See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

--
What power have you got?
Where did you get it from?
In whose interests do you use it?
To whom are you accountable?
How do we get rid of you?

Tony Benn

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24/11/2024 in message <lqh2kaFjb7fU9@mid.individual.net> David wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Amazing how nobody thought to do this for the various iterations of Tory >government we have had up until this year.

We knew there was an election due so perhaps pointless?


--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
The facts, although interesting, are irrelevant

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Amazing how nobody thought to do this for the various iterations of Tory government we have had up until this year.

Obviously the Labour Government will bow to the will of the people,
coupled with an abject apology.

Oh look - over there - bunnies!

Cheers



Dave R


--
AMD FX-6300 in GA-990X-Gaming SLI-CF running Windows 10 x64

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour government has reneged on so many of its promises.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about
TW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24 Nov 2024 at 23:16:33 GMT, "TimW" <timw@nomailta.co.uk> wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour
government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

See my sig.

--
"Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do." -- Bigby Wolf

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour
government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate. However,
it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is unusual to
consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for debate,
Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That lies
entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.


--
Colin Bignell

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <fhOdnT0cJev72dn6nZ2dnZeNn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>, at 09:35:28
on Mon, 25 Nov 2024, Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk>
remarked:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour
government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate.

A process that's a bit oversold. A debate yes, in the Palace of
Westminster yes, attended mainly by Parliamentarians yes, but takes
place on a Friday in a side-room.

However, it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is
unusual to consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for >debate, Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That
lies entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

--
Roland Perry

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.

Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/11/2024 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.

Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

I wonder if Starmer will give a different response to Sunak, when he was
well into his term...

https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/641904

Dave

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/11/2024 09:35, Colin Bignell wrote:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour
government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate. However,
it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is unusual to
consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for debate, Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That lies
entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

It is no more a waste of time than your (TimW's) post.

It is people, publicly expressing an opinion.

Part of the free speech and democracy the Labour party wants to eradicate.

Now standing at over 2 million signatures.

It will force a debate at least.

But its all over the news. The media are onto it like a rash.

And they have power.

It gets hard for a parliament that is universally despised to function.

Their supporters fade away when they realise they might be a target
after their protectors are voted out.



--
All political activity makes complete sense once the proposition that
all government is basically a self-legalising protection racket, is
fully understood.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <vi1ka4$2nhke$3@dont-email.me>, at 10:42:13 on Mon, 25 Nov
2024, David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> remarked:

On 25/11/2024 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.
Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

I wonder if Starmer will give a different response to Sunak, when he
was well into his term...

https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/641904

And illustrated by a picture NOT of the room the debate was held in!
--
Roland Perry

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/11/2024 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.

Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

Well that looks like being tomorrow.
What is special about 4.1 million?


--
Civilization exists by geological consent, subject to change without notice.
– Will Durant

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:52:22 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 25/11/2024 09:35, Colin Bignell wrote:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >>>> government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate. However,
it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is unusual to
consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for debate,
Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That lies
entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

It is no more a waste of time than your (TimW's) post.

It is people, publicly expressing an opinion.

Part of the free speech and democracy the Labour party wants to eradicate.

Now standing at over 2 million signatures.

Yes, it seems to have taken off since the Musk X'd about it. Seems as
if there may be more than a few from overseas including Vatican City.
I bet there's some ruskies in there too.


--
AnthonyL

Why ever wait to finish a job before starting the next?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:53:58 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/11/2024 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.

Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

Well that looks like being tomorrow. What is special about 4.1 million?

Well that petition was ignored too.

Incidentally, I wouldn't want to rely on the authenticity of this
petition too much.

https://bsky.app/profile/joshfwd.bsky.social/post/3lboquacj5s2u

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25 Nov 2024 at 12:29:35 GMT, "AnthonyL" <AnthonyL> wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:52:22 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 25/11/2024 09:35, Colin Bignell wrote:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >>>>> government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate. However, >>> it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is unusual to
consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for debate,
Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That lies
entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

It is no more a waste of time than your (TimW's) post.

