Cameron: "Cuts will change our way of life"

[Skidfingers McGonical]

Here's some stuff on it.

 

http://www.energy-regulators.eu/portal/page/portal/EER_HOME/EER_ACTIVITIES/EER_INITIATIVES/ERI/France-UK-Ireland/Meetings1/SG_meetings/1st_France-UK-Ireland_SG/DD/How%20Imbalance%20Prices%20Work.pdf

 

Appreciate that rico. However that pdf is just full of corporate jargon and bullshit speak that the majority are not going to understand.

[Section_31]

For me the problem with our brand of capitalism isn't about wages or money , it's about the underlying principles behind why we get up in the morning. If these companies worked to achieve success to help make the economy stronger, to help their employees and their communities then that'd be fine - but they exist for short term gain where the top brass are rewarded for quick wins at the expense of virtually everything else, and their only motivation is (if they're lucky) acquiring money or (most likely, if they're a low level employee) simple financial survival.

 

Said it loads of times but if Tesco could have its ideal model it'd consist of automated tills, automated warehouses, price fixing, no staff, minimum prices paid to producers and a bank account in Zurich. Any CEO that managed to achieve all that would go down in history as a business legend. Harvard would actually have buildings named after him, and that right there is the problem.

[Rico1304]

Appreciate that rico. However that pdf is just full of corporate jargon and bullshit speak that the majority are not going to understand.

It's an Ofgem document so probably skewed to those with Industry knowledge rather than an briefing document for those outside. That's why I was surprised when you said you understood it in your original article. It's very dry stuff.

 

If it helps you all to hate me less I have to read this type of stuff all the time, the DECC ones are even drier.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

It's an Ofgem document so probably skewed to those with Industry knowledge rather than an briefing document for those outside. That's why I was surprised when you said you understood it in your original article. It's very dry stuff.

 

If it helps you all to hate me less I have to read this type of stuff all the time, the DECC ones are even drier.

 

Easy Tiger.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

Household finances at breaking point, says Shelter

Housing charity says it is seeing a 'stream of cases' of families unable to cope with mounting rent or mortgage payments.

 

Rising bills and high housing costs are pushing many household budgets "to breaking point", with one in 11 people worried they will not be able to afford their rent or mortgage this month, according to research from Shelter.

 

The housing and homelessness charity said it was currently seeing a "stream of cases" of families who had been unable to cope with mounting rent or mortgage payments, and added that some of them "could face the very real prospect of losing their home this year".

 

The warning comes days after a report from the Resolution Foundation thinktank indicated that more than a million homeowners could be at risk of defaulting on their mortgages and losing their properties in the wake of even a small rise in interest rates. Meanwhile, a recent survey carried out by Which? found that rather than paying off their debts, around 13 million people paid for Christmas by borrowing more money.

 

The Shelter research, based on a YouGov survey of more than 4,000 adults, found that 9% of those quizzed feared they would not be able to afford to pay the rent or mortgage at the end of this month.

The charity said families were the worst affected, with more than two-thirds (70%) of rent or mortgage payers with children describing themselves as either "struggling" or "falling behind" with their payments, compared to 63% of the general population of renters and homeowners.

 

It added that it had found a worrying trend of people unable to face up to their financial difficulties, with almost one in five (18%) saying they had not opened post if they thought it was a bill or late payment reminder. Almost 15% admitted to putting such post in the bin without opening it.

Campbell Robb, chief executive of Shelter, said: "It is a worrying sign of the times that so many of us are starting the new year worried about how they will pay their rent or mortgage in 2014.

 

"Despite recent discussion of an economic recovery, we know that a combination of high housing costs, wage freezes and rising food and energy bills has created a nightmare scenario for many families that is pushing them to breaking point."

 

Liz Clare, a helpline adviser at Shelter, said: "One caller to the helpline arrived home to her rented flat to find the locks had been changed. She hadn't realised that a court hearing had even taken place because she hadn't felt able to open her post after falling into arrears with her rent."

