RayC

Maybe not zero but not a lot. Sack them is not an option. Resident doctors have just been awarded a 28.9% pay increase over 3 years. They argue that award merely gets them back to where they were as their pay has not matched inflation for a number of years. They add that they are underpaid in comparison with their overseas peers. Well, firstly, many sectors have found that their 'real' pay has fallen; the doctors are not alone. Secondly, while doctors in some overseas countries are paid more, their tuition costs are significantly higher. For example, £45k in the UK vs. $300k (median value) in the US. This smacks of opportunistic greed.

That's just another way of saying that Brexit wasn't implemented correctly!😂 It always somebody's else's fault. No accountability or responsibility taken. The Johnson and Truss administrations were Brexiter and had large majorities. Why couldn't they make a success of Brexit? I'm pre-empt the excuse of COVID and/or the Ukraine war. Of course, these issues preoccupied the PM, Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary, but what about the Trade departments, parts of the Treasury, etc. Why couldn't they come up with a plan for making Brexit work? How about Rees-Mog.g, arch-Brexiter; wasn't he meant to be Minister for the Bonfire of EU legislation or some such nonsense? What did he achieve? Zero. The truth is that Brexit was never going to deliver the promised sunny uplands. And again with the misplaced Strawman. Exactly how will leaving the ECHR stop people getting in a boat and setting off for Southern England? Really? Such as? I suppose that it is to Reform's credit that they have realised that the economic policies, which they proposed 6 months ago are completely impractical. The problem is that they haven't replaced them with anything. Absolutely. I was left with a sense of foreboding when Labour's manifesto promised no tax increases on workers. You didn't need to have access to the 'Blue Book' to realise that promise should not have been made and wouldn't be kept. Throw in a completely shambolic PR performance and this government is not far off being the complete disaster that you suggest that it is. However, imo Reform, The One Show (or whatever they call themselves) and the Greens aren't the answer: They would make a bad situation, worse.

I wonder if Mr. M-W will be signing on down at the labour exchange?

Rinse and repeat. 1. Brexit isn't a failure, it's the way that it's been implemented. 2. Leave the ECHR and the illegal boat crossings will immediately cease. 3. Reform has the answer to the UK's problems 🤦

Perhaps if you have read all of the article, you would have understood that the reference to, " ... mitigation being managed in favour of economic migrants and students ...", was in comparison with refugees and not British workers Your linked article goes on to say that, "(Blair) himself was much more closely associated with a stronger, more restrictive approach to asylum and security and, eventually, to a more "community approach" to integration." I would have thought that you would be in favour of such policies.

For once we agree. I've always thought that the OBR was fair and impartial https://obr.uk/forecasts-in-depth/the-economy-forecast/brexit-analysis/#assumptions

In 2023, there were 46,728 gun-related deaths in the US of which, 27,300 were suicides (58%); 17,927 were homicides (38%); 604 were due to Law Enforcement Intervention (+/-1%); 463 were unintentional (Accidental) deaths: (+/-1%) and 434 were due to undetermined Circumstances: (+/-1%). Figures relating to the number of illegally owned guns are not kept, but I'd suggest that the above breakdown makes it debatable whether the majority of deaths were due to illegally owned firearms. By contrast, although a precise breakdown of figures is difficult to find, the number of deaths by gunshot in the UK in 2023 was less than 200. Just over 100 were suicides (mainly serving or ex-military) and 22 were homicides. Moreover, the number of suicides from firearms has declined by 50% since the UK introduced stricter rules on owning guns for leisure activities. Personally, I think that it is intuitively obvious that the easier it is to obtain firearms, the greater the number of firearm related deaths there will be. However, there is no need to rely on my intuition, the evidence is plain for all to see.

Ah but the US is competing on the world stage. Jokes aside, it's the same old thing when it comes to the gun debate. Those in favour of gun ownership fall back on the argument that, 'it is not the gun that kills', suggesting that the gun is a cognitive entity which plays a reluctant role in unlawful killings.

Granted getting to top spot looks too big a leap at the moment, but with a bit more effort from US gun owners I'm sure that the US can start to climb the table quickly: 18th position is there for the taking🤦

Probably not but I don't understand your point.

'Plat du jour' in your eatery, Jeff?😉😂

Re the EU. I think that it's slightly different. Unless things have changed, Belgians cannot 'buy' state pension credits when they work abroad. However, if Belgians work in another EU country it does count (in part at least) towards their state pension. I worked in Belgium and receive a state pension from them. (Some of) my working time in the UK was taken into account. I have no idea re the formula used and didn't inquire further as my pension from Belgium was +/-50% more than I was expecting!