It is people, publicly expressing an opinion.

Part of the free speech and democracy the Labour party wants to eradicate. >>
Now standing at over 2 million signatures.

Yes, it seems to have taken off since the Musk X'd about it. Seems as
if there may be more than a few from overseas including Vatican City.
I bet there's some ruskies in there too.

What's the Vatican City's postcode?

--
“It is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since ... it is futile to reason someone out of a thing that he
was not reasoned into, we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a power-directed system of thought.”

Sir Roger Scruton

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25 Nov 2024 12:34:46 GMT, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> wrote:

On 25 Nov 2024 at 12:29:35 GMT, "AnthonyL" <AnthonyL> wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:52:22 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 25/11/2024 09:35, Colin Bignell wrote:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >>>>>> government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate. However, >>>> it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is unusual to
consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for debate,
Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That lies
entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

It is no more a waste of time than your (TimW's) post.

It is people, publicly expressing an opinion.

Part of the free speech and democracy the Labour party wants to eradicate. >>>
Now standing at over 2 million signatures.

Yes, it seems to have taken off since the Musk X'd about it. Seems as
if there may be more than a few from overseas including Vatican City.
I bet there's some ruskies in there too.

What's the Vatican City's postcode?

POP1

--
AnthonyL

Why ever wait to finish a job before starting the next?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/11/2024 12:34, Tim Streater wrote:

On 25 Nov 2024 at 12:29:35 GMT, "AnthonyL" <AnthonyL> wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:52:22 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 25/11/2024 09:35, Colin Bignell wrote:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >>>>>> government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate. However, >>>> it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is unusual to
consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for debate,
Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That lies
entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

It is no more a waste of time than your (TimW's) post.

It is people, publicly expressing an opinion.

Part of the free speech and democracy the Labour party wants to eradicate. >>>
Now standing at over 2 million signatures.

Yes, it seems to have taken off since the Musk X'd about it. Seems as
if there may be more than a few from overseas including Vatican City.
I bet there's some ruskies in there too.

What's the Vatican City's postcode?

Exactly.

--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace, community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/11/2024 12:32, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:53:58 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/11/2024 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.

Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

Well that looks like being tomorrow. What is special about 4.1 million?

Well that petition was ignored too.

Incidentally, I wouldn't want to rely on the authenticity of this
petition too much.

https://bsky.app/profile/joshfwd.bsky.social/post/3lboquacj5s2u

I don't take conspiracy theories too seriously.


--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace, community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:53:58 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/11/2024 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.

Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

Well that looks like being tomorrow. What is special about 4.1 million?

Seems I misremembered.

It should have been 6 million. That's the number of signatures on the
"Reverse A50" petition that disappeared so completely even I forgot it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/11/2024 13:45, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:53:58 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/11/2024 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.

Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

Well that looks like being tomorrow. What is special about 4.1 million?

Seems I misremembered.

It should have been 6 million. That's the number of signatures on the "Reverse A50" petition that disappeared so completely even I forgot it.

Well its only been a couple of days and we are at 2 million and some
already.

Reversing article 50 was never a legal option.
Holding an election is, however unlikely


--
The higher up the mountainside
The greener grows the grass.
The higher up the monkey climbs
The more he shows his arse.

Traditional

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 25/11/2024 11:52, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/11/2024 09:35, Colin Bignell wrote:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >>>> government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate.
However, it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is
unusual to consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved
for debate, Parliament no longer has the power to call an election.
That lies entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

It is no more a waste of time than your (TimW's) post.

It is people, publicly expressing an opinion.

It was started by Nigel, who is presumably unhappy that his party didn't
do better.

Part of the free speech and democracy the Labour party wants to eradicate.

Now standing at over 2 million signatures.

It will force a debate at least.