 

Caroline Berens, who lives in the Worcester Park area of south-west London with her husband and two children, recently approached the charity for help. She and her husband both work, but are struggling to keep up with the rent and worried about how they will cope in the year ahead. "I go clammy just thinking about the bills. I do anything I can to avoid opening the post as I am scared it will be another overdue bill. We do all we can to make ends meet – we have even sold our wedding rings and my mother-in-law has helped us with the rent – but we are really worried about keeping our home in the coming months."

 

The governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, has said he will look at raising the Bank of England base rate when unemployment has fallen to 7%. The figure fell to 7.4% in December, raising expectations that an increase in the base rate will come in 2015, and have an impact on mortgage lenders' rates this year.

 

Shelter said rent or mortgage payments should always be the top priority over other bills to prevent people from losing their homes. It is urging anyone worried about their housing costs to get help by visiting shelter.org.uk/advice.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jan/03/household-finances-breaking-point-shelter

[Lee909]

BNP's Nick Griffin declared bankrupt

Updated 18 minutes ago

 

Nick Griffin said he would use his bankruptcy experience to help his constituents

British National Party (BNP) leader Nick Griffin MEP has been declared bankrupt.

 

A bankruptcy order was made at Welshpool County Court on Thursday.

 

Mr Griffin tweeted: "Being bankrupt does NOT prevent me being or standing as an MEP. It does free me from financial worries."

 

He added: "I am now turning the experience to the benefit of hard-up constituents by producing a booklet on dealing with debt

[Strontium]

Ah yes, the stats, I presume you took the income inequality claims from the ONS report earlier this year, but stats can tell any story can't they, which is why they're largely pointless.  

 

http://www.poverty.org.uk/09/index.shtml

 

 

Or hows about:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/income-inequality-is-at-highest-level-since-the-1930s-says-report-8518073.html

 

 

To be honest, I'm not arsed about these reports - I've got my own eyes. And you've got a cheek claiming what I say bears no resemblance to reality. What's your level of real world experience then and how does that inform your personal views? How many places have your worked? In what fields? Have you lived and worked among 'the poor'? Are you related to any? And before you kick off this is not me playing some kind of shite university of life card either - but what right have you got to dismiss my honestly formed opinions while claiming yours are any more well informed?

 

The fact you claim I'd rather see people working down mines is you being deliberately glib because you know that's not what I value, I've said time and again I'd consider such a job personally hellish - but what they brought was community, community built around work where people worked, ate, socialised, played sport, befriended, married, and worked alongside their families and friends. Those communities did not need to be regulated, they did not need a copper to chastise a 14-year-old throwing stones, they did not need a special nurse to teach a mum how to change a nappy, because they taught and helped each other - the fact you can claim that's not true, having never lived - or been related to or worked with, I suspect, anyone who lived like that is laughable. Your entire viewpoint seems to stem purely from 'I'm a Lib Dem, the Lib Dems are in power, therefore I will defend the status quo'. Which doesn't rally cut it in any discussion as far as I'm concerned, nor does Rico's 'I work for a big company that pays me, therefore big companies are good'.

 

Your first set of data seems to pre-date the coalition.

 

As for your second, sorry, but I trust the ONS more than I trust a think-tank.

 

I appreciate you have your own experiences, and experiences are always subjective. That's why we have organisations like the ONS with expertise in objectively analysing data.

 

My own experiences don't inform my personal views to any great extent, precisely because I prefer the objectivity of facts. Anecdotes are notoriously unreliable, though of course, they make great copy.

 

I live in Wallasey, and before that I lived in Kensington (Liverpool) where I was born. So, yes, I have always lived among "the poor", for whatever that's worth.

 

I'm familiar with your view that, in transitioning from dangerous manual labour to cushy middle class service jobs, we have lost something in the way of "community". I think your view of the past is extremely rose-tinted, and does nothing to dispel my notion that so many lefties are (small c) conservatives at heart.

 

You can still find community. It lingers on in some places, like Speke, where most of my mother's family still lives. We find the strongest sense of community in those places which people can't afford to move away from. "Community" is people making the best of a very bad lot.

