ChaoticMusings

Vam wrote:

---

😂 Ahhh, Syl…let me try to explain. She seems to be a perfectly normal middle-aged woman, with a body shape similar to middle-aged women the whole world over. I’m not knocking her for that. If the way she dresses is her personal choice, I’m not really knocking her for that either.

Also, it has to be said that the Burnhams have 3 great looking kids.

The cellulite thing (sorry! 🤣) was a few seconds of me happening to notice her rear end, as she was stepping into Buckingham Palace. The sunlight happened to catch all the…’dimpling’…because her dress was cut too tight and the fabric was too pastel and clingy. And once seen, I couldn’t unsee it! 🤣

Rightly or wrongly, image matters for people in public office and it inevitably attracts public scrutiny.  I would imagine Mrs B will be surrounded by assistants/advisers to very tactfully steer her fashion choices in a better direction when she’s out in public view. If she then decides to still do her own thing, so be it 🤷🏻‍♀️

---

 I get all that.

This is my honest opinion....if you or I were in that role, we would (I am sure) relish the chance and the opportunity to look as fabulous as possible.

A limitless budget, freebies from the best designers (and if they think we believe they don't still get them...they can think again) and people commenting on how fabulous we would surely look.

But I really believe she will carry on doing her own thing, she has her own look and her own style. Plus, all she has to do to look fashionable is to sand next to Angela Rayner.

I hope so too Vam. At least she is not Cherie (Jackie Kennedy wannabe) Blair....so that's a huge advantage.

I used to hate the Blairs, horrible, horrible smug people. They were the original freebie hoovers before Starmer and Reeves came along. They used to get free luxury holidays in the homes of Cliff Richard and the Bee Gees, and once had a free holiday courtesy of the Italian taxpayer. The Italian press called him Lo scroccone - The Scrounger!

When he spoke he used to do that weird chopping an onion thing with his hands, and her with her freaky mouth - what an irritating, revolting couple!

She did a tour of Australia once to raise money for the Children's Cancer Institute and took a 100k fee for speaking, with the charity getting less than 10k - totally shameless!

Magica wrote:

---

Syl wrote:

---

I hope so too Vam. At least she is not Cherie (Jackie Kennedy wannabe) Blair....so that's a huge advantage.

---

 Cherie Blair, the one with a pillabox mouth.  Can't stand her!

---

 That's being kind.  My other half once said "You could get three cocks in there!"  

So far, from what I've seen of Eyelashes' public speaking, he's bitten off more than he can chew.  I'll give him 6 months 

The latest Burnham bullshit is him saying he's not going to tax the state pension.  The damned thing is below the tax threshold anyway so how does that work out?  

 

Anonymous wrote:

---

Digger wrote:

---

The latest Burnham bullshit is him saying he's not going to tax the state pension.  The damned thing is below the tax threshold anyway so how does that work out?  

 

---

 It's just below now, but won't be from next year onwards as the pension rises with inflation but the threshold stays frozen for five years.

---

 Obviously. But it's not going to go up by hundreds per week or month.  It goes up by pennies.   So the tax on it will still be negligible.   The way he's touting it is it's going to be saving people thousands.  It won't.  Because in line with this is the ever rising cost of living.  So nothing will be gained.   He needs to higher the personal tax threshold so we all benefit.   

There no talk by him of stopping the migrants, or stopping their benefits and sending them back. They cost our country billions.   But no, he'd rather tax us all to the absolute nth degree until we're all on the breadline.  Typical Labour.  I'll be surprised if he lasts one year never mind three.

Anonymous wrote:

---

Digger wrote:

---

Anonymous wrote:

---

Digger wrote:

---

The latest Burnham bullshit is him saying he's not going to tax the state pension.  The damned thing is below the tax threshold anyway so how does that work out?  

 

---

 It's just below now, but won't be from next year onwards as the pension rises with inflation but the threshold stays frozen for five years.

---

 Obviously. But it's not going to go up by hundreds per week or month.  It goes up by pennies.   

---

 The latest state pension increase was close to 5%. Of course we can't predict what it will be over the next five years, but a more modest 3% p.a. would take the pension up to around £14500 by 2031. So that would save £400 in tax that year, with a lesser saving in each of the years in between, averaging around £200 a year over the period.

Yes, as you say,  the cost of living will be rising but that's a different issue, but the triple lock (or the double lock if it replaces it) should keep increases at or above the rise in the consumer price index. 

I know it's not a fortune, but better than a poke in the eye with a burnt stick as my Nan used to say.

---

 Of course, every little helps.  But like the so called relief he's giving pubs, £1k per year saving, means very little when you need £1K a week to keep surviving.