But its all over the news. The media are onto it like a rash.

And they have power.

They do not have the power to force a general election.

It gets hard for a parliament that is universally despised to function.

That is usually expressed by them being throw out at the next general
election, which is what just happened to the Conservatives. Labour got
in with the lowest vote for a single party government since the war.
Unless Nigel stops dividing the right, even a new general election isn't
likely to change the party in power.

Their supporters fade away when they realise they might be a target
after their protectors are voted out.

--
Colin Bignell

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 14:35:26 +0000
Colin Bignell <cpb@bignellREMOVETHIS.me.uk> wrote:

war. Unless Nigel stops dividing the right, even a new general
election isn't likely to change the party in power.

At the last election, Reform was the only party on the right.

The Conservative Party then was just a pale imitation of Labour, though
it has to be said, a much cheaper version.

--
Joe

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <lqj976FjnefU1@mid.individual.net>, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> writes

On 25 Nov 2024 at 12:29:35 GMT, "AnthonyL" <AnthonyL> wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:52:22 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
<tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 25/11/2024 09:35, Colin Bignell wrote:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >>>>>> government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate. However, >>>> it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is unusual to
consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for debate,
Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That lies
entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

It is no more a waste of time than your (TimW's) post.

It is people, publicly expressing an opinion.

Part of the free speech and democracy the Labour party wants to eradicate. >>>
Now standing at over 2 million signatures.

Yes, it seems to have taken off since the Musk X'd about it. Seems as
if there may be more than a few from overseas including Vatican City.
I bet there's some ruskies in there too.

What's the Vatican City's postcode?

VAT69

B
--
Brian Howie

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 12:29:35 GMT, AnthonyL wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:52:22 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 25/11/2024 09:35, Colin Bignell wrote:

On 24/11/2024 23:16, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 19:03, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu
Labour government has reneged on so many of its promises.

Blimey, what a stupid waste of time

Completely. With that number, the Petitions Committee will have to
consider whether or not to refer it to Parliament for a debate.
However,
it can take months to reach the decision stage as it is unusual to
consider one that has not closed. Even if it is approved for debate,
Parliament no longer has the power to call an election. That lies
entirely within the hands of the Prime Minister.

It is no more a waste of time than your (TimW's) post.

It is people, publicly expressing an opinion.

Part of the free speech and democracy the Labour party wants to
eradicate.

Now standing at over 2 million signatures.

Yes, it seems to have taken off since the Musk X'd about it. Seems as
if there may be more than a few from overseas including Vatican City. I
bet there's some ruskies in there too.

I doubt it very much. What difference would it make to the UK's stance
with them? (hint - SFA).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 13:26:39 +0000, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 25/11/2024 12:32, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Mon, 25 Nov 2024 11:53:58 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 25/11/2024 10:17, Jethro_uk wrote:

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 16:05:21 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Yawn.

Wake me when it gets to 4.1 million.

Well that looks like being tomorrow. What is special about 4.1 million?

Well that petition was ignored too.

Incidentally, I wouldn't want to rely on the authenticity of this
petition too much.

https://bsky.app/profile/joshfwd.bsky.social/post/3lboquacj5s2u

I don't take conspiracy theories too seriously.

You know that's a lie. You take all the anti AGW conspiracy theories
VERY seriously.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <vhvta4$2ar1i$6@dont-email.me>, Cursitor Doom <cd999666@notformail.com> writes

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >government has reneged on so many of its promises.

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.
Instead, they have placed the required increased tax burden on various
specific groups by taking away various financial 'privileges', and who understandably feel aggrieved about this.

In particular, it's pretty obvious that increasing national insurance
and lowering the earnings threshold where it becomes payable is very
likely to kill business and employment growth dead in its tracks.

Would it not have been better to spread the pain more thinly over more
of the population? For example, could they not have increased income
tax, but at the same time increased the tax-free allowance? The winter
fuel allowance could still have been paid in the manner to which we have
become accustomed, but simply taxed as income. With some sensible
juggling this could have ensured that the poorest would not be worse
off, but the better-off would be those who paid more tax.

