"As of the end of the third quarter, Italy’s gross domestic product was 1.4 per cent below its end-2019 level. Germany narrowed the gap to 1.1 per cent and France to a mere 0.1 per cent. But in Spain the gap is more of a gulf. Its GDP remains 6.6 per cent below pre-pandemic levels. The economy has only just returned to its size in 2016."
My working theory is they are looking at OECD data, which is dollar denominated. The Euro has appreciated 3.5% in dollar terms since the end of 2019, thus appearing to boost OECD GDP without actually doing so,
Nobody reporting real GDP data will be using USD values. If they are they are idiots.
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
We didn't lag behind the rest of the world ... and came out early.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
Q4 looks pretty strong this year and last year we were in lockdown.
Yes, if we stay unlocked down we might see a decent surge. Especially in comparison to parts of Europe. 50,000 cases in Germany yesterday, they will have to bring in strict vaxports nationwide, at the very least.
I read a report that one reason the government has resisted vaxports is the big hit to to the economy they impose. Even a rather mild vaxport scheme would cost the UK £18bn in a few months
"As of the end of the third quarter, Italy’s gross domestic product was 1.4 per cent below its end-2019 level. Germany narrowed the gap to 1.1 per cent and France to a mere 0.1 per cent. But in Spain the gap is more of a gulf. Its GDP remains 6.6 per cent below pre-pandemic levels. The economy has only just returned to its size in 2016."
My working theory is they are looking at OECD data, which is dollar denominated. The Euro has appreciated 3.5% in dollar terms since the end of 2019, thus appearing to boost OECD GDP without actually doing so,
Surely they should be using either constant US$ or local currency, for such comparisons, same as for PPP calculations?
Listening to the radio this morning the second job controversy was not mentioned or referenced
Indeed the news stories seem largely to have moved on even on BBC and Sky
Actually it seems Megan Markle has dominated the news this morning and not in a good way for her
I wonder if the Mirror's Cox story might have more cut-through. It smacks more of plain old-fashioned greed rather than Cox being good at his job, and has echoes of the expenses scandal.
Tory MP Geoffrey Cox’s two homes greed exposed as he rents out taxpayer-funded flat MP Geoffrey Cox rents out London flat you helped fund; he then claims more for a second home in the capital; he even received £3,800 for two months he was in the Caribbean https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-geoffrey-coxs-two-25429742
It is unreasonable though? If his colleagues are entitled to rent a flat on expenses why should he not?
No-one should be allowed to do that.
Expenses and public money should never have got involved in helping to fund MPs' property speculation.
Those that need accommodation in London should be covered the costs of their rent. End of.
So because he owns a flat in London he should be “paid” less?
And if he sells his Battersea flat and invests the money elsewhere his compensation should go up?
I agree that the previous system was wrong, but it’s inequitable to treat people today differently.
What on earth are you on about?
MP1 already owns a flat in London, so they live in it, zero loss zero gain.
MP2 doesn’t own a flat in London so they rent one and the exact cost of the rent is covered as an expense, zero loss zero gain.
You are requiring MP1 to use his/her capital to benefit the state.
The economically rationale thing to do would be for MP1 to sell their flat and reinvest the proceeds elsewhere. They then don’t own a flat and can get one paid for by the state
No I’m not. MP1 could sell their home then rent one if they wish, however I imagine one may prefer to live in their own home.
But why should they be paid less than their colleagues?
They're not.
An expense isn't supposed to be a payment for their benefit, but to cover a cost.
I agree. But @Gallowgate is proposing to penalise them for owning a flat in London even if it is not their primary home.
All MPs should have the same rights to claim expenses. If one MP chooses to rent out a flat they own and rent an alternative in expenses that should be permissible.
Does anyone know what the rule is for housing benefit if you own a home you're letting out, can you then claim for another home?
I doubt it but I don't know. I don't see why MPs should be treated any differently to the rules they have set for others, so if its not allowed for them it shouldn't be for MPs but as I said I don't know.
Difference between benefits and expenses
Not really. They're both designed to cover costs.
There's a difference between income and either of those. But neither are supposed to be your income.
And in the case of cox it’s not his income.
He’s renting a flat and claiming the cost on expenses
But he’s rich, and rich=evil.
Same as the companies with ‘rich’ directors who put staff on furlough during the pandemic, who still appear from time to time in the papers.
"As of the end of the third quarter, Italy’s gross domestic product was 1.4 per cent below its end-2019 level. Germany narrowed the gap to 1.1 per cent and France to a mere 0.1 per cent. But in Spain the gap is more of a gulf. Its GDP remains 6.6 per cent below pre-pandemic levels. The economy has only just returned to its size in 2016."
