as normal, with a few more personal barbs at the government.

Apparently, there were afters between Badenoch and Phillipson, as Bad3noch's "bitter class warrior" went down badly.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, egg said:

I keep a tiny residential mortgage to avoid that. Payments are about a tenner a month, but if keeps my credit rating up. I also carry a small credit card debt (zero percent) for the same reason. 

I'm not that bothered, if I need a loan, and let's face it, that's all these companies are in business for, I'll get it from my bank who I've been with for over 45 years.  They always offer the best rate.

  • Like 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

She needed to make the most of the opportunity, because when she wakes up tomorrow the reality that she is still the leader of the Tories will hit, hard.

Starmer reminded her that Count Binface ran her candidate close. 🙂

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

And she reminded him they won Stephen Fylnns old seat with nearly 50% of the vote, compared to labour who got 5. Yet still he defended Milliband  and his lunatic agenda…

Edited by Lord Duckhunter
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

And she reminded him they won Stephen Fylnns old seat with nearly 50% of the vote, compared to labour who got 5. Yet still he defended Milliband  and his lunatic agenda…

She did. But the Binface one was funnier.

Posted

With Starmer quitting and Burnham in all probability shortly to become PM, this country faces a massive and critical question:

Do we rename this thread 'The Burnham Years....' or start a new one?

Posted
On 24/06/2026 at 15:49, whelk said:

Think Batman got whacked by Steve Grant for moaning. And an alter ego Alex sprang to life soon after. We love him though really 

What about the guy on the submarine?

Posted (edited)

Burnham knows Labour a screwed in the next GE. If he taxes to south to pay for the north he will try to “buy” the red wall back. His speech was full of feel good words a no substance really. All flowers and sunshine now, nasty part to come. Only 3 years left….

Edited by Sir Ralph
Posted
5 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Burnham knows Labour a screwed in the next GE. If he taxes to south to pay for the north he will try to “buy” the red wall back. His speech was full of feel good words a no substance really. All flowers and sunshine, nasty part to come

How exactly does he organise the tax system so that he can "tax the south to pay for the north" ? Regionally banded Income Tax rates ? 3% VAT surcharge south of Coventry ? Fuel Excise duty raised inside the M25 ?

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

How exactly does he organise the tax system so that he can "tax the south to pay for the north" ? Regionally banded Income Tax rates ? 3% VAT surcharge south of Coventry ? Fuel Excise duty raised inside the M25 ?

Property taxes (flat rate percentage) and inheritance tax are the two that have been heavily publicised. This is because property prices in the south are much higher but our cost of living is higher. Living up north is relatively cheap compared to the south and certainly London but this won’t be reflected in the “King of the Norths” policies. It may come as a surprise but these policies are political for the next GE. For the economy he will be worse than Starmer in my opinion 

Edited by Sir Ralph
Posted

To be fair, I think Burnham comes across quite well, far more 'statesmanlike' than Starmer, but wear a shirt and tie FFS.

  • Like 2
Posted
21 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Property taxes (flat rate percentage) and inheritance tax are the two that have been heavily publicised. This is because property prices in the south are much higher but our cost of living is higher. Living up north is relatively cheap compared to the south and certainly London but this won’t be reflected in the “King of the Norths” policies. It may come as a surprise but these policies are political for the next GE. For the economy he will be worse than Starmer in my opinion 

The fact that property.prices are grossly inflated the further south and east you go is not an excuse for constricting investment north of the Trent.

image.jpeg.39e1ed8913f34762bb7c783b6ca1c55c.jpeg

Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

The fact that property.prices are grossly inflated the further south and east you go is not an excuse for constricting investment north of the Trent.

image.jpeg.39e1ed8913f34762bb7c783b6ca1c55c.jpeg

So he will be taxing the south to pay for the north. Nobody said you shouldn’t invest in some deprived areas. Question is how do you pay for it? Giving tax breaks to citizens from the north at the cost of southerners is nothing more than a vote winner from a party who will struggle in the south in the next GE. To me that’s pretty clear

Edited by Sir Ralph
Posted
1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

How exactly does he organise the tax system so that he can "tax the south to pay for the north" ? Regionally banded Income Tax rates ? 3% VAT surcharge south of Coventry ? Fuel Excise duty raised inside the M25 ?

Count Binface had the right idea: "I'll cut your taxes and raise everyone else's"

 

Posted
57 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

So he will be taxing the south to pay for the north. 

No.

