The Starmarda has set sail!

[eightbo]

- Give politically inclined forum members option to opt-in to BA Royal Rumble (free-for-all)
- Each participant wears a coloured hat – red, blue, or otherwise
- Last man standing format
- No physical contact allowed; keyboard's to determine victor
- A participant will be declared as 'out' when they agree to an opposing argument
- No time limit, sleep allowed

[Derek27]

Just use 'Active Sports Topics' if you want to avoid getting drawn into any political threads. That's why we put it there: -

search.php?search_id=active_topics&topicstldw=sports

If he does that, he won't have anything to complain about.

[greenmark]

Must confess I'm puzzled by the cap on child allowance. Is £25 a week really an incentive to have more kids?
If 2 is ok, why is 3 not ok? Don't get it at all. Seems brutal and counter productive in a bad way.

[Emmson]

Must confess I'm puzzled by the cap on child allowance. Is £25 a week really an incentive to have more kids?
If 2 is ok, why is 3 not ok? Don't get it at all. Seems brutal and counter productive in a bad way.

As I understand it UK birth rate is 1.56 but it needs to be over 2.0 to sustain a workforce, that is why some immigration is necessary. Why not incentivize more mothers to have bairns?

[sionascaig]

Must confess I'm puzzled by the cap on child allowance. Is £25 a week really an incentive to have more kids?

I think it's about lifting children out of poverty rather than an incentive to have more kids. Scary as too many turn up at school hungry. I live in an affluent area in Edinburgh and the the local comprehensive estimates c12% to c16% of its children are in this position. In other areas the figures are much higher. Pretty hard to focus on your school work if your main concern is where is my next meal coming from.

Incentivising families to have more children is a whole other ball game...

[Archery1969]

Without trying to take political sides:

- Labour said they would stick to the physical rules set by the last Tory government.
- Removing the 2 child cap would cost £3.5 billion extra each year going forward. There are 1.2 million households with 3 or more children. Of these 772,000 households are receiving state benefits. So your adding more and more cost to the tax payer.
- It looks like they are going to give above inflation pay rises of 5.6% which will add £2.5 billion to the tax payer.
- Nobody knows how much they plan on giving Junior Doctors yet. Watch this space.
- Nodody knows how much rail industry staff will get yet. Watch this space.

So, minimum extra costs so far, if the above happens is around £6 billion outside of fiscal rules, which ofcourse is unfunded.

The OBR stated that for 2024-25, they expect a deficit of £87.2 billion as receipts are being outpassed by spending. By 2030, the national debt will still be 92.9% of national income.

My only comment would be thats allot of $$$$$

[sionascaig]

Without trying to take political sides:

There is of course a big difference between a cost that is in effect an "investment" and a cost that delivers no clear value.

Like you I would rather not get political about it but this one, child support, seems to tick a lot of boxes on all sides of the political spectrum and seems worthy of some priority - even Suella supports!

Didn't Rwanda plan cancellation free up £10bn - at least that was what the Home Office said was ear-marked to cover costs..

[Archery1969]

Without trying to take political sides:

There is of course a big difference between a cost that is in effect an "investment" and a cost that delivers no clear value.

Like you I would rather not get political about it but this one, child support, seems to tick a lot of boxes on all sides of the political spectrum and seems worthy of some priority - even Suella supports!

Didn't Rwanda plan cancellation free up £10bn - at least that was what the Home Office said was ear-marked to cover costs..

Rwanda - Correct but that was unfunded too. Im not an economist but I dont think thats really a saving. Unless someone can correct me ?

[sionascaig]

Rwanda - Correct but that was unfunded too. Im not an economist but I dont think thats really a saving. Unless someone can correct me ?

If unfunded, it is no saving... That would of course mean last government had a fairly sizable hole to fill at some point.

I seem to remember some wheeze where if a cost could be pushed out past 5years into the future it doesn't count to targets set - hence there was a big change (and argument) about the definition of medium term & long term was for forecast purposes (Sunak changed the definition but can't remember detail but it was the basis for the "5yr" plan they keep referring to & what was in / out)..

[Archery1969]

This is long but a really good read if you want to see the state of the UK economy:

https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/E030577 ... eFinal.pdf

The biggest standout for me is the number of inactive people, its HUGE. No wonder spending is out passing receipts since before the pandemic.

[firlandsfarm]

If unfunded, it is no saving...

Sorry SC but can't quite agree that. To establish if there is a saving you would have to use a formula something like this ...

Saving = (cost if immigrants for Rwanda stay in the UK) - (cost of sending them to Rwanda) - (cost saving of potential new refugees dissuaded from crossing the channel).

... a saving is a saving on what would/could have been, it makes no odds if unfunded.

[sionascaig]

If unfunded, it is no saving...

Sorry SC but can't quite agree that. To establish if there is a saving you would have to use a formula something like this ...

Saving = (cost if immigrants for Rwanda stay in the UK) - (cost of sending them to Rwanda) - (cost saving of potential new refugees dissuaded from crossing the channel).

... a saving is a saving on what would/could have been, it makes no odds if unfunded.

Yup.... I was really meaning what's been allowed in the budget v's not... e.g. not all of the £10bn has been allocated & the unallocated portion may be very large or > 5yrs away...

Appreciate there is a bigger picture...

[firlandsfarm]

Yup.... I was really meaning what's been allowed in the budget v's not... e.g. not all of the £10bn has been allocated & the unallocated portion may be very large or > 5yrs away...

Appreciate there is a bigger picture...

I accept your Budget slant.

[Derek27]

Starmer's committed to halving violence against women and girls. Surely that means he's committed to ensuring 1000s of women and girls are attacked.

[Archery1969]

Starmer's committed to halving violence against women and girls. Surely that means he's committed to ensuring 1000s of women and girls are attacked.

No Derek, believe it or not I am sticking up for a Labour PM.

He is referring to the 94,683 sexual offences, 144 killings and 72,418 rapes. So, basically, he is commiting to halving those numbers. Not perfect by any means of the imagination but a start, if he can achieve it.