My working theory is they are looking at OECD data, which is dollar denominated. The Euro has appreciated 3.5% in dollar terms since the end of 2019, thus appearing to boost OECD GDP without actually doing so,
Nobody reporting real GDP data will be using USD values. If they are they are idiots.
"If they are they are idiots." - Yes, those would take the kind of people who can't understand the difference between reporting day and day of. Or how reflections work.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
I wonder how much our growth is being restrained by the various shortages / price rises of everything and anything? Remember that our shortages and exposure to cost rises is greater than most of our immediate neighbours because of you know what.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
I wonder how much our growth is being restrained by the various shortages / price rises of everything and anything? Remember that our shortages and exposure to cost rises is greater than most of our immediate neighbours because of you know what.
Growth is restrained in many places because of supply issues. Germany is now lagging because it has a much larger manufacturing base and manufacturing is, obviously, more impacted by this stuff
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
Wasn't there somewhere like that at one time? Dolphin Square, Court or something like that. Got, after a while, a slightly 'iffy' reputation.
Dolphin Square. But it was never official, just a block used by a lot of MPs because of proximity. And yes it got a seedy rep
Also really ugly
But super convenient. You could walk to Chelsea or the West End.
Only slight downside was that Lupus Street was (and still is I believe) pretty iffy.
Iffy? In what way!? It is the middle of Pimlico!
For some reason, escorts and their agencies found it a highly convenient place to locate?
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
The relevant question is whether he was living in the flat when he became an MP, and only began renting it out when he had an opportunity for the state to pay his rent on a different flat?
If he already had a tenant when he became an MP then it would be unreasonable to expect the tenant to be evicted, but otherwise I would see it as an abuse of the system.
Listening to the radio this morning the second job controversy was not mentioned or referenced
Indeed the news stories seem largely to have moved on even on BBC and Sky
Actually it seems Megan Markle has dominated the news this morning and not in a good way for her
I wonder if the Mirror's Cox story might have more cut-through. It smacks more of plain old-fashioned greed rather than Cox being good at his job, and has echoes of the expenses scandal.
Tory MP Geoffrey Cox’s two homes greed exposed as he rents out taxpayer-funded flat MP Geoffrey Cox rents out London flat you helped fund; he then claims more for a second home in the capital; he even received £3,800 for two months he was in the Caribbean https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-geoffrey-coxs-two-25429742
It is unreasonable though? If his colleagues are entitled to rent a flat on expenses why should he not?
No-one should be allowed to do that.
Expenses and public money should never have got involved in helping to fund MPs' property speculation.
Those that need accommodation in London should be covered the costs of their rent. End of.
So because he owns a flat in London he should be “paid” less?
And if he sells his Battersea flat and invests the money elsewhere his compensation should go up?
I agree that the previous system was wrong, but it’s inequitable to treat people today differently.
What on earth are you on about?
MP1 already owns a flat in London, so they live in it, zero loss zero gain.
MP2 doesn’t own a flat in London so they rent one and the exact cost of the rent is covered as an expense, zero loss zero gain.
You are requiring MP1 to use his/her capital to benefit the state.
The economically rationale thing to do would be for MP1 to sell their flat and reinvest the proceeds elsewhere. They then don’t own a flat and can get one paid for by the state
No I’m not. MP1 could sell their home then rent one if they wish, however I imagine one may prefer to live in their own home.
But why should they be paid less than their colleagues?
They're not.
An expense isn't supposed to be a payment for their benefit, but to cover a cost.
I agree. But @Gallowgate is proposing to penalise them for owning a flat in London even if it is not their primary home.
All MPs should have the same rights to claim expenses. If one MP chooses to rent out a flat they own and rent an alternative in expenses that should be permissible.
Your language reveals your mindset. Expenses aren't pay.
No-one is being "penalised" if they already have accommodation near their work, since those who are having it rented with no financial benefit to themselves aren't benefitting financially.
That’s why I put “pay” in inverted commas. It was a simplification.
If I stay with friends while travelling on business I am entitled to claim £150 as a per diem (not that o have ever known anyone claim this!).
Why, because an MP owns a property in London should he/she be obligated to live there rather than having the ability to re t it out like anyone else might choose to do? If they choose to live there they don’t get to claim expenses. If they want to rent somewhere else (may be more convenient for Westminster) they should have the same rights as any MP to claim the cost back
Do you know what the rules are for housing benefit?
Can someone working a minimum wage job and on Universal Credit claim housing benefit if they own a home they're choosing to let to someone else?
If not, why should the rules for housing benefits for MPs be any different to the law they have set for others?
Benefits are a contribution by the state to people in need of support. If you have significant capital you are not in need of support.
Expenses are paid to MPs in order to allow them to perform their democratic function. This often requires additional accommodation close to Westminster.
