this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2024
389 points (99.2% liked)

United Kingdom

4069 readers
144 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (5 children)

This isn't hard to understand.

Owning stock doesn't make you a worker. Being a landlord doesn't make you a worker.

If you work on top of the above, you are a worker. If you do not, you aren't.

There's a big difference between "a landlord isn't a worker" and "a landlord cannot be a worker."

An absolutely based comment from Starmer.

[–] nialv7@lemmy.world -2 points 1 day ago (4 children)

I agree with you, but that's not what Keir Starmer said. His spokesperson recanted it, but what he said originally was stupid.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)
[–] nialv7@lemmy.world -3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Read the news please.

When asked by Sky News if someone who works but also gets income from shares or property is a working person, Starmer said “they wouldn’t come within my definition.”

[–] davidagain@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

But if he said "income from owning shares isn't eligible for PAYE taxation and therefore isn't covered by a pledge to not increase taxes on workers' earnings" he wouldn't have a headline and you would be accusing him of talking like a politician and breaking promises.

But no, he was asked this in the context of some disingenuous question like "bbbut you promised not to raise taxes on working people, and this will hurt working people, aren't people with a hardworking fast food day job and a tiny bit extra from a few shares or renting out their spare bedroom just to make ends meet exactly the working people you promised not to raise taxes on?"

And Starmer says no, and now we have a headline because a bunch of shareholders who are experts at hoarding money because it's all they really care about are as pissed as they ever get because tHe GovErNmunT iS tAkiN aLL MY mUnnY.

It's the daily telegraph, for goodness sake. When did they ever care about ordinary people's finances?!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)