 

I happen to think that self-reliance is a positive trait, so the loss of "community" in the sense you use it does not upset me. I'd rather enjoy the company of people whose values or interests I share than the company of people with whom I have been thrown together and from whom I cannot escape.

 

That you can sit there and accuse me of defending the status quo is frankly laughable. Yes, I put up a qualified defence of the Lib Dem role in government, because somebody has to counter-act the media lies. Liberals and radicals are intent on smashing the status quo, not perpetuating it.

[Stu Monty]

Dog, the problem is that 80% of what you post is defence of the government (and not just the Lib Dem role in it).

 

People might think you more radical if you posted even mildly radical views?

 

If anything it's usually other people saying "The status quo will not do, this is broken" and you going "Well fuck off to Cuba with Stalin then!"

[Pureblood]

Is breaking manifesto promises part of this smashing the status quo you speak of?

 

TK421's Guide to Smashing the Status Quo; Chapter 1 - Do not Prop Up Tory Government

[Stu Monty]

They are a minor party in a coalition. They aren't going to get everything the wanted. What is the point of going into politics if not to try and get even 10% of your policies into place (by forming part of a government).

 

It's not forming the coalition I've got a problem with, it's what they've had to sacrifice in order to get what they have that you have to question (and also how "collective responsibility" basically completely erodes your credibility if you don't speak out on major issues because you're a coalition.

 

The inherent problem here, in my opinion, is that many Lib Dems basically agree with the Tories, ideologically, that reducing the opportunity someone has to the size of their wallet is more liberating than having a state that will look after them and provide certain services for all. They don't seem to understand (or care) where this model leads for the majority of people.

[janmolby]

The way I see capitalism is like a 2 headed medusa.

 

The analogy I would use would be if it paid for capitalism to deforest the world it wouldn’t stop until every tree and been felled. Likewise if it paid for capitalism to plant trees it wouldn’t stop until every square inch of the landmass was an interconnected forest. It’s incessant.

 

Clearly both scenarios would be disastrous for mankind.  And it’s the role of the elected government to regulate sufficiently to prevent either scenario from happening.

 

I think most people fail to differentiate between a true free market where people move capital amongst each other in a decentralised manor free from external forces.  And crony capitalism ala the UK rail network, UK energy companies PFI contracts etc. Which to a large extent are effectively state sponsored private monopolies. “Privatised profits and nationalised liabilities” to paraphrase the saying. Where power and decision making is concentrated in the hands of a small number (be it executives and or governmental officials) who pander favour from one another in various tendering processes, allocation of subsidies, monopolistic traits so on and so forth. To me it’s this centralisation of power which largely undermines our ability to do business freely with one another to the benefit of either party. Corruption to a certain extent.

 

If you take a look at the banking crises which is essentially the precursor to this topic, most people will point to Bear Stearns, HBOS, RBS and the likes as roulette addicted banks which have subsequently rail-roaded the economy for the foreseeable future. But where is the scorn for governments who created a system whereby these actions could affect so many millions of people? Banks which are too big to fail? Government (tax payer) backed loan guarantees? 125% mortgages? 95% Buy to Let mortgages etc? Self certified mortgages? There isn’t anything inherently irrational about how the banks operated, they knew they were too big to fail and their subsequent actions proved that.

 

To me the banksters are akin to the symptoms of a disease, it’s easy to hurl mud at them because they are there and visible and easy to pin point. It is much more difficult to blame isolate and apportion blame to the dysfunctional interconnected governmental/banking system that morphed through successive governments from the great depression of the 1930s.

 

Why has our government been running budget deficits virtually unabated since the 1980s? Why is the pound in my pocket now worth less?

 

Every action has a consequence. Is it fair that (typically) pensioners are being penalised by artificially low interest rates (annuities) so mine or your mortgage is now more affordable? Why is it so? Who is the arbiter? Who decides which zombie high street firms continue to operate, and when do they pull the plug via rate rises? Mark Carney?

