In the news

pssst .............. anyone wanna buy some hydrangea
£15 a bag

Looking to grow a flourishing business from minimal seed money?

Looking to grow a flourishing business from minimal seed money?

just read some articles
it states that the amount of cyanide produced by some bushes make imbibing a risky business

NEXT

NHS special report on cycling safety:

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/02February/Pages/Cycling-safety-a-special-report.aspx

A surprising number of cyclists endanger themselves unnecessarily. In 2012, there were 248 KSIs with no other vehicles involved. Instead, cyclists were injured or killed for reasons such as falling off or hitting the kerb.
However, it’s worth highlighting that a significant number of these incidents occurred when cyclists were impaired by alcohol. Transport Research Laboratory estimated that around one in four “non-collision cycle accidents” was the result of drunk cycling.
The message for cyclists is clear: look out for vehicles of all types, but don't forget to watch out for yourself.

[not] interesting.

The meta analysis fails to take into account a number of significant and fundamental factors, and also fails to account for missing data, extrapolated and interpolated data points.

Bad science.

But hey - at least it will provide more ammunition for those that would see cycling relegated to only being an activity in a cordoned off corner of a municipal playground.

[not] interesting.

most of those come from the Guinness ride

the proposed changes by the Conservative Party MP for Ipswich (url) to make a meaningfully named (NI) and institutionalised (NI1911) tax seemingly (to me at least) meaningless by re-naming it as an 'Earnings Tax' are a concern!

National Insurance (NI) in the United Kingdom is a system of contributions paid by workers and employers towards the cost of certain state benefits. It was initially a contributory system of insurance against illness and unemployment, and later also provided retirement pensions and other benefits.[1] It was first introduced by the National Insurance Act 1911, expanded by the Labour government in 1948 and has been subject to numerous amendments in subsequent years.

more info here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-insurance-fund-accounts

If that's true I would say that it's actually the opposite of meaningless. It seems significant and harmful. A name change to 'Earnings Tax' signifies an ideological change that gives tories more ammunition to attack disability, unemployment, maternity benefits etc.

Where in the link does it actually mention the proposed naming change?

Also. Uganda's government and mainstream media are a bunch of cnuts.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/25/ugandan-tabloid-prints-list-top-200-homosexuals?CMP=fb_gu

Holy shitballs - this is the guy me and my ex bought our Beagle from in 2003, without realising he was a puppy farmer - she had everything you can imagine - mites, kennel cough, skin infection, fleas - he was a fucking horrible bastard to deal with once he'd got our money when we tried to get vets fees out of him

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-26324683

*"Let us suppose you are losing an argument," Boris Johnson wrote earlier this year.

"The facts are overwhelmingly against you, and the more people focus on the reality the worse it is for you and your case.

"Your best bet in these circumstances is to perform a manoeuvre that a great campaigner describes as 'throwing a dead cat on the table, mate'."*

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2013/11/24/the-dead-cat-strategy-how-the-tories-hope-to-win-the-next-el

WTF.
You don't expect this shit in The City
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/three-injured-after-stabbing-in-city-of-london-9150021.html

100m from my office and I'm completely oblivious. #typical

Good covering, they'll never suspect.

If that's true I would say that it's actually the opposite of meaningless. It seems significant and harmful. A name change to 'Earnings Tax' signifies an ideological change that gives tories more ammunition to attack disability, unemployment, maternity benefits etc.

Where in the link does it actually mention the proposed naming change?

here's the story,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/tax/10657014/Goodbye-National-Insurance.-Hello-Earnings-Tax.html

National Insurance, a 100-year old charge on employers and employees, will be renamed “earnings tax”, the Chancellor has signalled.

a 100+ year institution one might re-phrase,

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

Thanks for the link. This merger of Income Tax and NI is bull.

I'm not sure I see the problem?

The name is irrelevant, surely the fact that it's collected is important.

While the article mentions a future merger, it doesn't suggest anything is changing now beyond the name.

So who cares?

I'm not sure I see the problem?

The name is irrelevant, surely the fact that it's collected is important.

While the article mentions a future merger, it doesn't suggest anything is changing now beyond the name.

So who cares?

names contain meaning, so by renaming something it can loose its association with its meaning, which makes it easier for people with an agenda to get their own way,

e.g. the Tax Payers Alliance, 'Earnings Tax is the first step to abolishing National Insurance'

given that annual collections of National Insurance funds the £80bn of State Pension payments, the question could be:

Do you want to be entitled to a State Pension upon reaching the ripe old retirement age?

It's an excuse to cut taxes, which is why the taxpayers alliance is behind it.

The idea is to remove NI which nobody understands and fold it into Income Tax. Voters don't understand NI so won't miss it but will kick up a massive fuss if income tax goes up, so it won't.

But other articles seem to think it's just a backbencher proposal that's going nowhere. One reason is that current pensioners would have to effectively pay twice as they've paid contributions as they worked into NI, but would get taxed on pensions further if income tax increased.

But even if NI does go, that doesn't mean the overall contributions would be less?

Personally I'd rather have one tax, than multiple ones on top of each other.

Personally I'd rather have one tax, than multiple ones on top of each other.

Yeah. Stick it all on earnings : Beer tax, fuel tax, council tax, NI, VAT, stamp duty. Add it all up and plonk it on income tax.

I see Johns point here, a simpler and more transparent tax system does not mean a less fair one. One income tax instead of NI and income tax will simplify things. I'm all for simplifying the UK tax system. Simplification will lead to greater transparency and less opportunity to use loopholes.

The problem here is the people pushing for this are coming from a certain ideological pov, one that I don't trust to implement things fairly.

i guess the move from National Insurance logically is towards 'individual insurance', so taking away any emphasis on providing for others, and paving the way for a move to an 'individual health service' rather than a national one.
but i'm a bit of a pessamist....

I just wish they would get rid of the regressive aspect of NI (12% under 41K, 2% above), although I have a feeling it'll be used as a way of getting closer to a flat tax.

First time I have heard of Ben Gummer. Quick google says he has the schooling and the breading of a future Tory star. 36 and already knowing how to get his face in the Tory press.

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/24922/ben_gummer/ipswich
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Gummer

Keep getting that babyface in the torygraph and you have a candidate for future leader.

It just stinks of another example of the Tories trying to get their claws into every single thing they can in the five years they are guaranteed power, making changes that can not easily/ever be undone. This is the same as the massive speed with which they are trying to reform education and health, the removal of benefits, the reforms they are trying to make to our human rights framework without allowing the previous changes to the framework time to bed in.

It's damaging and undemocratic, as they are trying to bind any future government by destroying what they will inherit.