[Closed] This is satirical comedy, right?

Removing EMAs, increasing tuition fees...

Binners...

Agree fully. Cameron is wired to the moon.

Have we done the thing about how they're trying to erase all their old speeches and election promises from the Internet?

It is, except that rather than laughing I now feel a bit depressed

Where's Guy Fawkes when you really really need him?

Truely depresing individual that Camaroon bloke, truely.

🙄

Aaaah, don't pick on CallMeDave, you'll make him sad.

[img] [/img]

Have we done the thing about how they're trying to erase all their old speeches and election promises from the Internet?

heard something on the radio this morning, someone needs to point them to this page...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

Was this at the Lord Mayors Banquet where the wine bill alone is in the region of £15K each year.

Perhaps they should start modernising themselves by having a Lord Mayor's buffet in place of a banquet, and instead of the mansion house they could have it down some pub in the East End with jellied eels, pie and mash and a few sausage rolls swigged down with a couple of mugs of builder's tea.

indeed privately educated millionaire son of a man who made his fortune exploting tax loopholes lectures us all about helping the poor whilst slowly dry shafting them and selling off or decimating everything that helps them

It is the death of satire

It is amusing how they went on about open govt and honesty and integrity then removed all their own speeches - I wonder if there was anything incriminating in them?
i find it hard to believe dave has not delivered on his pledges

Crikey Binners, I misread that stuff, judging by your comments I thought it read:

David Cameron has conclused that there is sufficient social mobility in British society and said it was not the job of the government to raise the aspirations of people from poor backgrounds to get top jobs in public life.

Speaking days after Sir John Major criticised the "truly shocking" dominance of the affluent and privately educated in public life, the Eton- and Oxford-educated prime minister rejected the idea that the coalition must "do far more" to increase diversity in the national elite.

Now that would be worthy of comment.

So punishing the poor for being poor, rewarding the rich for being rich, surrounding yourself with your old millionaire Eton school chums in every single position of power and influence, and just generally turbo-charging the inequality in society, is going to improve social mobility how exactly?

Leaving aside the inconvnenient truth that negative trends in income inequality have finally been halted/reversed under, of all things a Tory led coalition (source the independent ONS), that the BoE published its most up-beat assessment of the UK economy in some while, when UN stats are likely to proove the current BoE governor wrong etc. I doubt that I need point you to look across th Channel to see one of the alternatives but today's FT makes interesting reading.

The more interesting question is why, when the Tory joker card (the economy) is looking increasingly like a trump card, CMD continues to be rattled by the likes of Major and why he has allowed Milliband to increasingly set the political agenda and debate. He is an odd politician at times!!!! May be THAT is satire.

Blimey, how the hell did the Conservatives reduce income inequality?

Seems to be true from the stats. Is there more to it?

How has Cameron got anything to do with it? Labour were in power for the generation that social mobility declined. The 80s was all about the expansion of the middle classes.

Not that anyone can do much about it, the middle-class is about to contract as their jobs are automated.

I know HH, CMD's supporters must have a very different interpretation of satire when they read:

Disposable incomes have fallen since the start of the economic downturn, with average equivalised income falling by £1,200 since 2007/08 in real terms. The fall in income has been largest for the richest fifth of households (6.8%). In contrast, after accounting for inflation and household composition, average income for the poorest fifth has grown over this period (6.9%)

Bloody Tories 😉 (that bit IS (weak) comedy BTW!)

the fall is certainly welcome, seems to be largely due to VAT increases

theres still a long way to go

[img] [/img]
http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/resources/infographic-income-inequality-uk

and since 2012 and those statistics food bank use has trippled
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/hungrier-than-ever-britains-use-of-food-banks-triples-8882340.html

meanwhile child poverty has also soared
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22887005

theres no doubt that the recent benefit reforms have played a large in this

still for some its taxpayer funded banquets with silver spoons all the way
[img] [/img]

Seeing as the Tories seem to be specialising in ill-thought through policies delivering unintended consequences, I feel pretty sure any reduction in inequality was entirely unplanned

Not really VAT, since increases in indirect taxes has a disproportionate effect on lower income households. Richer people pay more VAT in absolute but lees VAT in relative (to income) terms

Reduced income inequaliy was an unintended consequence? If they want satire, they should get your to write CMD's speeches Binners!!!

(but I get what you mean!! 😉 )

your right THM, I was misreading this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23253092

Is it increased tax revenues then or reduction in benefits for higher earners, or both?

either way the cost of living squeeze is obviously felt more acutely by those with less money

My favourite unintended Tory consequence involves the [s]bedroom tax[/s] sorry, Spare Room Subsidy. It perfectly illustrates their heartfelt concern for the poor, and their steadfast commitment to improving their lot...

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/nov/10/bedrooom-tax-affordable-homes-face-demolition ]You really couldn't make it up[/url]

The links above Kimbers. I will leave you to decide who has been squeezed hardest - that is probably a matter of interpretation. No doubt about the absolute level of suffering still being endured by many though.