 

I know this post deviates largely from the topic title and what has been posted over the last few pages but it’s just my personal musings surrounding the general tone of the topic. The public and private debt this nation holds is astronomical and it’s going to weigh us down for years and years and years but from what I’ve read in this topic it’s been largely side stepped...

[Stickman]

BNP's Nick Griffin declared bankruptUpdated 18 minutes agoNick Griffin said he would use his bankruptcy experience to help his constituentsBritish National Party (BNP) leader Nick Griffin MEP has been declared bankrupt.A bankruptcy order was made at Welshpool County Court on Thursday.Mr Griffin tweeted: "Being bankrupt does NOT prevent me being or standing as an MEP. It does free me from financial worries."He added: "I am now turning the experience to the benefit of hard-up constituents by producing a booklet on dealing with debt

He should be happy not being in the black anymore.

[Bobby Hundreds]

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jan/04/buy-to-let-landlord-evicts-housing-benefit-tenants

 

Can't say I am fan of the concept of professional landlords making a living from it. Buying up all the cheap properties and using housing to create you own personal empire. It seems an immoral way to make a living. Their should be a limit on the amount of houses someone can own. There's certain areas in life where I just think that shouldn't be an area where people make a killing to the detriment of society.

[Section_31]

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jan/04/buy-to-let-landlord-evicts-housing-benefit-tenants

 

Can't say I am fan of the concept of professional landlords making a living from it. Buying up all the cheap properties and using housing to create you own personal empire. It seems an immoral way to make a living. Their should be a limit on the amount of houses someone can own. There's certain areas in life where I just think that shouldn't be an area where people make a killing to the detriment of society.

Ah, social progress, that's what you get with a Conservative government. It could be the 20s again. This is what council houses were invented for.

 

Everything in this country is all sewn up. Anything finite has just been bought and bought and bought until there's fuck all left for everyone else. But hey, that's free market innovation, I'm sure you have to be a business genius to buy a house at auction for 50 grand, spend 10 grand doing it up and then flog it for 100. Or maybe you just need the 60 grand.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

I can't believe Stronts used Speke as a shining example of a thriving community.

 

I lived in Soeke for 5 years and yes it does have a great community spirit but that's because there is quite an inbred vibe and a lot of people are unable to get out because there are no jobs for them to get out of there.

 

Oh must be because they stuck a Morrisons there and have a retail park up the road. Yeah that defines a boss community that. Suppose that means round by ours is thriving because the Tesco has been built in the last few years.

[Vincent Vega]

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jan/04/buy-to-let-landlord-evicts-housing-benefit-tenants

Can't say I am fan of the concept of professional landlords making a living from it. Buying up all the cheap properties and using housing to create you own personal empire. It seems an immoral way to make a living. Their should be a limit on the amount of houses someone can own. There's certain areas in life where I just think that shouldn't be an area where people make a killing to the detriment of society.

Negged this post by mistake, can someone do the honours and put my mistake right?

 

I've actually been saying the same thing for years, there should be a limit on the amount of properties any individual can own. As well as the landlord situation, we have the better off buying holiday homes in Devon and Cornwall, The Lakes, The Peak District and parts of rural North Yorkshire which lie empty for 9 months of the year and in the process reduce the amount of homes available to locals and inflate the price of the property in those areas.

 

I'd also tighten regulations on foreigners buying property here unless they actually live here, speculators from Russia and the Middle East are making it impossible for people who were born and brought up in London to buy a home in their own city.

 

I want a government that put the priorities of its citizens first, and not just those with the fattest wallets. Decisions and policies should be taken on ensuring they benefit as many people as possible. It shouldn't be too much to ask.

[Section_31]

I can't believe Stronts used Speke as a shining example of a thriving community.

 

I lived in Soeke for 5 years and yes it does have a great community spirit but that's because there is quite an inbred vibe and a lot of people are unable to get out because there are no jobs for them to get out of there.

 

Oh must be because they stuck a Morrisons there and have a retail park up the road. Yeah that defines a boss community that. Suppose that means round by ours is thriving because the Tesco has been built in the last few years.