But of course I realise that in their election manifesto they could
never have admitted that they intended to increase income tax for
workers and savers. They wouldn't dare do this. If they had, we'd still
have a Tory government (or even Reform).
--
Ian
Aims and ambitions are neither attainments nor achievements

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26 Nov 2024 at 17:08:00 GMT, "Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

This is mere sophistry.

--
27/6/1975 - Herbert Kiebler shot and killed trying to cross Berlin Wall.

"A reminder that the defining characteristic of a socialist regime is coercion, not equality."

Dan Hannan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <lqmrrrF6t1hU1@mid.individual.net>, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> writes

On 26 Nov 2024 at 17:08:00 GMT, "Ian Jackson" ><ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

This is mere sophistry.

So what did you expect them to do instead? The money has to come from somewhere, and the one place it isn't going to from is an increase of
direct tax on the income of the workers and on personal savings.
Instead, they're effectively putting an extra tax on employment (and
they never said they wouldn't).
--
Ian
Aims and ambitions are neither attainments nor achievements

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26 Nov 2024 at 22:30:02 GMT, "Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

In message <lqmrrrF6t1hU1@mid.individual.net>, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> writes

On 26 Nov 2024 at 17:08:00 GMT, "Ian Jackson"
<ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

This is mere sophistry.

So what did you expect them to do instead? The money has to come from somewhere, and the one place it isn't going to from is an increase of
direct tax on the income of the workers and on personal savings.
Instead, they're effectively putting an extra tax on employment (and
they never said they wouldn't).

They should have continued the Tories' path of reducing (with a view to eliminating) national insurance. Done in such a way as to be revenue neutral for lower paid people (by adjusting income tax rates), it would have put *my* taxes up and I am one of the better off pensioners who could afford it. I see no reason why the likes of me get away with paying no NI. Abolishing NI would save a lot of money anyway.

--
“It is not the truth of Marxism that explains the willingness of intellectuals to believe it, but the power that it confers on intellectuals, in their attempts to control the world. And since ... it is futile to reason someone out of a thing that he
was not reasoned into, we can conclude that Marxism owes its remarkable power to survive every criticism to the fact that it is not a truth-directed but a power-directed system of thought.”

Sir Roger Scruton

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26/11/2024 17:08, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message <vhvta4$2ar1i$6@dont-email.me>, Cursitor Doom <cd999666@notformail.com> writes

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour
government has reneged on so many of its promises.

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

Wrong. Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through
umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out of
their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them having
lower take-home pay.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26/11/2024 23:27, Tim Streater wrote:

On 26 Nov 2024 at 22:30:02 GMT, "Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

In message <lqmrrrF6t1hU1@mid.individual.net>, Tim Streater
<tim@streater.me.uk> writes

On 26 Nov 2024 at 17:08:00 GMT, "Ian Jackson"
<ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

This is mere sophistry.

So what did you expect them to do instead? The money has to come from
somewhere, and the one place it isn't going to from is an increase of
direct tax on the income of the workers and on personal savings.
Instead, they're effectively putting an extra tax on employment (and
they never said they wouldn't).

They should have continued the Tories' path of reducing (with a view to eliminating) national insurance. Done in such a way as to be revenue neutral for lower paid people (by adjusting income tax rates), it would have put *my* taxes up and I am one of the better off pensioners who could afford it. I see no reason why the likes of me get away with paying no NI.

Presumably because pensions are dependent upon the number of years of NI payments accrued, but once retired, if you don't receive full pension,
you cannot add to your contributions.

Abolishing NI would
save a lot of money anyway.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26/11/2024 23:27, Tim Streater wrote:

On 26 Nov 2024 at 22:30:02 GMT, "Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

In message <lqmrrrF6t1hU1@mid.individual.net>, Tim Streater
<tim@streater.me.uk> writes

On 26 Nov 2024 at 17:08:00 GMT, "Ian Jackson"
<ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

This is mere sophistry.