There is a fundamental difference
And if an MP already has a home in the capital then they don't require additional accommodation any more than somebody who owns their own home needs a benefit. There is absolutely no fundamental difference.
If the MP wants to earn extra money, they can get a job to earn it, not maximise their "expenses" as pay. Just as someone on benefits can.
But if he rents out the house then he doesn’t have access to it
Neither does an individual working on Universal Credit.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
I've been pondering how one distinguishes legitimate outside work done by MPs, and outside work that is, at best, dubious, and have come up with a solution.
Any MP that claims in the Register that their role is "providing strategic advice" to a profit-making concern is, in all likelihood, raking in money in exchange for influence on government decision-making, and is therefore corrupt. Easy.
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
If Cox has a flat in London he shouldn't be claiming accommodation expenses from taxpayers. End of story. If he chooses to rent that flat out then he can use the rental income to pay for his own accommodation. A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
I wonder how much our growth is being restrained by the various shortages / price rises of everything and anything? Remember that our shortages and exposure to cost rises is greater than most of our immediate neighbours because of you know what.
Growth is restrained in many places because of supply issues. Germany is now lagging because it has a much larger manufacturing base and manufacturing is, obviously, more impacted by this stuff
Ditto China. It’s a global ting
No you don't understand, it's Brexit. The rest of the world is having a wonderful time of it, those reports of 6% inflation in the US and 75% of German retail struggling to get stock are mere figments of your imagination, RP had decreed that it's Brexit.
Mr. kjh, that's what you claim didn't happen but if you consult this briefing which I forgot to mention I think you'll find that changes things.
I'm glad someone appreciated my pun. I was rather proud of it. You do realise we could keep this up for hours, because there were so many things I didn't do this morning that will counter the things you didn't do.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
There was a block of flats at the bottom of Waterloo bridge (Stamford street?) they looked at and passed on. Imperial turned it into student accommodation.
Your proposal seems reasonable. I’d make them 2 bedroom flats (no need to be mean). If MPs want to bring their families to London they can rent a hotel like everyone else.
Yes, no need to scrimp. The taxpayer will benefit as the state will get the capital gain from the property. Spacious 2 bed flats.
Takes away all the hassle of renting in London. You can move in immediately. Day one of Parliament. Don’t like it, fine, don’t live there but you won’t get money for anywhere else
A nice little perk of the job, but impossible to abuse the system. Sorted
Don’t MEPs have something like this? Official apartments owned by the EU? Or maybe they just sleep in their offices. They are known for their selflessness
No.
They just get ~10k Euro per month in their Daily Allowance, which covers accommodation and related costs.
I've been pondering how one distinguishes legitimate outside work done by MPs, and outside work that is, at best, dubious, and have come up with a solution.
Any MP that claims in the Register that their role is "providing strategic advice" to a profit-making concern is, in all likelihood, raking in money in exchange for influence on government decision-making, and is therefore corrupt. Easy.
Make every MP with a second job have a film crew follow them around for a week while they do it, with the resulting films put up on the Hoc website.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
I wonder how much our growth is being restrained by the various shortages / price rises of everything and anything? Remember that our shortages and exposure to cost rises is greater than most of our immediate neighbours because of you know what.
Growth is restrained in many places because of supply issues. Germany is now lagging because it has a much larger manufacturing base and manufacturing is, obviously, more impacted by this stuff
Ditto China. It’s a global ting
No you don't understand, it's Brexit. The rest of the world is having a wonderful time of it, those reports of 6% inflation in the US and 75% of German retail struggling to get stock are mere figments of your imagination, RP had decreed that it's Brexit.
“Germany risks becoming the eurozone’s economic laggard, as economists worry that restrictions to contain a fresh surge in Covid-19 infections will hit consumer activity and compound the supply chain problems already throttling industrial output.
“The German Council of Economic Experts, which advises the government, became the latest group to cut its forecasts for growth in Europe’s largest economy on Wednesday, warning that supply problems are taking a greater toll than expected on manufacturers.”
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
If Cox has a flat in London he shouldn't be claiming accommodation expenses from taxpayers. End of story. If he chooses to rent that flat out then he can use the rental income to pay for his own accommodation. A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
I wonder how many legal actions such a stance would generate?
"We sacked you because we assumed..."
It's a nice fantasy, but how would you enforce it practically?
Would you sack Chris Bryant for doing the same thing between 2012 and 2017?
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
I wonder how much our growth is being restrained by the various shortages / price rises of everything and anything? Remember that our shortages and exposure to cost rises is greater than most of our immediate neighbours because of you know what.
