[Misnomer]

Mr Mercury, on 21 April 2025 - 10:41 AM, said:

Surely Starmer will sue?

He will if it's a false accusation.

[isleaiw1]

Johnnyspireite7, on 21 April 2025 - 12:22 PM, said:

And replaced with what? Grabs popcorn waiting for this one!

Well, if they weren't public funded they would be private sector so would be DC schemes like the rest of the country has..

Was it worth waiting for? If you can't afford what you have, you go for a cheaper option. And its funny how everyone is saying the country is broke... but apparently not so broke that moving this in line with everyone else (over time, gradually) is even considered..

[Wooden Spoon]

isleaiw1, on 21 April 2025 - 12:08 PM, said:

I am, because they are - if they weren't public funded they would have been scrapped years ago...

Or maybe if they’d been paid into from the get go instead of taking the “employer contributions payment break” they wouldn’t be under funded?


And private pension schemes aren’t free from mismanagement- look at coalite and Maxwell. No different

[Mr Mercury]

Misnomer, on 21 April 2025 - 12:47 PM, said:

He will if it's a false accusation.

You certainly couldn’t say 100% it was them but at the same time you couldn’t 100% say it definitely wasn’t them.

[Blue roan lily]

Mr Mercury, on 21 April 2025 - 05:10 PM, said:

You certainly couldn’t say 100% it was them but at the same time you couldn’t 100% say it definitely wasn’t them.

Correct.
However, theres been something bubbling up with Starmer for a while and his wife seems to have gone awol.
Could well be fake but then again nothing would surprise us with this absolute shower..

[isleaiw1]

Wooden Spoon, on 21 April 2025 - 03:07 PM, said:

Or maybe if they’d been paid into from the get go instead of taking the “employer contributions payment break” they wouldn’t be under funded?



And private pension schemes aren’t free from mismanagement- look at coalite and Maxwell. No different

That's why the rules were changed - and now Labour want to relax them...

What happened past doesn't matter, we can't change it... but what we do know is the country's finances are perilous and these pension schemes cost the tax payer huge sums and will continue to get worse. It's not if but when the cull comes...

[Wooden Spoon]

isleaiw1, on 21 April 2025 - 06:27 PM, said:

That's why the rules were changed - and now Labour want to relax them...

What happened past doesn't matter, we can't change it... but what we do know is the country's finances are perilous and these pension schemes cost the tax payer huge sums and will continue to get worse. It's not if but when the cull comes...

How much a year do you estimate these pension costs for the NHS, fireman and police to cost?

[Wooden Spoon]

Starmer says pope Francis was a pope for the poor, the down trodden

Shame he isn’t a prime minister for those same people of his own country

[Mr Mercury]

Wooden Spoon, on 21 April 2025 - 10:10 PM, said:

Starmer says pope Francis was a pope for the poor, the down trodden

Shame he isn’t a prime minister for those same people of his own country

He’s also been strangely quiet on the verdict of the Supreme Court in regard to what constitutes a woman, common sense verdict that’s been met with howls of derision and bile from those that oppose it. He’s a PM who really has no idea what he’s talking about.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 21 April 2025 - 10:22 PM

[Wooden Spoon]

Mr Mercury, on 21 April 2025 - 10:16 PM, said:

He’s also been strangely quiet on the verdict of the Supreme Court in regard to what constitutes a woman, common sense verdict that’s been met with howls of derision and bile from those that oppose it. He’s a PM who really has no idea what he’s talking about.

The whole party is like that


It’s no longer a party of the working man. It’s a party that only wants to represent stuff like women with a penis.

[Goku]

Wooden Spoon, on 22 April 2025 - 08:35 AM, said:

The whole party is like that


It’s no longer a party of the working man. It’s a party that only wants to represent stuff like women with a penis.

Why are you parroting right wing shite like this? They’ve literally come out against trans people today?

https://www.bbc.co.u...es/c5y42zzwylvo

https://www.bbc.co.u...es/crldey0z00ro

How is this “representing stuff like women with a penis”?

[isleaiw1]

Wooden Spoon, on 21 April 2025 - 07:37 PM, said:

How much a year do you estimate these pension costs for the NHS, fireman and police to cost?

Me, or someone much cleverer than me? The report I linked to earlier says the hidden cost is £57bn a year and that suggests the true cost was 62% not 30% for the NHS... so in the absence of a clear figure in the report I am going to say more than £100bn - and rising as numbers employed rise.

That's a chunk more than we spend on defence apparently...

[Wooden Spoon]

Goku, on 22 April 2025 - 06:39 PM, said:

How is this “representing stuff like women with a penis”?

You’ve heard those words from Starmers mouth, just as I have

[Goku]

Wooden Spoon, on 22 April 2025 - 07:47 PM, said:

You’ve heard those words from Starmers mouth, just as I have

There is no way you can say im its current guise that Labour is showing anything positive towards trans people regardless of what’s been said in the past.