So what did you expect them to do instead? The money has to come from
somewhere, and the one place it isn't going to from is an increase of
direct tax on the income of the workers and on personal savings.
Instead, they're effectively putting an extra tax on employment (and
they never said they wouldn't).

They should have continued the Tories' path of reducing (with a view to eliminating) national insurance. Done in such a way as to be revenue neutral for lower paid people (by adjusting income tax rates), it would have put *my* taxes up and I am one of the better off pensioners who could afford it. I see no reason why the likes of me get away with paying no NI.

Presumably because pensions are dependent upon the number of years of NI payments accrued, but once retired, if you don't receive full pension,
you cannot add to your contributions.

Abolishing NI would
save a lot of money anyway.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <vi5mes$3lnet$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:43:24 on Tue, 26 Nov
2024, SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> remarked:

On 26/11/2024 17:08, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message <vhvta4$2ar1i$6@dont-email.me>, Cursitor Doom >><cd999666@notformail.com> writes

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour
government has reneged on so many of its promises.

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done
exactly what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the >>employed.

Wrong. Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through
umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out of
their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them having
lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will make
lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the
company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the
employees).
--
Roland Perry

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 27/11/2024 in message <pARltDZLUvRnFArs@perry.uk> Roland Perry wrote:

In message <vi5mes$3lnet$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:43:24 on Tue, 26 Nov
2024, SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> remarked:

On 26/11/2024 17:08, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message <vhvta4$2ar1i$6@dont-email.me>, Cursitor Doom >>><cd999666@notformail.com> writes

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >>>>government has reneged on so many of its promises.

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly >>>what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

Wrong. Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through
umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out of >>their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them having lower >>take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will make lower >profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the company's owners >(who are co-incidentally the same people as the employees).

That may be technically correct but a lot of these companies are set up to
sell the services of one person, who will be the shareholder and director,
so the practical effect is it hits the employee. They used to be called
IR35 companies but I've been retired for 25 years and much has changed!

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
This joke was so funny when I heard it for the first time I fell of my dinosaur.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26/11/2024 21:11, Tim Streater wrote:

On 26 Nov 2024 at 17:08:00 GMT, "Ian Jackson" <ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

This is mere sophistry.

That's what you get with a Lawyer as chief cunt.

--
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the
urge to rule it.”
– H. L. Mencken

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26/11/2024 22:30, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message <lqmrrrF6t1hU1@mid.individual.net>, Tim Streater <tim@streater.me.uk> writes

On 26 Nov 2024 at 17:08:00 GMT, "Ian Jackson"
<ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.co.uk> wrote:

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done exactly
what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the employed.

This is mere sophistry.

So what did you expect them to do instead? The money has to come from somewhere, and the one place it isn't going to from is an increase of
direct tax on the income of the workers and on personal savings.
Instead, they're effectively putting an extra tax on employment (and
they never said they wouldn't).

The money doesn't have to come from anywhere. The state should stop
spending it on employing people who do nothing useful at all.

--
“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false face for the
urge to rule it.”
– H. L. Mencken

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Roland Perry wrote:

SteveW remarked:

Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through

umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out of
their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them having
lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will make
lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the
company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the
employees).

That's how it used to be, but most contractors I know no longer run
their own service company, but use a 3rd party umbrella company that
deals with many contractors.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <xn0ott4hwh35274013@news.individual.net>, at 11:08:08 on Wed,
27 Nov 2024, Jeff Gaines <jgnewsid@outlook.com> remarked:

On 27/11/2024 in message <pARltDZLUvRnFArs@perry.uk> Roland Perry wrote:

In message <vi5mes$3lnet$1@dont-email.me>, at 23:43:24 on Tue, 26 Nov
2024, SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> remarked:

On 26/11/2024 17:08, Ian Jackson wrote:

In message <vhvta4$2ar1i$6@dont-email.me>, Cursitor Doom >>>><cd999666@notformail.com> writes

On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 18:21:38 +0000, TimW wrote:

On 24/11/2024 16:05, Tim Streater wrote:

See:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

I have no idea what this is about TW

Petition to call a General Election on the basis that the Nu Nu Labour >>>>>government has reneged on so many of its promises.