Speke has no community spirit, none, at least not the kind I was referring to. It never has, it's renowned in other parts of Liverpool for that fact. My family went there from the Dingle in the 60s and never liked it for that reason.

[Rico1304]

I think limiting the number of houses a landlord can have is daft, what you should say is that every landlord HAS to have all his houses up to a minimum standard. If they don't get them up to standard then they are CPO'd and turned into Council Houses.

[Vincent Vega]

I think limiting the number of houses a landlord can have is daft, what you should say is that every landlord HAS to have all his houses up to a minimum standard. If they don't get them up to standard then they are CPO'd and turned into Council Houses.

Wow, I'm astounded you hold that view rico.

[janmolby]

They should change stamp duty rules, a landlord can buy 10 houses at 100k and pay no stamp duty. A first time buyer buys a house for £125,001 and pays tax. Crazy.

 

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

 

 

[Rico1304]

Wow, I'm astounded you hold that view rico.

Why? It's then a well regulated market.

 

(I did have a good night breaking windows last night, maybe it's that!)

[Stu Monty]

I think it makes more sense that the tax a landlord pays rises incrementally the more property he decides to gather. If anyone can give me a compelling reason that someone's 900th property shouldn't be taxed to the max then I'm all ears.

 

I've said it before but one of the major problems with modern capitalism is that there is such little cost for defection (in game theory terms). Because of information asymmetry and the fact that the visibility of these defections is often controlled by the defectors themselves the damage to the reputation that would, in any other situation, act as a balance against actions that continually damage the collective good are simply not there.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I think limiting the number of houses a landlord can have is daft, what you should say is that every landlord HAS to have all his houses up to a minimum standard. If they don't get them up to standard then they are CPO'd and turned into Council Houses.

A few years ago near me a lot of houses were built a lot of people I knew went for them but were out bid they were bought in lots by a few people who then rented them out at a much higher rent than a mortgage payment. Having capital shouldn't mean you can buy up all the housing then sit on your arse raking it in whilst everybody else struggles to put a roof over their head. The more houses they get the more they can buy eventually eating up all the houses and dictating the cost of rent, it really does seem Dickensian. We seem to be regressing, its yet another way money is made with no positive impact no end product other than filling one persons pockets.

[Rico1304]

A few years ago near me a lot of houses were built a lot of people I knew went for them but were out bid they were bought in lots by a few people who then rented them out at a much higher rent than a mortgage payment. Having capital shouldn't mean you can buy up all the housing then sit on your arse raking it in whilst everybody else struggles to put a roof over their head. The more houses they get the more they can buy eventually eating up all the houses and dictating the cost of rent, it really does seem Dickensian. We seem to be regressing, its yet another way money is made with no positive impact no end product other than filling one persons pockets.

But what about good landlords? Why punish them? Who sets the number you can have? You'd flood the market with all the shittest cheap housing and that would be foolish.

[lifetime fan]

Just fired this off to Steve Webb.

Dear Mr Webb

I write to you in a great sense of disbelief, frustration and anger.

My wife was diagnosed with incurable bowel cancer over a year ago having been terribly failed by her GP, who at the time stated he wanted to treat her depression "and not physical symptoms". Carly had been seeing her GP for a number of years with a variety of complaints that had all been attributed to her depression and only after Carly requested to see a different GP was she sent for scans. I'm sure you can appreciate how let down she felt on being told she had incurable bowel cancer and would have had the tumour for approximately 5 years.

Carly has been through such an ordeal the last year including chemotherapy, combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy plus surgery this summer. At one point we were given the hope the surgery may be curative but this was to not be the case and we have had to accept the fact this will be one battle Carly can not win.

Having to endure the last year is one thing but to then experience the unhelpfulness, politicking, incompetency and sheer cruelty of the DWP and ATOS is another matter entirely.