Growth is restrained in many places because of supply issues. Germany is now lagging because it has a much larger manufacturing base and manufacturing is, obviously, more impacted by this stuff
Ditto China. It’s a global ting
No you don't understand, it's Brexit. The rest of the world is having a wonderful time of it, those reports of 6% inflation in the US and 75% of German retail struggling to get stock are mere figments of your imagination, RP had decreed that it's Brexit.
“Germany risks becoming the eurozone’s economic laggard, as economists worry that restrictions to contain a fresh surge in Covid-19 infections will hit consumer activity and compound the supply chain problems already throttling industrial output.
“The German Council of Economic Experts, which advises the government, became the latest group to cut its forecasts for growth in Europe’s largest economy on Wednesday, warning that supply problems are taking a greater toll than expected on manufacturers.”
- FT yesterday (££)
Yeah but they don't have Brexit so the FT report is is a clear fiction. You need to get with the narrative mate, Brexit is the cause of all the world's ills, those who say otherwise are deluded.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
There was a block of flats at the bottom of Waterloo bridge (Stamford street?) they looked at and passed on. Imperial turned it into student accommodation.
Your proposal seems reasonable. I’d make them 2 bedroom flats (no need to be mean). If MPs want to bring their families to London they can rent a hotel like everyone else.
Yes, no need to scrimp. The taxpayer will benefit as the state will get the capital gain from the property. Spacious 2 bed flats.
Takes away all the hassle of renting in London. You can move in immediately. Day one of Parliament. Don’t like it, fine, don’t live there but you won’t get money for anywhere else
A nice little perk of the job, but impossible to abuse the system. Sorted
Don’t MEPs have something like this? Official apartments owned by the EU? Or maybe they just sleep in their offices. They are known for their selflessness
No.
They just get ~10k Euro per month in their Daily Allowance, which covers accommodation and related costs.
Yes I think I’m confusing things.
What some MEPs do, literally, is sleep in their offices but still claim the enormous daily living expenses. Thus effectively adding €100,000 to their annual salaries. Such nice people
"As of the end of the third quarter, Italy’s gross domestic product was 1.4 per cent below its end-2019 level. Germany narrowed the gap to 1.1 per cent and France to a mere 0.1 per cent. But in Spain the gap is more of a gulf. Its GDP remains 6.6 per cent below pre-pandemic levels. The economy has only just returned to its size in 2016."
My working theory is they are looking at OECD data, which is dollar denominated. The Euro has appreciated 3.5% in dollar terms since the end of 2019, thus appearing to boost OECD GDP without actually doing so,
Nobody reporting real GDP data will be using USD values. If they are they are idiots.
"If they are they are idiots." - Yes, those would take the kind of people who can't understand the difference between reporting day and day of. Or how reflections work.
I think it's that phenomenon where the edge case/emotional impact generates a lot of debate, whilst clear cut examples of corruption don't, because they are obvious so little to discuss.
But Johnson has assured us that there's little or no corruption here.
He sounded rather wistful about this, didn't he?
You should get yourself over to LBC mate. Nick Ferrari talking about Meghan Markle. Unlimited material for you there.
Yes, I can imagine. Talk about your bete noires for fruity reactionaries.
Chatted to various MPs and political journalists at COP. The general view is that sleaze isn't especially cutting through - people can see there's a problem and they do think the Tories are significantly worse, but their expectations were low anyway and tbh they aren't very interested - in particular, it's not coming up on the doorstep in Bexley. On the other hand, almost nobody thinks the government is very competent, and that is a stronger suit for Labour, since people find Keir boringly managerial but they do think he inspires confidence, precisely as a manager. Reeves is seen as doing well as Shadow Chancellor - everyone I talked to likes Dodds personally, but they think Reeves has more of a cutting edge. On the whole, the Labour MPs were moderately confident that progress is being made.
COP is seen by most of the people I talked to (mostly not political types) as a half-full glass, which is better than expected though falling short of what most think is actually needed. I was struck by the genuine enthusiasm and engagement of the delegates, including people from places that I know embarassingly little about (Guinea, Costa Rica, Madagascar...) - I'd expected a high proportion of portly time-servers on a jolly, but that really wasn't in evidence. Everyone had an agenda, but there was a consensus that there was a real climate problem and we all had to muck in.
When you say "all had to muck in" you mean the governments. Not the people. Because the people seem strangely unwilling to "muck in".
Well, nearly every delegate there was part of a government delegation, so yes, they were talking about what "we the governments" need to do.
Not sure you're right about people in general. They aren't very interested in tremendous personal effort if nobody else is bothering, but on the whole seem up for both (a) modest personal effort (sorting recyclable rubbish, turning the heating down a notch) and (b) government action even if if diverts money from something else (green new deal and all that). I'm not pollyannaish about it but one can be too cynical too.
