Jeremy Corbyn

Ninfan- I don't really care about Labour and Blair's involvement in MS, but thanks.

None of that disproves what I said above.

"In a May 31, 2006 email, the head of Morgan Stanley's team tasked with doing due diligence on the value of properties underlying the mortgage loans asked a colleague, 'please do not mention the 'slightly higher risk tolerance' in these communications. We are running under the radar and do not want to document these types of things.'
"In another email on November 21, 2006, a member of the Morgan Stanley due diligence team forwarded a list of questionable loans, seeking review and approval to purchase them and adding 'I assume you will want to do your 'magic' on this one?' "

They were deeply, deeply involved in the whole shebang.

I don't really care about Labour and Blair's involvement in MS,

Really, because if “The next Labour Government is a threat to a damaging and failed system that’s rigged for the few.” Then I would suggest that Labours longstanding involvement and close ties to Morgan Stanley opens
some really quite interesting questions,

Shall we just "cite", as they say?

“These are the same speculators and gamblers who crashed our economy in 2008 and then we had to bail them out. Their greed plunged the world into crisis and we are still paying the price.”

Is the "bail out" line why you're asserting that Corbyn was wrong? I'll give you that. No bailout was made to MS.

However, as I noted above, they were forced to pay a $3.2 billion settlement because they were aware of what risks they were carrying and covered it up.

Not exactly blameless.

ninfan - Member
I don't really care about Labour and Blair's involvement in MS,
Really, because if “The next Labour Government is a threat to a damaging and failed system that’s rigged for the few.” Then I would suggest that Labours lingstanding involvementand clise ties to Morgan Stanley opens some really quite interesting questions"

Labour's [i]former[/i] involvement, you mean?

Cody to your credit you more informed than your hero. His comments were quite different, more specific and wrong. But no change really.

Labour's former involvement, you mean?

One of Morgan Stanley’s current directors is a Labour Peer FFS!

teamhurtmore - Member
Cody to your credit you more informed than your hero. His comments were quite different, more specific and wrong. But no change really.

I'll be honest THM- I went through all he said line by line, and nothing I found- other than what I noted above- had anything factually correct that I could see. But as its you, I'll review it later and if I'm wrong, I'll come back and say so.

I do accept his broad assertion about the actions of certain banks prior to 2008 and afterwards. So.

ninfan - Member
Labour's former involvement, you mean?
One of Morgan Stanley’s current directors is a Labour Peer FFS!

Indeed, suggested by Harman IIRC. So?

I'll be honest THM- I went through all he said line by line, and nothing I found- other than what I noted above- had anything factually correct that I could see.

That’s a bit harsh. But you might be correct. Wouldn’t surprise me

j

jambalaya - Member
What’s really worrying for Labour is Bristol Labour council planning a trebling of council tax for “the rich”.

What's funny is whenever you see jamba making an outlandish claim you know without even googling that he's talking shite.

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/increase-council-tax-200-richest-806346

I would say more people vote for the Conservative party in blissful ignorance as they are not part of the 5% that actually benefit from having a Conservative party

Absolutely.

I don't get that at all. Comes down to being a true blue and all that. But without the capacity to understand what shitting on your own doorstep means.

The Alf Garnett effect:

"My father borrowed a pair of boots to walk fifteen miles to the polling station to vote Conservative!"

Turkeys, Christmas etc....

@DrJ look at all the rises proposed for just shy of 16,000 owners. Owning a £1m property in Bristol doesn’t make you rich does it ? £500k property not rich, £1m property with £500k mortgage = rich ?

@Rusty running up a £90bn per anum deficit having soectacularly failed to properly regulate banks whilst claim8 g to have ended “boom and bust” certainly doesn’t help the 95%

“(Corbyn) going the full (Hugo) Chavez” - brilliant 🙂

Are you drunk?

Owning a £1m property in Bristol doesn’t make you rich does it ?

Sadly not it’s Monday. Did you watch the video, tremendous ? Or are you referring to something else

yeah but not like really rich, you know just quite well off.

Owning a £1m property in Bristol doesn’t make you rich does it ? £500k property not rich, £1m property with £500k mortgage = rich ?

And with that you show just how out of touch you are. £500 000 mortgage only available to the very richest couple of % of the UK

Yes it does.