They haven't really reneged on their promises. They have done
exactly what they promised, ie not to put any direct taxes on the >>>>employed.

Wrong. Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through >>>umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out
of their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them
having lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will make
lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the
company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the >>employees).

That may be technically correct

Which is all that matters when it comes to election promises.

but a lot of these companies are set up to sell the services of one
person, who will be the shareholder and director, so the practical
effect is it hits the employee. They used to be called IR35 companies
but I've been retired for 25 years and much has changed!

--
Roland Perry

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:24:54 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <lqofcqFel1uU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:50:45 on Wed, 27
Nov 2024, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry wrote:

SteveW remarked:

Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through

umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out
of their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them >>>>having lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will make >>>lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the
company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the >>>employees).

That's how it used to be, but most contractors I know no longer run
their own service company, but use a 3rd party umbrella company that
deals with many contractors.

OK, so the third party umbrella company is paying the extra NICs.

One is usually made a director of the umbrella company, and you only take £5000 per year with the rest paid as a dividend.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:24:54 +0000
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

In message <lqofcqFel1uU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:50:45 on Wed, 27
Nov 2024, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry wrote:

SteveW remarked:

Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through

umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs
out
of their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them >>>having lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will
make
lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the
company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the >>employees).

That's how it used to be, but most contractors I know no longer run
their own service company, but use a 3rd party umbrella company that
deals with many contractors.

OK, so the third party umbrella company is paying the extra NICs.

And charging the contractors appropriately more for their services.

--
Joe

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 16:31:50 +0000, Joe wrote:

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:24:54 +0000 Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

In message <lqofcqFel1uU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:50:45 on Wed, 27
Nov 2024, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry wrote:

SteveW remarked:

Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through

umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out
of their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them
having lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will
make
lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the
company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the
employees).

That's how it used to be, but most contractors I know no longer run
their own service company, but use a 3rd party umbrella company that
deals with many contractors.

OK, so the third party umbrella company is paying the extra NICs.

And charging the contractors appropriately more for their services.

Still cheaper than a limited company with £400 a year (2003) for verified accounts.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

In message <vi7g4b$2n0p$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:07:39 on Wed, 27 Nov
2024, jon <reading.mostly@crap.org> remarked:

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:24:54 +0000, Roland Perry wrote:

In message <lqofcqFel1uU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:50:45 on Wed, 27
Nov 2024, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry wrote:

SteveW remarked:

Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through

umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out >>>>>of their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them >>>>>having lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will make >>>>lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the >>>>company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the >>>>employees).

That's how it used to be, but most contractors I know no longer run
their own service company, but use a 3rd party umbrella company that >>>deals with many contractors.

OK, so the third party umbrella company is paying the extra NICs.

One is usually made a director of the umbrella company, and you only take >�5000 per year with the rest paid as a dividend.

Nice to know, but it's still the umbrella company paying, or are you
saying NICs on �5k are zero even after the recent budget? In which case,
why the complaints?
--
Roland Perry

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 27/11/2024 16:43, jon wrote:

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 16:31:50 +0000, Joe wrote:

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:24:54 +0000 Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:

In message <lqofcqFel1uU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:50:45 on Wed, 27
Nov 2024, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry wrote:

SteveW remarked:

Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through

umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's NICs out >>>>>> of their received hourly rate. This will directly result in them
having lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company will
make
lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the
company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the
employees).

That's how it used to be, but most contractors I know no longer run
their own service company, but use a 3rd party umbrella company that
deals with many contractors.