AFAICS older people who follow events are aware of several things:
Firstly that unless China, India, Russia and USA are on board the whole thing (in terms of saving the planet) is a no go.
Secondly that a mixture of elementary maths, political nous and ordinary level scepticism tells them that if the science is correct (which is a real 'if') we are all stuffed. The CO2 level required isn't going to happen in the timescale required.
Thirdly, they notice that Greta Thunberg has spotted this too and that though she is right she doesn't have a plan.
Fourthly older people are aware that the great and good have all been crying wolf for 30 years on the subject of X years to save the planet, and they still are.
And finally they hope the science is wrong and that we in fact have a chance, and that getting rid of fossil fuels etc is good anyway regardless of consequences, because renewables are obviously a better way to run the world.
(Nothing in mainstream media ever reflects this widespread opinion, which nonetheless has the merit of possibly even being true).
The views of older people are not without value. They really have seen it all before.
Older people DO care! For example I'm a member of the university of the Third Age, and in particular of u3a.communities u3acommunities.org. Can I highlight, from it's Climate Change page. "In 2020 the globally averaged temperature was 1.02 degrees Celsius (1.84 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than the baseline 1951-1980 mean. The last seven years have been the warmest seven years on record. We have to expect that records will continue to be broken!
If Climate Change is of concern to you and you would like to take part in on-line meetings with like-minded people to explore and discuss technological and societal aspects of Global Warming then please join us.
Once a month, on the fourth Wednesday, we link up (via Zoom) for an hour of stimulating videos or talks followed by lively discussions.
Our starting premise is: Man-made climate change is proven beyond doubt, so what can we do individually and as a society?"
Other u3a members made their voices heard about climate change at fringe events at the COP26 Conference in Glasgow sharing their experiences of climate change
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
That's a strange bit of reporting, given that GDP is only 0.6% away from its pre-pandemic level.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
There was a block of flats at the bottom of Waterloo bridge (Stamford street?) they looked at and passed on. Imperial turned it into student accommodation.
Your proposal seems reasonable. I’d make them 2 bedroom flats (no need to be mean). If MPs want to bring their families to London they can rent a hotel like everyone else.
Yes, no need to scrimp. The taxpayer will benefit as the state will get the capital gain from the property. Spacious 2 bed flats.
Takes away all the hassle of renting in London. You can move in immediately. Day one of Parliament. Don’t like it, fine, don’t live there but you won’t get money for anywhere else
A nice little perk of the job, but impossible to abuse the system. Sorted
Don’t MEPs have something like this? Official apartments owned by the EU? Or maybe they just sleep in their offices. They are known for their selflessness
No.
They just get ~10k Euro per month in their Daily Allowance, which covers accommodation and related costs.
Paid tax-free into their personal bank account, and from which they pay their staff and expenses.
None of this having to actually account for the spending stuff.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
I wonder how much our growth is being restrained by the various shortages / price rises of everything and anything? Remember that our shortages and exposure to cost rises is greater than most of our immediate neighbours because of you know what.
Growth is restrained in many places because of supply issues. Germany is now lagging because it has a much larger manufacturing base and manufacturing is, obviously, more impacted by this stuff
Ditto China. It’s a global ting
No you don't understand, it's Brexit. The rest of the world is having a wonderful time of it, those reports of 6% inflation in the US and 75% of German retail struggling to get stock are mere figments of your imagination, RP had decreed that it's Brexit.
Daft sod. These are global issues. But the extra time / cost in getting stuff into the GB is Brexit. Other countries does have those extra delays / costs. As witnessed by the "importing to the GB" seminar I did on Tuesday where once again the additional reams and reams of paperwork and checks required uniquely to bring anything into GB are coming.
Remember that the global logistics map hasn't been redrawn because of Brexit. Where it made sense to ship everything into Rotterdam and then distribute onwards that is still the case. With said delays and costs now applied to the final leg into GB that aren't needed for anywhere else.
Max - do you have much experience as an importer...?
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
If Cox has a flat in London he shouldn't be claiming accommodation expenses from taxpayers. End of story. If he chooses to rent that flat out then he can use the rental income to pay for his own accommodation. A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
I wonder how many legal actions such a stance would generate?
"We sacked you because we assumed..."
It's a nice fantasy, but how would you enforce it practically?
Would you sack Chris Bryant for doing the same thing between 2012 and 2017?
In my opinion, anyone who claims for London living expenses while owning a property in London that they could be living in should go. Perhaps an exemption if they are renting in their constituency (ie the London property is their only property). There are too many landlord MPs anyway.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
What a wonderful target for terrorists / murderers / lunatics.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
Wasn't there somewhere like that at one time? Dolphin Square, Court or something like that. Got, after a while, a slightly 'iffy' reputation.