When Carly was originally diagnosed with bowel cancer in September 2012 we made a claim for DLA with the support of a member of staff at the Citizens Advice Bureau in Bristol who's funded by Macmillan Cancer Support. Unfortunately we found this process to be very slow and laborious and the original decision of the DWP was to award Carly low rate care and no mobility. When speaking to CAB advisor and expressing my concerns at the award I was informed "unfortunately in my experience the DWP do this, they'll offer you the bare minimum and wait to see if you appeal, make sure you do and I'm confident Carly will be awarded high rate care and high rate mobility".

And exactly as I was told, on appeal Carly's award was increased to high rate care and high rate mobility. The fact a specialist dealing with people with a diagnosis of cancer has enough experience of the DWP to confidently predict how they will act in such an underhand manner is quite frankly disgusting.

Having finally been awarded the correct DLA claim we then come to the ordeal of having to make an Employment and Support Allowance claim. Carly and I made the claim in August of this year for ESA, it was received by the DWP on the 13 August and sent to ATOS who received it the following day. And then nothing.

At the end of the 13 week assessment phase having not heard from anyone I rang the DWP to be informed the file was with ATOS but they have a large backlog at the moment, would I like their phone number. I then phone ATOS to be told they have Carly's file but that they have a large backlog at the moment and don't know when it will be dealt with. All questions are then answered with the stock phrase of "we do not give a guaranteed turn around time". Even a rough idea of how long the backlog was or if there was a tracking process was met with the parrot phrase of "we do not give a guaranteed turn around time".

So we continued to wait, and wait. Until today when I again rang ATOS to enquire if there had been any progress as we're still yet to hear from anyone. I spoke with a gentleman called Chris (work ID# A539917) who for some reason was reluctant to give his surname. He informed me there was some confusion over the file and that it had initially been sent to them incomplete by the DWP as they should have added an additional form for the referral code used. He explained the file was then resubmitted by the DWP under a different referral code but that there remained confusion around the file and were waiting for instruction from the DWP on how to proceed.

Chris did at least have the decency to tell me the current waiting time for files from the Bristol benefit office is 6 months (for a 13 week assessment phase), he would email them to find out what was going on and would give me a call when he had some answers.

Chris called me this afternoon having spoken to Matt at the Bristol benefit office (work ID# A168697 again not wanting to give surnames) to explain there had been a terrible mix up. The DWP had submitted the original claim on the 14 August incorrectly, ATOS returned it the following day, the DWP submitted it incorrectly for a second time on the 16 August and ATOS again returned it to the Bristol benefit office to await further instruction.

Which is where the file has remained, unactioned for over 4 months. ATOS waiting for instruction and the DWP waiting for ATOS to process the claim. Neither of whom have bothered to track the file, check on its progress or contact Carly.

Apparently Matt is now "going to get someone else to submit the claim properly in the next 3 days" and ATOS will then make a decision on the file. The fact Carly has a job which she enjoys and would dearly love to be able to do is lost in this entire process.

When I politely asked why it was possible for this situation to arise as there seemed no coherent policy or systems in place I was then told "it's not possible for a system dealing with nearly 2 million people". I'm firmly of the opinion if I'd not been chasing both the DWP and ATOS this would not have been discovered for at least 6 months as obviously the DWP are happy with this turnaround time from ATOS and are not tracking files.

Is this really the sort of customer led, cost effective, streamlined, more efficient service your coalition government wanted when appointing yet another contract to a private company? One who took the money knowing full well they were unable to meet the demands of the contract and are yet to be financially penalised for offering such a dogs dinner of a 'service'.

As MP for Carly and myself and Minister of State for the Department of Work and Pensions I urge you to look into this case immediately, use whatever powers available to you to ensure Carly's file is both actioned with immediate effect and that ATOS actually read the file and make the decision based on the facts including the medical reports.

Carly is not well enough to work, believe me she has a job she'd far rather be doing instead of having to deal with incompetency on such a grand scale a cynic would call it deliberate cruelty and penny pinching.

I look forward to your reply

 

No reply, not even an acknowledgment of receipt (and I've double checked it's the correct email address).

 

Despite people telling me he's a good MP etc etc I knew him to be a lying cunt.

 

It almost makes you wish you knew people that could cause a shit storm for him, the DWP and ATOS...