OK, so the third party umbrella company is paying the extra NICs.

And charging the contractors appropriately more for their services.

Still cheaper than a limited company with £400 a year (2003) for verified accounts.

But unlike the director(s) of a limited company, they are on PAYE. They
have all the costs and lack of tax advantages of PAYE, but have no
proper sick pay, redundancy pay, etc. The government/HMRC changed the
rules, putting the onus on the client company to determine whether
people are inside or outside IR35 - with the result that many of the big companies decided not to take a risk and put everyone inside. High
taxation, without any compensatory benefits.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:49:31 +0000
SteveW <steve@walker-family.me.uk> wrote:

On 27/11/2024 16:43, jon wrote:

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 16:31:50 +0000, Joe wrote:

On Wed, 27 Nov 2024 14:24:54 +0000 Roland Perry
<roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

In message <lqofcqFel1uU1@mid.individual.net>, at 11:50:45 on
Wed, 27 Nov 2024, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:

Roland Perry wrote:

SteveW remarked:

Around 700,000 individuals who work as contractors, through

umbrella companies, pay both the employee's and employer's
NICs out of their received hourly rate. This will directly
result in them having lower take-home pay.

No! The umbrella company is paying those NICs. The company
will make
lower profits, but it's legally true that this only affects the
company's owners (who are co-incidentally the same people as the
employees).

That's how it used to be, but most contractors I know no longer
run their own service company, but use a 3rd party umbrella
company that deals with many contractors.

OK, so the third party umbrella company is paying the extra NICs.

And charging the contractors appropriately more for their
services.

Still cheaper than a limited company with £400 a year (2003) for
verified accounts.

But unlike the director(s) of a limited company, they are on PAYE.
They have all the costs and lack of tax advantages of PAYE, but have
no proper sick pay, redundancy pay, etc. The government/HMRC changed
the rules, putting the onus on the client company to determine
whether people are inside or outside IR35 - with the result that many
of the big companies decided not to take a risk and put everyone
inside. High taxation, without any compensatory benefits.

Directors of limited companies are employees on PAYE. Same as any other employees *except* when it suits HMRC to treat them differently e.g. on expenses.

They may also be shareholders, of course, and in small companies,
usually are.

--
Joe

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Tim Streater wrote:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Here's your resulting hot air ...

<https://www.youtube.com/live/cHmOan1zeqY?si=TfpvWKEQKKL58saI>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 6 Jan 2025 at 16:55:28 GMT, "Andy Burns" <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Here's your resulting hot air ...

<https://www.youtube.com/live/cHmOan1zeqY?si=TfpvWKEQKKL58saI>

Over 3 million now but really tailing off.

--
"It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong." -- Thomas Sowell

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 06/01/2025 21:28, Tim Streater wrote:

On 6 Jan 2025 at 16:55:28 GMT, "Andy Burns" <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

Tim Streater wrote:

https://petitionmap.unboxedconsulting.com/?petition=700143

Here's your resulting hot air ...

<https://www.youtube.com/live/cHmOan1zeqY?si=TfpvWKEQKKL58saI>

Over 3 million now but really tailing off.

No one expected it to result in the *government* doing anything, but it
did have a media impact, and people are starting to question whether or
not we have inadvertently elected the most incompetent government since
Mary I, AKA “Bloody Mary” Reversed the policies of her father and
brother, pitching England into a nasty religious civil war, murdered a
young girl in order to take the throne, burned pregnant women at the
stake, instituted programs of religious genocide across the country, was miserable and bullying to nearly everyone who knew her, married a
Spaniard who treated her like dirt and stole from the country, and
helped bankrupt the country, just to add more to the list.

Starmer has a way to go, but he's getting there.

I think it is just a marker in the road towards total disillusionment
with Labour in particular and traditional government in general, which
is why the aptly named Reform party is gaining so much traction...

Whether they will prove any better remains in doubt, but frankly, what
has anyone got to lose?


--
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)