This is a slow, mild recovery - albeit happening at a slightly faster rate than people expected.

still for some its taxpayer funded banquets with silver spoons all the way

None of the Mansion House dinners are taxpayer funded, I think most are self funding and to the extent they need subsidy it will come from the Corporation of London, most of whose income comes from its own resouces. Being Lord Mayor is petty expensive as the Lord Mayor has to dip into their own pocket for quite a lot of expenses - £100 to 200K.

Its true labour were really poor on income inequality but it would be disingenous - in fact it would be an outright lie, to claim the Tories were trying to do this juts as it would be a lie to say it had not happened- it appears THM might try to argue it from his neutral non partisan position

Does anyone think he or any Tory [or frankkly any politician of any hue] lies awake at night worrying about income inequality and how they can redress it?

were they to care I would have expected the higher rate of tax to have remained, a wealth tax [ lib dem choice] to have been implemented and the raising of tax thresholds to have been their plan

appologies my info was from here, since corrected!
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/13/david-cameron-austerity-public-sector-cuts

Does anyone think he or any Tory [or frankkly any politician of any hue] lies awake at night worrying about income inequality and how they can redress it?

I doubt it, why would anyone want to be re-elected? Heaven (sorry) forbid.

We know the story on the higher rates of tax though don't we? No need to examine the previous government's record there or to view the shenanigans across the channel.

On the thresholds - good job we have a coalition then.

[i]I can only assume that this is some form of satirical, political performance art [/i]

Probably is but being poor and educated at public school you couldn't possibly understand it. You'll find your spiritual needs would be better met if you read the cartoons in the Sun.

iirc one of the best methods of improving social mobility were selective grammar schools that offered bursaries to those from poorer backgrounds.

iialsorc these were abolished by the socialist government of the day, many of whom had used them as springboard to go from working class backgrounds to Oxbridge.

Leaving aside the inconvnenient truth that negative trends in income inequality have finally been halted/reversed under, of all things a Tory led coalition

This is a slow, mild recovery

😯

What kind of dreamland are you living in?? Have you not looked around you, at Reality?

the [b]independent[/b] ONS

😆

Does anyone think he or any Tory [or frankkly any politician of any hue] lies awake at night worrying about income inequality and how they can redress it?

More people who own homes with middle-class jobs means more tory voters.

More people on benefits mean more labour votes.

It's pretty obvious which party wants to push people into benefits and suppress social mobility.

No cybicle, I prefer to walk around with my eyes shut, ignore any economic data releases, never read a paper or listen to the radio. It's a lovely dreamland isn't it?

But in my dreams yesterday I imagined hearing:

Inflation is now as low as it has been since 2009. Jobs are being created at a rate of 60,000 per month. The economy is growing at its fastest pace in 6 years.For the first time in a long time, you don’t have to be an optimist to see the glass as half full. The recovery has finally taken hold.

Didn't sound like comedy at the time especially as the dream also had

It is welcome that the economy is growing again, but a return to growth is not yet a return to normality. Nearly one million more people are out of work than in the years before the financial crisis. Many others in part time work would prefer to be working full time. Real wages are not yet increasing. And the economy remains 2.5% smaller than it was in 2008.

I wonder if, in the real world, any politician thinks about that. Meanwhile back in dreamland......

[the irony of grammar schools and social mobility will not have been lost of Major. Among his other notable successes (?) shame he didn't address that as well]

5thelefant theres only 1 joker on this thread and thats CMD, your efforts pale in comparison to his

Eh? The labour party wants more people on benefits? And the present Tory party are the champions of social mobility?

Some... erm... 'interesting' logic there. Reminds me a bit of similar logic displayed in finding witches....

😆

The middle classes vote tory. Poor people vote labour.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/05/why-working-class-people-vote-conservative

although i'd replace conservative with UKIP these days...

Whilst I have every sympathy with those affected by the bedroom tax, which was brought in without enough thought for it's consequences, it actually just brought those in social housing in line with the rules that claimants in private rented property have been having todeal with for over 20 years.

They should get rid of all those pesky workers rights and child labour laws too, bring us in line with the rules that workers Bangladesh and Ghana have been having to deal with for over 20 years.

iirc one of the best methods of improving social mobility were selective grammar schools that offered bursaries to those from poorer backgrounds.

iialsorc these were abolished by the socialist government of the day, many of whom had used them as springboard to go from working class backgrounds to Oxbridge.

Labour started the process in 65 but was not massively opposed nor repealed by Tories so Mleh as a general point
FWIW I missed the socialist govt and it like me calling any right wing govt fascist in terms of accuracy
Yes the grammar schools sole purpose was to get working class folk into oxbridge and they existed to solely promote social mobility, which they still do a sterling job at these days 😕

The recovery has finally taken hold.

iirc one of the best methods of improving social mobility were selective grammar schools that offered bursaries to those from poorer backgrounds.

Yeah it really made so much sense to lock someone's life into a set path at 11 years of age.

The problem is that the torie vision of social mobility is still to have an elite, that some can move into if they are really really lucky.

The socialist (sensible) path is to provide a good life to as many people as possible. So even if you do what many consider a trivial manual job, you can still afford to live in a decent home, raise kids and enjoy life without financial fears.

