EU referendum are you in or out

[gilesgoat]

4 million children living in poverty, 2.9 million of them in homes where one or both parents work.

But hey, it's more important to talk about which of the horrible asshats will succeed Theresa The Incompetent

Poverty apart, that's all it always worked/still working in Italy.

Fundamentally 'nearly unthinkable' in a family ( typical italian family was/is 4 people, wife, husband, max 2 children ) you don't have both parents working because normally "one salary goes for the rent/bills/taxes, the other for the food/things/children".

All this while '0 savings' because in that situation is nearly impossible to save for anything

I started to have a some regular job/odd jobs at the age of 16 ( was lucky ) to have some money for myself to be able to buy some stuff I wanted ( computer ).

The fact is rent/TAXES/lot of other things makes near impossible to live with ONE salary alone ( rent and/or mortgage is the same, actually in Italy rents can be much higher than mortgages rate easily ).

If you live alone and you are lucky to have a place to stay you are not paying that much ( unless you are MEGA lucky you inherited some apartment/place ) you can go on alone with a 'standard salary' but having 'not much of a very exciting life'

But yeah a thing like "one salary dad/mum pays for all we are rich we can do well" .. "does not exist" .. UNLESS .. unless you go into politics and you get 'some position in some places' .. you can see a pattern forming here ..

Surely these days through people have higher expectations? They want all the gadgets, new cars etc etc. Sometimes its the choices people make that means they are in a situation they are in?

Not saying its 100% like that for everyone... when I was growing up we didn't have half as much "stuff" as we seem to have now... food was never wasted and hardly bought from a supermarket (usually local shops). We had the basics in the house. One TV for example for the whole family. We tended to use stuff until it fell to bits and not replace things because they were "outdated". If they had a purpose and worked they were used until they were no good! We even repaired things.

I think today we tend to choose how we spend our money differently that's all perhaps... sometimes necessitating a dual income. However I largely agree. Be interesting to work out the relative costs of say % of income going to towards accommodation and food vs average income back in the say mid 70s compared to now.

I think that is "the dream of absolute capitalism", "be able to buy whatever you want to buy".

True.dat there's been some improvements in life/etc. "we can buy some more things" but it's also true IMHO that "in subtle ways" we are maybe more tied to a chain/collar than what we were before and this chain is fundamentally "debts and things we HAVE to pay".

I think some of the "real big problems" is that "we are surrounded by millions of products" MANY, MOST of which are not really essential but are "highly desirable".

And "the capitalist dream" is "you will be able to buy them, you can get rich enough" acutally NO there's NO "enough" that's the whole point that keeps all moving.

Thing is "there are at very least classes of whealt" The truth is with your own job and means, unless you someway acquire much more, there's only "so much rich you can get" then ... you have to dramaticaly change things for even more money to happen and in many cases "maybe they are not so worth to be changed after all".

Also "beyond certain limits" I think cause we are in a sort of zero sum game "the EXTRA richness of someone is the poverty of someone else".

Fact is "you can't buy them all, you can't have it all" but "the consumerisms" wants you to believe that "yes you can".

[tufty]

the dream of absolute capitalism

We already have the dream of absolute capitalism. The people are paying for the devices used to track them, tell them what to buy, and, frankly, what to think.

[Absolute_Zero]

So surprise surprise they've held the indicative votes and can't agree to anything.

What an absolute mess

Seems it's May's deal or no deal, and very likely still to be the latter (as to when, who knows, I can't see a second extension happening).

I realise this is from two days ago - an aeon in tail-end Brexit politics - but once again, predictably, no. If she fails you should expect a two-year A50 extension with a Parliament-mandated customs union. Anathema to the hard Brexiteers, which is why many are switching.

Another data point: if Labour thought that rejecting May's deal would, at this point, lead inevitably to a no-deal exit, then they wouldn't be opposing it.

I wouldn't take Barnier's no-deal warnings too literally as he's in arm-twisting mode.

Never know though, she might just about get enough support from the number of MPs waiting for her to fuck off.

See previous. If it gets through it will have to be dissident Labour votes and abstentions.

[venusian]

Another data point: if Labour thought that rejecting May's deal would, at this point, lead inevitably to a no-deal exit, then they wouldn't be opposing it.

Unconvinced by this. I think there are just as many power-at-any-cost idiots on that side of the house who think Brexit is a price worth paying for 4 years in government.