I'm not talking about penalising people. I paid the lower voluntary NI contributions under the old rules, and I believe that the UK government has a moral - and quite possibly legal - duty to honour their commitment to me (i.e. in my case, that means paying me the maximum pension). However, why shouldn't the government close this loophole? They are under no obligation to keep tax laws as they are.

Look at the headline: 'Starmer Rocked As Trump Orders Diplomats To Expose UK’s Migrant Crime Crisis'. No mention there that this memo was sent to most Western governments. This is typical of The Express' misleading reportage. I basically agree with @Billd766. This is a European problem. It does threaten the US or US interests so, 'Thank for your interest, Mr. President, now sod off'.

I'm pleased that you managed to take some advantage of the previous regulation. The fact that someone does not have access to other UK welfare benefits whilst working abroad is no justification. Imo if someone is no longer resident - irrespective of whether they are a national - they should no longer be entitled to the welfare benefits of that country. The other side of the coin is that I believe that the individual should have the same access to welfare benefits as locally-born workers in their new country of residence. Wrt pensions specifically, I don't know of any other country where you can continue to pay towards the state pension when no longer resident, especially at what was essentially a reduced rate.

I was being sarcastic

Paying Class 2 contributions was an excellent deal and one that I took full advantage of when working abroad. However, there was no justification for it and it was a loophole that needed closing.

The view from the Kremlin. What complete and utter tosh.

They are just showing that they care😉 Anyway, it's a non-story by a rag which has long ceased to be worthy of the label, newspaper.

There is no doubt that if the West seizes, or further limits Russia's use of, its assets then Russia will retailate. However, to reuse the Brexiter's favourite line: 'They need us more than we need them', but this time it is true. Where can Russia look for financing other than the West? BRICS as a collective is little more than a catchy acronym. Would any of the BRICS countries' be sufficiently interested in Russia to invest the required capital? I just don't see that. For one thing, the perils of opposing Western policy have been known for 300+ years and yet .....? At a more practical level, consider the EU/ China relationship. Politically the relationship is currently very tense, however, the economical ties remain strong. It is the second most important economic relationship for both - behind another Western nation, the US - with investment and trade between the two at near-record levels. I really don't see a dispute between the EU and Russia completely redefining that relationship. More practically, where would that money go? China is already heavily invested in Asia and Africa. Is it really likely to want to divert further enormous sums of money into these regions? A similar argument can applied re the likes of Saudi Arabia, etc. The EU's inability to fund Ukraine is certainly a fundamental problem but it is most certainly not intractable; the EU could raise the funds relatively easily. The problem, of course, is that doing so will almost certainly result in negative economic consequences for the individual member states and a negative outcome for their politicians hence the reluctance to do so. Europe's politicians are guilty of moral hypocrisy (hardly the first time that has happened). Agreed but what are the current alternatives?

All that is certainly possible but when, or if, Russia ever rejoins the rules-based world order I wonder who, and how many, will be queuing up to invest in her? Here's a suggested way (illegal or not) of utilising the blocked Russian funds. https://www.cfr.org/article/how-use-russias-frozen-assets

Extreme right-wing violence remains a threat. A lot of (fortunately) small neo-Nazi groups exist in Europe and they are definitely not averse to causing violent disorder. In recent history (the last 5 years), police in both Germany and Portugal have arrested right-wing extremists who were plotting coups.

Careful, you're slipping, Jonny. It's taken you seven posts before you've got around to having a dig at immigrants. Type in 'London house inflation from 2019 to date" (2019 chosen because it was pre-Brexit and pre-pandemic). Have a look at the AI generated answer. Notice anything? So much for your theory.

I agree that the triple lock should be dropped - link rises to inflation - and that many of the welfare related schemes - including the mobility scheme - require a thorough overhaul: While it would almost certainly lead to major savings, I'm not so sure about means testing the State Pension (although there's more than an element of self-interest in my reply😁). However, such discussion is now redundant. If these types of 'bold' measures were going to be enacted, then it would had to have happened by now. The future cannot be predicted of course, but other things being equal - and assuming Labour last the full term - I would expect the next two budgets to be dull with the final one containing some 'give aways'. I also agree (largely) with your comments re the Tories and Sunak/ Hunt. Imo Sunk and Hunt deserve a lot of credit for the way that they handled things in the aftermath of Trusses' disastrous tenure. Unfortunately, they then undid much of their good work with their blatant attempt to court favour and 'buy' votes with their two completely economically unjustified cuts to NI.

Typical of the woke, liberal EU governments. They only target extreme right-wing groups. They wouldn't go after extreme left-wing groups like this ... oh, hold on a minute .....