There's a "boom" JY? Where?

That bit was missing in my dreams.....

As an aside and turning tangentially to the Remembrace Sunday debate on polticising the day, interesting to hear that Hollande was actually heckled at the French service. Now if I could escape dreamland, I might just enjoy the debate between Paul Krugman, S&P and the OECD currently raging re France. I am sure it's quite interesting especially with Krugman (apparently) getting quite agitated.

No cybicle, I prefer to walk around with my eyes shut, ignore any economic data releases, never read a paper or listen to the radio. It's a lovely dreamland isn't it?

So you'll be aware that child poverty in increasing in the UK then:

In the short run, relative child poverty is forecast to remain broadly constant between 2009---10
and 2012---13, before rising slightly in 2013---14. Relative working-age adult poverty is forecast
to rise slightly between 2009---10 and 2012---13, before rising faster in 2013---14. Absolute child
and working-age adult poverty are forecast to rise continuously, and by more than relative
poverty, over this period. This unusual pattern arises because the living standards of low-income
families are set to fall over the period --- which will increase absolute poverty --- but they are
forecast to fall by less than the living standards of families at median income, and so relative
poverty is forecast to have fallen in 2010---11. Indeed, at its low point, real median household
income is forecast to be 7% lower in 2012---13 than it was in 2009---10, and to remain below its
2009---10 level until at least 2015---16. This unprecedented collapse in living standards is chiefly
due to the (actual or forecast) high inflation and weak earnings growth over this period. As
families in poverty get much of their income from state benefits and tax credits, which are
typically increased in line with inflation, a fall in real earnings closes the gap between them and
families around median income, who get much of their income from earnings.

Children's campaigners say the true figure is higher and that 300,000 more children live in poor homes than in the previous year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22887005

And that tuberculosis, the 'disease of poverty', is on the increase in the UK:

The report’s author, Professor Alimuddin Zumla of University College London, attributes the rise to people living under “Victorian” conditions, with poor housing, inadequate ventilation and overcrowding in certain deprived areas of London.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2010/12December/Pages/tb-tuberculosis-cases-rise-london-uk.aspx

More a nightmare, than a dreamland, I'd say.

Just as an example of how much more equal our society has become, if the minimum wage had kept pace with average rises in boardroom pay since its introduction in 1997, it would now stand at £20 an hour. Its £6.31

But Binners; have you read any economic data releases? Because if you had, you'd surely know that there's a good reason for that discrepancy. And be able to defend the growing inequality. 😉

Yes aware thanks but appreciate the update. May I re-quote from your quote as well:

As families in poverty get much of their income from state benefits and tax credits, which are
typically increased in line with inflation, a fall in real earnings closes the gap between them and
families around median income, who get much of their income from earnings.

Now if I had posted that (cough) I am sure you would have objected!!!

Leaving the silliness aside, can you point me in the direction of anyone defending inequality? Or was that an attempt at satire?

I included all the 'data' rather than using it selectively to make a point (which you've actually failed to make there). The fact still stands that the gap is widening, not falling as you seem to believe.

Ok, well there's a well paid job waiting at the non-independent (apparently) ONS because clearly they don't know what they are talking about.

The only downside is that you may have to be a fully paid up member of the Tory party to apply!

The data was interesting as was the bit I highlighted.

I'm sure the people on £6.31 an hour will be thanking the lord they have Dave fighting their corner. He's almost evangelical in his quest for a fairer society. Bless him.

As families in poverty get much of their income from state benefits and tax credits, which are typically increased in line with inflation, a fall in real earnings closes the gap between them and families around median income, who get much of their income from earnings.

Are you really trying to argue that a fall in median earnings is a sign of social mobility? I would say it proves that the majority are getting screwed by the minority.

No, just responding to idea, "punishing the poor for being poor and rewarding the rich for being rich."

Social mobility is a different point - but share others' views on the role of grammar schools though. Not that it did Major much good as I understand that he only got three O levels. No wonder he was unable to achieve anything in his life!

No, just responding to idea, "punishing the poor for being poor and rewarding the rich for being rich."

Well showing that median earnings have lowered doesn't respond to that point.

Which view do you share?

That selection at a young age is good for social mobility.

or

That grammar schools lock a person into (or more frequently out of) a life based on an exam taken at the age of 11.

There's a "boom" JY? Where?

Patience young padawan

That bit was missing in my dreams...

I thought you said you were reality based

Correct, it doesn't.

It's all in phrasing the question isn't it!? I will duck your (loaded !!) questions and merely say that satisfying different educational needs require tailored/diffeent rather than comprehensive solutions. How we achieve that is a whole new can of worms.

Edit for X-post: I thought so too JY but have been informed otherwise!!!!

Actually in our free-market (sic) we do have a mini boom in certain asset prices created by, heaven (Opps again) forbid, the state which is deliberate mis-pricing risk in financial markets. This will ultimately lead to a bust in those assets.

Governments eh, bloody boom and bust, the inevitable result of their intererence!!!! 😉

(Edit: we'll strictly speaking not exactly the state)