Why are you richer owning a £1m property with a £500k mortgage than a £500k property without, or indeed a £900k property mortgage free. IMO a £900k property mortgage free makes you much richer than a £1m property owner with a 50% ltv loan

either example only is available to the very rich. £500 000 mortage is what - £3500 pcm.

@DrJ look at all the rises proposed for just shy of 16,000 owners. Owning a £1m property in Bristol doesn’t make you rich does it ? £500k property not rich, £1m property with £500k mortgage = rich ?

You didn't even get what DrJ was saying. The article references a report put out by Bristol's "wing" of Momentum. I realised this as I'd seen mention of it on twitter when you posted it the other day but didn't bother responding at the time. Yet, here you are talking about it again. It is not a "plan" by Bristol City Council. It's not even anywhere near a "plan" - let alone policy to be implemented. Jesus wept - what planet are you on?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_in_the_United_Kingdom

In terms of global poverty criteria, the United Kingdom is a wealthy country, with virtually no people living on less than £4 a day. In 2012-13, median personal income was approximately £21,000 a year but varies considerably by age, location, data source and occupation.[2] There is both significant income redistribution and income inequality; for instance, in 2013/14 income in the top and bottom fifth of households was £80,800 and £5,500, respectively, before taxes and benefits (15:1). After tax and benefits, household income disparities are significantly reduced to £60,000 and £15,500 (4:1).[3]

TJ you clearly don’t understand the difference between wealth and income then. The day you start a £100k a year job you are not rich. It’s also substantially more than a “couple lf percent” that can afford a £500k 50% LTV mortgage be they individuals, couples or even BTL landlords.

Jamba - you clearly have no idea of what riches are. Being able to afford a 500 000 mortgage makes you one of the very rich elite and yes it will be the top couple of % of the population.

The day you start a £100 000 job you become one of the richest in our society.

The day you start a £100k a year job you are not rich.

vs Median
YEAR MONTH WEEK
Gross Wage £21,000 £1,750 £404
Taxable Wage £9,491 £791 £183
Tax Paid £1,898 £158 £37
Tax Free Allowance £11,509 £959 £221
National Insurance £1,540 £128 £30
Take-home pay £17,561 £1,463 £338

So in 3 months on 100k you earn the same as somebody on the median wage does in a year? Definitely not rich, if you choose to live a lifestyle that spends most of your 100k then that is a choice and that does make you rich.

So what about Bristol City Council's plans for a 3x Council Tax rise jamba?

Is this true or not? Has Bristol City Council said that it's planning to raise Council Tax for the highest banded houses in the city? All I can find is stories about a 5% rise while making 30 odd million cuts - so those in Clifton and Stoke Bishop don't have to worry quite yet - unless you can cite specific plans to raise the council tax for Band H by 200%?

The day you start a £100 000 job you become one of the richest in our society.

Yep, assuming you keep that salary for a while. I count myself as relatively rich. Don't have much spare money each month because A LOT of money is going on a house but I can do that because I am rich.

So do I feel rich - not really
Am I rich - yes

he day you start a £100 000 job you become one of the richest in our society.

that also depends where you live - if you got that salary but lived and worked in the welsh valleys you would be a lot richer than someone working in London and having to cope with the much higher living/housing costs.

We all have a choice in where we live.
Moaning about living in the most affluent areas is a bit off, tbh.

But McDonald is being sensible. Populism succeeds despite being BS indeed arguably because of it. Even he doesn’t understand what he is saying about borrowing and ruturnd so his safe with the voters

Everytime I see McDonald I think that he will be echoing Trump if he ever got in - saying things like

"Now, I have to tell you, it's an unbelievably complex subject, Nobody knew [insert any of 'railways', 'the economy', 'water utilities', 'government borrowing', or anything else he has promised to nationalise] could be so complicated."

that also depends where you live - if you got that salary but lived and worked in the welsh valleys you would be a lot richer than someone working in London and having to cope with the much higher living/housing costs.

Indeed but it's still 3x average London salary and I lived there for 10 years on far less than 100k, is have felt much richer on 100k !

110K pa puts you firmly in the richest few % of the country. This is a fact. You might not feel rich but you are compared to the rest of us.

We all have a choice in where we live.
Moaning about living in the most affluent areas is a bit off, tbh.

Moaning - I think you are missing the point.

A bit like Labour threatening to tax people earning over £80k more without, it seems, any weighting for where the earner lives. A salary of £80k in London is worth a lot less than £80k in Bangor.

Yes, I know.