Dolphin Square. But it was never official, just a block used by a lot of MPs because of proximity. And yes it got a seedy rep
Also really ugly
But super convenient. You could walk to Chelsea or the West End.
Only slight downside was that Lupus Street was (and still is I believe) pretty iffy.
Iffy? In what way!? It is the middle of Pimlico!
364 crimes within half a mile in September this year.
If you zoom in on the map, it's just behind Pimlico Academy, and it shows the recorded crimes on the streets around Dolphin Square in one recent month.
There's "violence and sexual offences" recorded on almost every street around Dolphin Square.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
There was a block of flats at the bottom of Waterloo bridge (Stamford street?) they looked at and passed on. Imperial turned it into student accommodation.
Your proposal seems reasonable. I’d make them 2 bedroom flats (no need to be mean). If MPs want to bring their families to London they can rent a hotel like everyone else.
Yes, no need to scrimp. The taxpayer will benefit as the state will get the capital gain from the property. Spacious 2 bed flats.
Takes away all the hassle of renting in London. You can move in immediately. Day one of Parliament. Don’t like it, fine, don’t live there but you won’t get money for anywhere else
A nice little perk of the job, but impossible to abuse the system. Sorted
Don’t MEPs have something like this? Official apartments owned by the EU? Or maybe they just sleep in their offices. They are known for their selflessness
No.
They just get ~10k Euro per month in their Daily Allowance, which covers accommodation and related costs.
Paid tax-free into their personal bank account, and from which they pay their staff and expenses.
None of this having to actually account for the spending stuff.
When the UK MPs expense scandal happened, the European Parliament reacted quickly, decisively and nearly unanimously.
They made their expenses a specially protected secret, with severe penalties for leaking them.
Chatted to various MPs and political journalists at COP. The general view is that sleaze isn't especially cutting through - people can see there's a problem and they do think the Tories are significantly worse, but their expectations were low anyway and tbh they aren't very interested - in particular, it's not coming up on the doorstep in Bexley. On the other hand, almost nobody thinks the government is very competent, and that is a stronger suit for Labour, since people find Keir boringly managerial but they do think he inspires confidence, precisely as a manager. Reeves is seen as doing well as Shadow Chancellor - everyone I talked to likes Dodds personally, but they think Reeves has more of a cutting edge. On the whole, the Labour MPs were moderately confident that progress is being made.
COP is seen by most of the people I talked to (mostly not political types) as a half-full glass, which is better than expected though falling short of what most think is actually needed. I was struck by the genuine enthusiasm and engagement of the delegates, including people from places that I know embarassingly little about (Guinea, Costa Rica, Madagascar...) - I'd expected a high proportion of portly time-servers on a jolly, but that really wasn't in evidence. Everyone had an agenda, but there was a consensus that there was a real climate problem and we all had to muck in.
When you say "all had to muck in" you mean the governments. Not the people. Because the people seem strangely unwilling to "muck in".
Well, nearly every delegate there was part of a government delegation, so yes, they were talking about what "we the governments" need to do.
Not sure you're right about people in general. They aren't very interested in tremendous personal effort if nobody else is bothering, but on the whole seem up for both (a) modest personal effort (sorting recyclable rubbish, turning the heating down a notch) and (b) government action even if if diverts money from something else (green new deal and all that). I'm not pollyannaish about it but one can be too cynical too.
AFAICS older people who follow events are aware of several things:
Firstly that unless China, India, Russia and USA are on board the whole thing (in terms of saving the planet) is a no go.
Secondly that a mixture of elementary maths, political nous and ordinary level scepticism tells them that if the science is correct (which is a real 'if') we are all stuffed. The CO2 level required isn't going to happen in the timescale required.
Thirdly, they notice that Greta Thunberg has spotted this too and that though she is right she doesn't have a plan.
Fourthly older people are aware that the great and good have all been crying wolf for 30 years on the subject of X years to save the planet, and they still are.
And finally they hope the science is wrong and that we in fact have a chance, and that getting rid of fossil fuels etc is good anyway regardless of consequences, because renewables are obviously a better way to run the world.
(Nothing in mainstream media ever reflects this widespread opinion, which nonetheless has the merit of possibly even being true).
The views of older people are not without value. They really have seen it all before.
Older people DO care! For example I'm a member of the university of the Third Age, and in particular of u3a.communities u3acommunities.org. Can I highlight, from it's Climate Change page. "In 2020 the globally averaged temperature was 1.02 degrees Celsius (1.84 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than the baseline 1951-1980 mean. The last seven years have been the warmest seven years on record. We have to expect that records will continue to be broken!
If Climate Change is of concern to you and you would like to take part in on-line meetings with like-minded people to explore and discuss technological and societal aspects of Global Warming then please join us.
