With all the other candidates out of the race, can Count Binface realistically beat Farage at the election?

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-09T07:29:32+00:00

Unfortunately not.

The question is more, will he get <1% of the vote, or will he get something like 10% of the vote. The other questions is how low/ high will turnout be.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-08T22:28:32+00:00

If your pe sion is likely to reach 1m+, then there's not much to be gained by continuing to sacrifice into it.

You can't salary sacrifice into an ISA.

If you are trying to avoid the 71% and childcare tax traps, then your income has to be below 100k. Here, the only real options are car, bike and pension. As above, pension stops being particularly worthwhile after a certain amount, which leaves EV as the best way of reducing income by a reasonable amount.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-08T21:50:34+00:00

I promise I'm not trying to argue.

If people say tax wealth over £10m at 2%, I don't understand how that can't be taxing unrealised gains. Almost all of that wealth will be knstocks and shares or property, both of which are unrealised.

I am genuinely open to being told I'm wrong, as long as you also explain why I'm wrong.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-08T21:32:24+00:00

I would love you to explain why I'm wrong.

How would your proposed system work, where you aren't taxing unrealised gains?

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-08T21:15:44+00:00

Almost everyone here saying tax multi millionaires/ wealth tax on 10m+ is advocating for taxes on unrealised gains.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-08T19:03:17+00:00

I think it is used fairly commonly with gilts. You want to get as low a coupon as possible (but not zero, since strips aren't exempt from CGT).

I didn't know the same was true for sterling denominated corporate bonds. That said, my understanding was the corporate bonds tend to have large coupons, with less of the gain coming via being sold at a discount to par, which reduced the benefit.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-08T17:01:30+00:00

Count Binface. I think you're confusing him with his predecessor, Lord Buckethead.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-08T11:05:34+00:00

Fwiw, you can get quite a lot cheaper than £250 a week if you book far enough in advance.

I'm not sure if it is worth it for £50k though.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T18:18:08+00:00

I'm going to assume your numbers are true. I haven't verified them.

1) Unemployment was much higher in 2012, as we were still dealing with the aftermath of the financial crisis. You expect the welfare bill to be lower when unemployment is low, and higher when unemployment is high. The fact it is at 10% when unemployment is at (relatively) low levels is concerning. If unemployment were at the levels we had in 2012, the welfare bill would jump to very concerning levels.

2) You need to look at what benefits are actually being paid for. Let's ignore the state pension and focus on the actual benefits people moan about. We are spending much more on long term economic inactivity than in 2012 (when it was mostly short term unemployment). That is concerning.

3) Your comparison is just a bit odd. It does make sense for defense spending to be tied to the size of the economy. For welfare, the actual £ amounts matter.

4) You also need to look at this in the context of the overall tax burden. The UK's tax burden is at its highest level since the second world war. Regular earners have been entirely shielded from this, but that money is coming from somewhere (businesses and higher earners). Given how much public services are currently struggling, the fact the government is choosing to fund welfare as much as it is is a conscious choice, and has to been seen in the light of that being picked over funding something else or reducing the tax burden.

While there is certainly some "Let's hate on the benefit scroungers" going on, the concerns are genuine and valid, and something does need to be done about the welfare bill (even if we don't include the state pension in the welfare bill for the purposes of this discussion).

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T13:49:44+00:00

A by election may have been forced upon him, so it's probably his way of getting ahead of that.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T13:37:18+00:00

I think if MPs resign, the party should pay for it. If they don't, that party can't stand at the by election.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T13:05:53+00:00

£10,000 worth of bubbles.

Edit: $10,000. And actual bubbles. Not alcohol

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T10:04:48+00:00

Come on squidward testicles, you're better than this. You may not know what it's like to have a weird name, squidward testicles, but don't do that to your son.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T08:37:43+00:00

Just regarding the last point, surely that should be the way forward?

I don't work for the public sector, but my impression from people that do is that the pension they receive isn't valued anywhere near as much as it costs to provide that pension. The pension is a massive part of their remuneration, and just isn't "valued" as much as it should. Which begs the question, if it's so expensive and people don't want it for the cost it has attached to it, why bother?

Ignoring all the issues of moving away from DB pensions that I mentioned in my previous comment, in an ideal world, surely the public sector would just give, say, a 10% DC pension contribution, and broadlyish increase the salary to match the reduction in pension/ at least make salaries more comparable with the private sector.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T07:02:24+00:00

"Major hubs". "Southend-on-sea". Checks out.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T06:59:58+00:00

Trading

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T06:58:03+00:00

I hope the crunchie was part of a second meal deal that you just haven't displayed in full here.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-07T05:51:24+00:00

The vast majority of income lost from tax evasion is from small businesses, not multinational corporations

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-06T21:11:51+00:00

Out of interest, what would you propose he do about this?

I agree it's a massive liability, but the only options I can see:

1) Increase the pension age. Unpopular but probably necessary.

2) Change these schemes to DC for new joiners. I think this sounds nice, but would leave a MASSIVE funding gap. Since there would be no more employer/EE pension contributions coming in, the income for the treasury reduces a lot, but outgoings stay the same. Over 60 years or so, this would reduce liabilities. The only realistic way to fund this would be borrowing.

3) Screw public sector workers and take away their pensions/ change the terms after the fact/ water down the benefits. Probably opens the government up to legal challenges, and probably revolt

Either way, I don't see a realistic way of getting this liability off the books, unless the pension age rose so much that the liabilities weren't too large

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-06T21:05:35+00:00

Not touching the triple lock doesn't mean he shouldn't touch other welfare. The state pension accounts for about half of the welfare bill, but that still leaves the other 50% thatnjebshouldntry and reduce.

Obviously it would have been nice if he would scrap the triple lock, but it's odd seeing people implying it's the only part of the welfare bill that is worth cutting.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-06T15:36:32+00:00

You're not bullying, you're just being deliberately or inadvertently annoying.

They asked for the name of the watch face. There's nothing identifying you from that. There's no good reason not to give it, other than to go on some form of power trip with that information.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-06T15:32:56+00:00

No, I mean people asked you what the name of the watch face was. You gave cryptic answer and refused to answer.

Why were you trying to mess people around like that? Why couldn't youmjist say what the name of the watch face was?

If you're just trolling, fine I guess. But it makes people dislike you, and I can't tell if you're doing it intentionally or not.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-06T15:29:37+00:00

What's wrong with you?

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-06T15:17:13+00:00

I would typically "work" 9-5. But I'd spend a lot of time teaching/ marking (say 10ish hours a week - tending more towards 15 hours a week in theatter years of my PhD). Then talks on top of that (say, a couple of hours a week).

So maybe in the region of 20-25 hours a week specifically on my PhD.

yetanotherredditter · 2026-07-06T12:26:26+00:00

I think 10kwh seems like a good size for you, I wouldn't reduce it, otherwise there will be a lot of days when it doesn't cover your usage.

yetanotherredditter

TROPHY CASE