We supposedly live in the same country.
If you're happy with increased inequality and genuinely don't care about anyone outside your own little bubble, your argument holds water.
If not, it doesn't.

You are one of the wealthiest in our society.
You choose your lifestyle and how to spend your money.

Complaining that living costs are higher in the area you choose to live is, in my opinion, in extremely poor taste.

Don't complain because prices are higher in more affluent areas.
Isn't that how the blessed free market works?

A bit like Labour threatening to tax people earning over £80k more without, it seems, any weighting for where the earner lives. A salary of £80k in London is worth a lot less than £80k in Bangor.

You'd then get people pulling sneaky non-dom kind-of tricks so they didn't appear to live in London.

And it's quite hard to earn £80k in Bangor BTW.

Yep, when you start complaining how hard it is to live on 100k in the same city as people on minimum wage you might as well ask why they don't want some cake.

turnerguy - and that 80 000 still puts you in the richest few % of the population. Jeezo - the worlds of unreality some of you live in!

A salary of £80k in London is worth a lot less than £80k in Bangor.

still a decent wedge anywhere though.

Jeezo - the worlds of unreality some of you live in!

it's you guys that seem to live in a world of unreality.

The actual salary figure doesn't matter - it is the amount of disposable income you have left after basic living costs that counts.

I seem to remember Corbyn saying he wasn't wealthy on his salary of £138k.

And it's quite hard to earn £80k in Bangor BTW.

yes, that's the point - it would be a top level salary but you would be being taxed at the same level as a mid(ish) level salary for someone in the city of london.

Nope - its you folk that have absolutely no idea of whow most of the folk in the UK live that are in the unreal. Anyone who thinks you can earn amounts that put you in the top few % of the UKs earners and not be rich show your utter inability to understand things outside of your bubble. It doesn't matter where you live or what your outgoings are £100 000 pa makes you rich
Basic living costs are the same for everyone - from the doleprole to the very richest

I am in agreement with TJ on this one, apart from

Basic living costs are the same for everyone

turnerguy - £80 000 pa is never a middish level salery no matter where you live. This shows the amount of your self delusion.

[img] ?w=1024&h=565[/img]

Matt - only if you buy a house. Basic living costs are not buying a house. Its living in a room in a shared house if you are single or fair rental is you have a family. Not a huge range in difference of these across the country. ( although I accept a difference)

TurnerGuy - Member
The actual salary figure doesn't matter - it is the amount of disposable income you have left after basic living costs that counts.

Which basic living costs are out of your control?

Not a huge range in difference of these across the country. ( although I accept a difference)

FFS - you just spout a load of drivel, don't you?

Check this then :

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23234033

If you're earning £80k in London then you're not as talented as someone earning same in Bangor, so do you really deserve as much money?

Fair rents Turnerguy. You know - social housing that many poorer folk rely on. Not hugely different across the UK and anyway living in an expensive area is not " basic living costs"

Its awfully harsh but I'd love folk like you to lose your jobs for a year just to understand what being rich and poor actually means as you seem absolutely incapable of understanding what the reality for the majority in this country is.

Look at that income distribution graph.

salary heatmap, some correlation with the housing costs, funny that :

https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/nesscontent/dvc126/

Pointless TJ, just pointless.

The Marie Antoinette comparison seems more apt the further we get into this.

If you're earnng 100k & living in Hounslow you're a king

[img] [/img]

Look at that income distribution graph.

Income distribution doesn't matter if the rest of your costs are less and you end up with the same amount of disposable income and quality of life.

What's so difficult to understand about that ?

Which basic living costs are out of your control?

You are right Rusty

Turnerguy - because the rest of your costs being high is your choice. Basic living costs are similar for everyone. a roof over their head and food and utilities.

Here's another interesting page :

https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2017/06/12/the-wealth-of-regions-measuring-the-uks-tax-and-spending-imbalance/

Which has nothing to do with the fact that 80 or 100k puts you firmly amongst the richest in the country

Basic living costs are similar for everyone. a roof over their head and food and utilities.

😯

You think housing costs are similar across the country?

Do iPhones cost more in London? X

I dunno.

But it would appear they have the facility to blank out questions that are a bit tough to answer.

ninfan - Member

Basic living costs are similar for everyone. a roof over their head and food and utilities.

You think housing costs are similar across the country?

