Rooster

@EdwardJDavey We shouldn’t have acts of mass worship in public spaces like this by any religion other than the CofE.

Imagine seeing British people at prayer and thinking “this is a great chance to stoke fear, hatred and division”. People who do that should have no place in British politics. Freedom to worship is a fundamental British value – one the Conservative Party used to believe in.

@FarmerFrances1 @Liam_Holman99 @C_01000011 It renders your opinion on that, and the subject of the thread, meaningless.

@Rrrrooster @Liam_Holman99 @C_01000011 Doesn’t change the fact that you’re retarded.

Anyone who says pregnant women are gonna start having abortions at 38 weeks are taking you for a mug.

@FarmerFrances1 @Liam_Holman99 @C_01000011 Says the….. ah yes, american account. 🙄

@Rrrrooster @Liam_Holman99 @C_01000011 You are clearly retarded.

@RobertaFresque2 1

??? 🤔

@stephenRB4 I do

Do you like the taste of Guinness?

@Frances_Coppola Some women murder their husbands without medical help - a hugely risky practice that women only do if they are desperate. Should they be criminalised?

OK, I am bored with this lie now. Here are the facts. - Abortion remains illegal after 24 weeks gestation except in certain rare and exceptional circumstances - Supplying pills to terminate a pregnancy remains illegal after 10 weeks gestation - Abortion still requires two doctors' signatures to be performed legally - Women seeking terminations must still meet one of the criteria set out in the 1967 Abortion Act - Forced abortion remains a crime - Anyone, including medical professionals, who helps a woman obtain an abortion outside the law is liable for prosecution. In short, "abortion up to birth" HAS NOT been legalised. What the new law does is prevent women from being criminalised for ending their own pregnancies without medical help - a hugely risky practice that women only do if they are desperate. Parliament recognises that these women need care and support, not draconian punishment. Importantly, the new law also protects women who have suffered late miscarriages or stillbirths from being prosecuted for their loss and potentially spending years in jail for what is a tragedy, not a crime. bills.parliament.uk/publications/5…

@Liam_Holman99 @C_01000011 You cannot be that dense to not see the obvious connection

@C_01000011 That's Pakistan. Gender-based infanticide also happens in China and has nothing to do with abortions.

If you enjoy this account, and care for the memory, and future of Britain's Pubs, kindly follow (if you don't already) and share this post in order to help others find us. Thank you all for your support. 🤝

@gowronseyes @EyeOnStalk @CoreyWriting Of course I do, it was broadcast in the uk weeks ago.

@Rrrrooster @EyeOnStalk @CoreyWriting You have absolutely no idea who is playing who in this cast.

Why are wealthy elite British boys this ethnically diverse in this time period?

@MadTitan666 @MbarkCherguia 😭😭😭😭😭

@MbarkCherguia any right wing comedian

I’ll go first… Seth Rogan

@carla_denyer Let make everyone billionaires

Inequality isn’t inevitable. It’s the result of decades of privatisation and deregulation. The Greens offer an alternative, where working people don't struggle to afford the basics, and have warm homes, cheap bills and good lives. theguardian.com/politics/2026/…

@EyeOnStalk @CoreyWriting Apparently it does matter to the producers of the show, as they inevitably made the protagonist mixed race and the antagonist blonde and blue eyed. Those are the rules 🤷‍♂️

@CoreyWriting Who cares? Does ethnicity matter to the story? No. So why not cast race-blind? You access a wider pool of actors and lose absolutely nothing. Lord of the Flies isn't a documentary.

@ZackPolanski You’ve got to look at all public sector pensions and civil service bloat generally.

We live in Rip Off Britain. We have to lower people's bills and tax wealth fairly. This morning I'll be starting to lay out our vision of how to do this. theguardian.com/politics/2026/…

@dontdelay It’s more predictable than wage growth or inflation, but I just don’t think the degree to which it is unpredictable is material to any of the real problems with our pension system. I think “abolish the triple lock” is a culture war slogan, and a massive red herring.

No meandering just diving deeper as each of your replies needed a further response Triple lock is not predictable. Either for individuals personal planning or for governments long term budgeting If your concern is the state pension is insufficient, then make the case to increase it (and say who pays for it) But the triple lock is a poor way to do it. Since stability can mean pensioner incomes wouldn’t increase (in real terms) at all. But add in instability, Covid, Ukraine etc, and pensioners have seen significant real terms increases

I post a lot about the triple lock (with apologies to followers) But I've increasingly realised the worst thing about it, is the competing generational incentives. Not just about how much is one generation paying to another. But how the mechanism for triple lock pension increases, actually incentivises economic instability. Workers, who are often paying for mortgages, or raising children, crave stability and gentle progress (to be able plan, to be at less risk of redundancy, to not have to wait a year for a pay rise after inflation has already increased their living costs etc.) But if earnings and inflation grew steadily and stably at 2.5% a year, then state pension would only go up by inflation each year. There would be no more 'real' gains for pensioners as they have beneffited from since 2011 And yet, if there was a recession, and inflation and earnings fell below 2.0%, pensioners would see a real terms increase to their state pension If inflation soared one year, and wages caught up the next year, again, pensioners would see real terms increases to their state pensions. That doesn't feel right.

@dontdelay Your issue meandered from a “cake and eat it” objection to pension rises, to difficulty doing personal financial planning, to uncertainty over when people might claim a pension in future. An issue for sure, but one which minor tinkering on the triple lock won’t solve at all.

@Rrrrooster And that’s the point Younger people are worried if or when they will ever receive a state pension at all, while paying ever more for triple lock increases now A predictable future cost allows the future age it’s paid at to be more predictable too

@MrBrum43 Name a tastier pint. I’ll wait…..

Guinness tastes like crap and is only drunk by “look at me I’m so trendy cunts” Always has been, always will be. Tastes. Like. Crap. #bcfc #guinness

@dontdelay a financial planner challenge, not a high priority. Financial planners deal with all sorts of uncertainty, it goes with the job. And the uncertainty over the value of the pension is tiny and trivial to deal with compared to the uncertainty over if or when people will receive it

@Rrrrooster That’s the thing it’s not predictable at all As a financial planner I can’t model what someone’s future state pension will be with triple lock, therefore it’s harder to recommend how much extra they should (or shouldn’t) save As this explains well ifs.org.uk/publications/t…

@dontdelay Predictable, dependable and gradually rising. The triple lock.

@Rrrrooster No. I want state of pension to be predictable and dependable so that people can incorporate it their own planning

@dontdelay Now you want a quadruple lock?

@Rrrrooster The triple lock doesn’t guarantee a real terms rise though.

@dontdelay @ArthurHayw34890 Under-utilised property is vacated and heavily utilised property is moved into.

@ArthurHayw34890 @Rrrrooster How can there be a glut of houses if population increases faster than house building?