Once a month, on the fourth Wednesday, we link up (via Zoom) for an hour of stimulating videos or talks followed by lively discussions.
Our starting premise is: Man-made climate change is proven beyond doubt, so what can we do individually and as a society?"
Other u3a members made their voices heard about climate change at fringe events at the COP26 Conference in Glasgow sharing their experiences of climate change
Apart from the 'beyond doubt' assertion (beyond doubt is a high bar) this seems pretty sensible to me.
I suspect Newton thought his physics was beyond doubt, and at the time it would have been a reasonable view. But wrong.
"As of the end of the third quarter, Italy’s gross domestic product was 1.4 per cent below its end-2019 level. Germany narrowed the gap to 1.1 per cent and France to a mere 0.1 per cent. But in Spain the gap is more of a gulf. Its GDP remains 6.6 per cent below pre-pandemic levels. The economy has only just returned to its size in 2016."
My working theory is they are looking at OECD data, which is dollar denominated. The Euro has appreciated 3.5% in dollar terms since the end of 2019, thus appearing to boost OECD GDP without actually doing so,
Nobody reporting real GDP data will be using USD values. If they are they are idiots.
"If they are they are idiots." - Yes, those would take the kind of people who can't understand the difference between reporting day and day of. Or how reflections work.
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
If Cox has a flat in London he shouldn't be claiming accommodation expenses from taxpayers. End of story. If he chooses to rent that flat out then he can use the rental income to pay for his own accommodation. A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
I wonder how many legal actions such a stance would generate?
"We sacked you because we assumed..."
It's a nice fantasy, but how would you enforce it practically?
Would you sack Chris Bryant for doing the same thing between 2012 and 2017?
In my opinion, anyone who claims for London living expenses while owning a property in London that they could be living in should go. Perhaps an exemption if they are renting in their constituency (ie the London property is their only property). There are too many landlord MPs anyway.
But if they had £1 million in Tesla shares, instead... that would be OK?
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
What a wonderful target for terrorists / murderers / lunatics.
And drug dealers and sex workers.
With so many MPs happy users of Turkish and various affairs going on how would we tell the difference between the two groups?
Everyone Stop and Think for a minute how egregiously horrible it would be to live and work as a giant community of MPs 5 days a week. Like being on the Apprentice but with less skills and never ending.
"As of the end of the third quarter, Italy’s gross domestic product was 1.4 per cent below its end-2019 level. Germany narrowed the gap to 1.1 per cent and France to a mere 0.1 per cent. But in Spain the gap is more of a gulf. Its GDP remains 6.6 per cent below pre-pandemic levels. The economy has only just returned to its size in 2016."
My working theory is they are looking at OECD data, which is dollar denominated. The Euro has appreciated 3.5% in dollar terms since the end of 2019, thus appearing to boost OECD GDP without actually doing so,
Nobody reporting real GDP data will be using USD values. If they are they are idiots.
"If they are they are idiots." - Yes, those would take the kind of people who can't understand the difference between reporting day and day of. Or how reflections work.
No, wait.....
Does anyone really understand how mirrors work?
At first not, but then I realised it was staring me in the face.
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
If Cox has a flat in London he shouldn't be claiming accommodation expenses from taxpayers. End of story. If he chooses to rent that flat out then he can use the rental income to pay for his own accommodation. A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
I wonder how many legal actions such a stance would generate?
"We sacked you because we assumed..."
It's a nice fantasy, but how would you enforce it practically?
Would you sack Chris Bryant for doing the same thing between 2012 and 2017?
In my opinion, anyone who claims for London living expenses while owning a property in London that they could be living in should go. Perhaps an exemption if they are renting in their constituency (ie the London property is their only property). There are too many landlord MPs anyway.
What if they have a huge mortgage on it, which they can no longer afford having taken a pay cut to be an MP? Would you force them to sell it rather than let it?
Perhaps there should be a new, parliamentary convention… any MP in a safe seat waving away their questionable behaviour by declaring that they will be judged at the next election, should automatically be subject to an open selection process before said election.
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Is there a particular problem with crisps? There have been almost no Walkers multipacks in both my local Sainsbury's or Asda for the last week or so and generally the snack aisles look like a gang has steamed through and raided everything.
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Is there a particular problem with crisps? There have been almost no Walkers multipacks in both my local Sainsbury's or Asda for the last week or so and generally the snack aisles look like a gang has steamed through and raided everything.
I don’t know, but it seems awfully hard to get “Squares” these days, despite sitting at top of god tier for crisps.
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
If Cox has a flat in London he shouldn't be claiming accommodation expenses from taxpayers. End of story. If he chooses to rent that flat out then he can use the rental income to pay for his own accommodation. A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
I wonder how many legal actions such a stance would generate?