Yes - fair / social rents which is what poorer folk rely on especially in the expensive cities

yourguitarhero - Member
Do iPhones cost more in London? X

yip, good point that. it's not an entirely level playing field either way. Housing costs are higher in london, but in rural areas and the like, things like supermarket prices and petrol prices are actually more expensive.

Average social rent in london £100 per week, rest of england 88.

Canny just factor in social rents though. I rent and I've never paid a social rent in my puff. Could maybe factor in if they where available to everyone, but they aren't.

But it would appear they have the facility to blank out questions that are a bit tough to answer.

don't flatter yourself...

I've already quoted housing costs, commuting costs are also high to offset the fact I can't afford to live in London itself.

Quality of life drops as well because of commute time.

Maybe I should apply for some of that social housing - that should help keep my costs down.

And maybe they should put a cap on wages down here so they are no higher than anywhere else in the country, and then increase taxes on everyone in the whole country massively to counter the drop in tax revenues that are being used to prop up government spending in the rest of the country - like on the ONS web page I posted earlier.

Thats the basic living cost tho. Not a detached house and a BMW.

Families - basic living costs are the cheapest accommodation ie social rents. for singles - a room in a shared house.

Turnerguy - maybe you should try living on average incomes? then you might understand the difference between rich and poor a little more - or even better benefit levels

Yo ucan quote all the obfuscation you like. Nothing alters the fact that on £100 000 pa you are in the richest few % of the UK

I've already quoted housing costs, commuting costs are also high to offset the fact I can't afford to live in London itself.
Quality of life drops as well because of commute time.

All these things are within your control.

And maybe they should put a cap on wages down here so they are no higher than anywhere else in the country, and then increase taxes on everyone in the whole country massively to counter the drop in tax revenues that are being used to prop up government spending in the rest of the country

Or maybe not have a country where one city is completely out of whack with the rest of the whole country. If wages were more even, property would be more even and tax revenue would be the same overall.
Population would be better spread, less concentrated pressure in certain areas etc,.

Sounds quite hard for you struggling to live on £100K in London. You could always move and help the balance of London vs non-London...

Or maybe not have a country where one city is completely out of whack with the rest of the whole country.

Yeah but how many countries are really like that though? Reality is that cities are where the money is especially if they have decision making government or financial sectors.

You could always move and help the balance of London vs non-London...

I go where the decent jobs are - where I live is a balance between a decent job and being able to get into the countryside.

I like how everyone assumes I earn 100k although I never said anything of the sort, and TJ implies I drive a BMW. Shame I really drive a 14 year old Alfa...

Yo ucan quote all the obfuscation you like. Nothing alters the fact that on £100 000 pa you are in the richest few % of the UK

It's not obfuscation is it though - accounting for costs someone on 100k in London could be in exactly the same position in terms of wealth as someone on 60k in Bristol, or 40k in Liverpool.

Except that they pay more tax.

Perhaps all you lefty types should be moving to London and paying a bit more tax - i.e. pull your finger out and contribute a bit more to the running of the country.

It's not obfuscation is it though - accounting for costs someone on 100k in London could be in exactly the same position in terms of wealth as someone on 60k in Bristol, or 40k in Liverpool.

Nope - this is simple nonsense. the person in london is 40 or 60% richer.

Nope - this is simple nonsense. the person in london is 40 or 60% richer.

jesus, I thought my maths ability was dodgy...

You seem to think if you spend all your money on luxuries that makes you poor. It doesn't. Its the total amount of money you have that shows whether you are rich or poor not how much you have left after your purchases

You seem to think if you spend all your money on luxuries that makes you poor. It doesn't. Its the total amount of money you have that shows whether you are rich or poor not how much you have left after your purchases

I am talking about the amount of money you have left after paying tax, the increased housing costs required to live in an area that allows you to earn the higher salary, the possibly increased commuting costs, etc, not luxuries.

TurnerGuy - Member

Perhaps all you lefty types should be moving to London and paying a bit more tax - i.e. pull your finger out and contribute a bit more to the running of the country

How much tax does one have to pay to have an opinion?

How much tax does one have to pay to have an opinion?

At least be subject to the 45% band...

Amazing.

At least be subject to the 45% band...

😆

TurnerGuy - Member
At least be subject to the 45% band...

😯

I thought it was the lefties who were supposed to be chippy and bitter?

Please tell me you're not serious.

Please tell me you're not serious.

of course I am not serious.

Thank God for that.
🙂