Rachel Reeves lied on her CV was not an “Economist”

[Disappointedagain22]

AIBU - it’s OK to lie to get ahead

AINBU - it’s bad RReeves very Publicly lied about her prior work. We are right to feel annoyed by this lie.

saw this headline and am feeling really disappointed. Think Rachel Reeves needs to tell public exactly her job title.
She changed job title from Economist, to “Retail Banking”
An Economist at a Bank, is a clear and specific job, it’s a economic research position. A good experience for her current position.

”Retail Banking” - is not a job title … she could have been doing anything in a branch from Bank Teller, to Branch manager, or working in back office operations putting bank notes in the plastic bags or in HR.

Is this the same GB news as the one fined £100,000 by Offcom for breaking impartiality rules?

Only another 5 pages before this thread is full and sinks to the bottom of the internet forever - unless of course it gets deleted because of aggressive posting

Oh.

Who is being aggressive?

I had not noticed.

But what about the legs and unfolds?

Indeed it is. @zarf2007 has unusual ideas about objectivity.

The posts were deleted and possibly the poster concerned is now on the MN naughty step.

Oh was that the poster who you called ‘sweetcheeks’?

What does ‘sweetcheeks’ mean in the context you intended please?

So you noticed after all then

Probably not wise to quote from deleted posts

Bad luck.

The PPs retort remains live.

Nothing wrong with it then

Nothing wrong with me asking for clarification either.

Would you mind not answering for the poster?

Thanks awfully.

If anyone is offended by my somewhat tongue in cheek (😀) use of "sweetcheeks" then do feel free to report to MNHQ.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3776809-If-someone-calls-someone-sweetcheeks-what-does-that-mean

Eta: I think I picked up the term from Gavin and Stacy.

I wasn't aware I was answering any questions

Ta very much

Where did I or anyone say I or they had taken offence?

Its not a phrase one sees very often, so I was curious as to the meaning in the context.

Nothing more yet on/from Kevin Gillett. His twitter account is interesting.

Large UK retailers including Tesco, Boots, Marks & Spencer and Next have written to Rachel Reeves to say that a £7bn increase in annual costs after last month’s budget would lead to job cuts and higher prices.

Source: THE GUARDIAN

Higher prices and job losses will go down well (not).

I bet!

Definitely. I immediately thought of Ness.

Full article here:

www.theguardian.com/business/2024/nov/19/uk-retailers-rachel-reeves-budget-tax-rises-brc

We seem to have allowed ourselves to be held hostage by big businesses. Many of them are subsidised by the tax payer, as top up benefits allow them to pay very low wages. They say the only way to pay their greater contribution is to cut the wage bill and increase prices, but it’s not, is it? They could also reduce profits which have been kept artificially high by state support of low wages.
We have to find a way to change this - businesses can’t dictate government policy.

And force the UK pensions to invest in M&S, Tesco, Boots who will now pledge to “not profit. “

What is damning is that Labour evidently did not consult the BRC before implementing the budget.

Madness.

‘Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England, told the Treasury committee on Tuesday that retailers were right to warn on the risk of job cuts due to the change in NICs.

He added that job losses could turn out to be more than the 50,000 forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) after the budget’

It's not just larger companies that will pass this cost on, Labour's policies will close or reduce some smaller to medium businesses. Same way as it will impact smaller to medium farms and schools

Larger companies can warn of job loss and price rises but I doubt Labour will do much. Whether it's consult or work out impact if policies and messaging

‘Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England, told the Treasury committee on Tuesday that retailers were right to warn on the risk of job cuts due to the change in NICs.

Not good, Labour are going for it anyway