[MattyP]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47752017

May gets her plan rejected again... :-\

[snaff]

I think today we tend to choose how we spend our money differently that's all perhaps... sometimes necessitating a dual income. However I largely agree. Be interesting to work out the relative costs of say % of income going to towards accommodation and food vs average income back in the say mid 70s compared to now.

[zip accident]

Also "beyond certain limits" I think cause we are in a sort of zero sum game "the EXTRA richness of someone is the poverty of someone else".

The strange thing is that it's not zero sum. If the low wealth end of the population have more, the rich become richer. The only way the rich become richer by squezing the poor is in percentage terms, but having more of a smaller cake is not having more cake.

[merman]

4 million children living in poverty, 2.9 million of them in homes where one or both parents work.

But hey, it's more important to talk about which of the horrible asshats will succeed Theresa The Incompetent

Relative poverty? How nationalistic of you. How very... Brexit.

Get lost. I am anti-Brexit and anti-Tory. The Tories have spent the last nine years saying
- austerity was necessary (nope, just made the rich richer)
- the economy is working for everyone (nope, as proven by the increasing numbers on poverty and homelessness)
- Brexit means Brexit (nope, no-one wants Theresa May's Brexit)

[zip accident]

- austerity was necessary (nope, just made the rich richer)

It didn't. The rich got a bigger portion of a much smaller cake, they aren't richer.

Since the deadline is today, did anything happen?

[Harlequin]

Since the deadline is today, did anything happen?

It used to be today until the date was legally changed a couple of days ago. Today, May put her Withdrawal Agreement to Parliament. It was rejected. She apparently plans to hold a fourth Parliamentary People's Vote on it next week.

[tufty]

She apparently plans to hold a fourth Parliamentary People's Vote on it next week.

You're joking, surely?

[Harlequin]

She apparently plans to hold a fourth Parliamentary People's Vote on it next week.

You're joking, surely?

If only I were. Everything about this, however, is already a joke.

Government sources suggested she was first likely to make another attempt to force her deal through parliament in a third “meaningful vote”. This might happen in a “run-off” against any successful alternative from Monday’s indicative votes.

The government has been discussing with the Speaker, John Bercow, whether there is a way to hold MV3 that would not fall foul of his insistence that the same proposition cannot be put before parliament again.

A Downing Street spokesman highlighted the fact that May’s margin of defeat, 58, was smaller than the 149 majority she lost by earlier this month, and the crushing 230-strong defeat in the first meaningful vote in January. “We are at least going in the right direction,” the spokesman said.

…

Friday’s vote did not technically qualify as a third “meaningful vote”, because MPs were asked to consider only the withdrawal agreement, which includes the controversial Irish backstop and secures EU citizens’ rights and the post-Brexit transition period.

[Harlequin]

[(o)(o)]

- austerity was necessary (nope, just made the rich richer)

It didn't. The rich got a bigger portion of a much smaller cake, they aren't richer.

Britain’s billionaires have seen their net worth more than double since the recession, with the richest 1,000 families now controlling a total of £547bn.

While average UK incomes have yet to recover from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, with thousands still flocking to food banks, the financial elite have emerged not only with their fortunes intact, but holding a larger than ever slice of the cake.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... nce-crisis

[zip accident]

- austerity was necessary (nope, just made the rich richer)

It didn't. The rich got a bigger portion of a much smaller cake, they aren't richer.

Britain’s billionaires have seen their net worth more than double since the recession, with the richest 1,000 families now controlling a total of £547bn.

While average UK incomes have yet to recover from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, with thousands still flocking to food banks, the financial elite have emerged not only with their fortunes intact, but holding a larger than ever slice of the cake.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... nce-crisis

While homegrown fortunes are faring well, the Rich List remains dominated by entrepreneurs from outside the UK – just five of the top 20 fortunes are in the hands of British-born individuals. Attracted by ever increasing property prices and the non-dom laws which allow UK residents with foreign passports to shelter their offshore assets from tax, the world’s super-rich are still flocking to London. Of the 117 billionaires who feature in the list, only 62 are British, and the Queen herself has now dropped out of the richest 300 for the first time.

A larger slice of a smaller cake is what I said. I may be wrong, but I can't see how the rich having more than ever without the economy growing can work, if the economy is growing that fast, what's going on, where is the growth?