Everybody faces the same tax burden: Income Tax, VAT, NI, etc are not regionally defined within England. Some people have geographically enhanced property values and incomes, but that is the luck of the draw, and if as a consequence higher rate taxes or taxes of opportunity such as Inheritance Tax kick in, so be it.

How Government decides to spend it's tax revenues should be decided by greatest need. Ultimately all people should have the same chances in life - historically the North has lagged behind because the country is London focussed.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

No.

Everybody faces the same tax burden: Income Tax, VAT, NI, etc are not regionally defined within England. Some people have geographically enhanced property values and incomes, but that is the luck of the draw, and if as a consequence higher rate taxes or taxes of opportunity such as Inheritance Tax kick in, so be it.

How Government decides to spend its tax revenues should be decided by greatest need. Ultimately all people should have the same chances in life - historically the North has lagged behind because the country is London focussed.

Well that’s a more socialist view of the world (I’m not saying that in a disparaging way). It forgets the view that the few who are net contributors to the tax system need to be incentivised to continue to take the burden rather than killing ourselves to pay for others. This change again would penalise those who have aspired for financial security for themselves and their families. Unfortunately though that seems to be the mentality of the incumbent ruling party.

The increase in property values and incomes isn’t “luck of the draw” and doesn’t reflect a significantly reduced cost of living in the north. Can you explain where that has been factored in?

 

Whether you want to or not you are essentially agreeing that he would be increasing current taxes on those in the south and reducing taxes for those in the north. 

Edited by Sir Ralph
Posted
38 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

Whether you want to or not you are essentially agreeing that he would be increasing current taxes on those in the south and reducing taxes for those in the north. 

No I am not. What you "get out of the system" is not necessarily reflective of what you "put in". ( Going on a tangent, for many years Croydon was a net beneficiary of the national Business Rates pool, whilst Blackpool was a net contributor. )

What I am saying is that, perhaps, proportionally more of the total tax take should be redistributed northwards. This does not require any change in an individual's "contribution".

Posted
46 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

The increase in property values and incomes isn’t “luck of the draw” ...... 

Of course it is. If my house was magically transported to Outer London it would instantly gain over £700k in value.

Posted
44 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Of course it is. If my house was magically transported to Outer London it would instantly gain over £700k in value.

But it doesn’t work like that. If I buy your house I have to get a mortgage and work hard to pay down that extra £700k mortgage. The vast majority of people haven’t magically accrued that additional value, they have had to pay for it and will now be taxed more for it. 

Posted
3 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

The fact that property.prices are grossly inflated the further south and east you go is not an excuse for constricting investment north of the Trent.

image.jpeg.39e1ed8913f34762bb7c783b6ca1c55c.jpeg

Do you mean 'invest' or do you mean 'subsidise'?

I see precious little scope for a return on investment. 

Posted
50 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

No I am not. What you "get out of the system" is not necessarily reflective of what you "put in". ( Going on a tangent, for many years Croydon was a net beneficiary of the national Business Rates pool, whilst Blackpool was a net contributor. )

What I am saying is that, perhaps, proportionally more of the total tax take should be redistributed northwards. This does not require any change in an individual's "contribution".

I understand your point and I’ve no objection to the principle of increased investment in the north. However Burnham is proposing a change to individual’s contribution in the south to achieve this objective and reducing northerners tax bill to achieve this. 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

No.

Everybody faces the same tax burden: Income Tax, VAT, NI, etc are not regionally defined within England. Some people have geographically enhanced property values and incomes, but that is the luck of the draw, and if as a consequence higher rate taxes or taxes of opportunity such as Inheritance Tax kick in, so be it.

How Government decides to spend it's tax revenues should be decided by greatest need. Ultimately all people should have the same chances in life - historically the North has lagged behind because the country is London focussed.

It's not their money.

  • Like 1
Posted
50 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Of course it is. If my house was magically transported to Outer London it would instantly gain over £700k in value.

But then would you have been able to buy it?

We got out of London in 1971 and moved to Hampshire for a better life.

Posted
5 minutes ago, Sir Ralph said:

I understand your point and I’ve no objection to the principle of increased investment in the north. However Burnham is proposing a change to individual’s contribution in the south to achieve this objective and reducing northerners tax bill to achieve this. 

Source?

Posted
19 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

But then would you have been able to buy it?

We would both have been earning more, but then the cost of living is probably higher across the board, so the honest answer is "I don't know". However, houses sell in Outer London, so they must he somehow "affordable".

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...