[Wooden Spoon]

Goku, on 22 April 2025 - 07:56 PM, said:

There is no way you can say im its current guise that Labour is showing anything positive towards trans people regardless of what’s been said in the past.

This week yes. Because they have been forced to by the court.


Previously he’s said that stuff at the party conference. Those words out of his mouth at party conference

Not right wing shyte, his words and up until this week.

What is mental is it took a judge to tell Starmer what a women is

This post has been edited by Wooden Spoon: 22 April 2025 - 08:15 PM

[Wooden Spoon]

Goku, on 22 April 2025 - 07:56 PM, said:

There is no way you can say im its current guise that Labour is showing anything positive towards trans people regardless of what’s been said in the past.

This ruling hasn’t taken anything away from trans people. Their rights are still protected under the 2010 equality act just as they were last week, and the week before. There has been no change to their rights, status or protections, you do realise that right?


This ruling simply clarified the definition of what a biological woman is under the same equality act, and women’s rights to safe spaces. Something which extreme activists had sought to stop. And let’s face it if it takes a Supreme Court to help someone understand what a biological woman is then they are a lost cause, lacking an ounce of common sense.


Why act as if this is some great wrong against trans people when there has been no legal change to their rights or status under the 2010 equality act?


You’ve been sucked right in HB, sucked into to thinking anything not to the left of this is hard right fascism.

This post has been edited by Wooden Spoon: 22 April 2025 - 09:49 PM

[Goku]

Wooden Spoon, on 22 April 2025 - 09:43 PM, said:

This ruling hasn’t taken anything away from trans people. Their rights are still protected under the 2010 equality act just as they were last week, and the week before. There has been no change to their rights, status or protections, you do realise that right?


This ruling simply clarified the definition of what a biological woman is under the same equality act, and women’s rights to safe spaces. Something which extreme activists had sought to stop. And let’s face it if it takes a Supreme Court to help someone understand what a biological woman is then they are a lost cause, lacking an ounce of common sense.


Why act as if this is some great wrong against trans people when there has been no legal change to their rights or status under the 2010 equality act?


You’ve been sucked right in HB, sucked into to thinking anything not to the left of this is hard right fascism.

You said Labour “only want to represent stuff like women with a penis”. They have come out today and said that a trans woman isn’t a woman, which fair enough, is their prerogative and is a very popular view, but is absolutely not an example of them “representing stuff like women with a penis”. If they wanted to represent women with penises, they would call a transwoman a woman. You were chatting bollocks when you wrote that mate, dunno why you can’t just admit that. I actually find the amount of focus this subject gets completely disproportionate to the impact it has in the real world.

This post has been edited by Goku: 22 April 2025 - 10:07 PM

[Wooden Spoon]

Goku, on 22 April 2025 - 10:00 PM, said:

You said Labour “only want to represent stuff like women with a penis”. They have come out today and said that a trans woman isn’t a woman, which fair enough, is their prerogative and is a very popular view, but is absolutely not an example of them “representing stuff like women with a penis”. If they wanted to represent women with penises, they would call a transwoman a woman. You were chatting bollocks when you wrote that mate, dunno why you can’t just admit that. I actually find the amount of focus this subject gets completely disproportionate to the impact it has in the real world.

Coz it’s not bollocks HB - it’s how the party has been for ages. Up until this week.

A few quotes from Starmer

2021 - it is not right to say only women have a cervix

2022 - it is the law that trans women are defined as women

2023 - 99.9% of women do not have a penis

This week - a woman is a biological female - compare that to his 2022 policy direction.

Did it really take a judge to tell this muppet what a woman is? Jesus he’s been married to one and had kids with one.

And you’re right about the focus in the real world - How a handful of activists and like 0.1% of the population drive the leader of a party to make it part of a keynote speech at the annual party conference and ignore 50% of the non trans population is crazy.



Like I said, no trans rights have been removed, no change in trans rights yet the extreme activists have been out vandalising statues monuments, protesting and yelling on social media about……… nothing. No change for them.

You’ve been had, hook line and sinker.

This post has been edited by Wooden Spoon: 22 April 2025 - 11:11 PM

[Mr Mercury]

 Wooden Spoon, on 22 April 2025 - 08:02 PM, said:

What is mental is it took a judge to tell Starmer what a women is

Even though he agreed with the court speaking in an interview with ITN he really struggled to say it with any conviction. Like you said the fact he needed a court to clarify is mind boggling.

[s42blue]

 Goku, on 22 April 2025 - 07:56 PM, said:

There is no way you can say in it’s current guise that Labour is showing anything positive towards ***** people regardless of what’s been said in the past.

Corrected for you.