"We sacked you because we assumed..."
It's a nice fantasy, but how would you enforce it practically?
Would you sack Chris Bryant for doing the same thing between 2012 and 2017?
In my opinion, anyone who claims for London living expenses while owning a property in London that they could be living in should go. Perhaps an exemption if they are renting in their constituency (ie the London property is their only property). There are too many landlord MPs anyway.
What if they have a huge mortgage on it, which they can no longer afford having taken a pay cut to be an MP? Would you force them to sell it rather than let it?
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
If Cox has a flat in London he shouldn't be claiming accommodation expenses from taxpayers. End of story. If he chooses to rent that flat out then he can use the rental income to pay for his own accommodation. A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
I wonder how many legal actions such a stance would generate?
"We sacked you because we assumed..."
It's a nice fantasy, but how would you enforce it practically?
Would you sack Chris Bryant for doing the same thing between 2012 and 2017?
In my opinion, anyone who claims for London living expenses while owning a property in London that they could be living in should go. Perhaps an exemption if they are renting in their constituency (ie the London property is their only property). There are too many landlord MPs anyway.
But if they had £1 million in Tesla shares, instead... that would be OK?
If they were able to fashion the shares into a primitive shelter then no. People viewing houses as capital rather than somewhere to live is how we got into our current housing mess. Bottom line: if you own a flat in London then you don't need to be paid to rent a different one. It's just taking the piss.
“But this is not ransom money. This is a debt. An international court has said so. The defence secretary has said so. We should pay it because it is an irritant to relations and whether or not it should be linked to Nazanin’s case, the Iranians certainly do make that linkage.”
So it is ransom money.
I wonder why we didn't clear our debt at the same time as the Americans?
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
Wasn't there somewhere like that at one time? Dolphin Square, Court or something like that. Got, after a while, a slightly 'iffy' reputation.
Dolphin Square. But it was never official, just a block used by a lot of MPs because of proximity. And yes it got a seedy rep
Also really ugly
But super convenient. You could walk to Chelsea or the West End.
Only slight downside was that Lupus Street was (and still is I believe) pretty iffy.
Iffy? In what way!? It is the middle of Pimlico!
364 crimes within half a mile in September this year.
If you zoom in on the map, it's just behind Pimlico Academy, and it shows the recorded crimes on the streets around Dolphin Square in one recent month.
There's "violence and sexual offences" recorded on almost every street around Dolphin Square.
Is that not "iffy"?
According to Dolphin Square, Dolphin Square is "LONDON'S MOST DISTINGUISHED RENTAL ADDRESS"
*{scans down page}*
Jeeeeesus. £450 a WEEK for a 460 sqft 1 bed flat...
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Is there a particular problem with crisps? There have been almost no Walkers multipacks in both my local Sainsbury's or Asda for the last week or so and generally the snack aisles look like a gang has steamed through and raided everything.
Yes Walkers has a production problem. I don't think it is either Covid or Brexit related, at least not directly.
This morning we have had a potentially significant intervention from Rishi Sunak, the chancellor. In interviews primarily about the growth figures (mildly disappointing), he said the government needs “to do better” on standards than it did last week. He told Sky News:
"On the broader point and just reflecting over recent events, I think for us as a government, it’s fair to say that we need to do better than we did last week and we know that."
In one respect this is not surprising. Ministers have admitted that it was a mistake to get MPs to vote for the motion shelving the Owen Paterson report, and so of course the government has to do better. But, because they are coming from a cabinet minster who (at least until now) has not been implicated in controversy about sleaze or second jobs, and one seen as the favourite to be next PM, Sunak’s words also sound like an implied rebuke to Boris Johnson.
“But this is not ransom money. This is a debt. An international court has said so. The defence secretary has said so. We should pay it because it is an irritant to relations and whether or not it should be linked to Nazanin’s case, the Iranians certainly do make that linkage.”
So it is ransom money.
I wonder why we didn't clear our debt at the same time as the Americans?
We should send in the SAS.
Or do nothing as she's an Iranian citizen in Iran.
We should never pay that money as long as Iran is holding hostages though.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
There was a block of flats at the bottom of Waterloo bridge (Stamford street?) they looked at and passed on. Imperial turned it into student accommodation.
Your proposal seems reasonable. I’d make them 2 bedroom flats (no need to be mean). If MPs want to bring their families to London they can rent a hotel like everyone else.
Yes, no need to scrimp. The taxpayer will benefit as the state will get the capital gain from the property. Spacious 2 bed flats.
Takes away all the hassle of renting in London. You can move in immediately. Day one of Parliament. Don’t like it, fine, don’t live there but you won’t get money for anywhere else
A nice little perk of the job, but impossible to abuse the system. Sorted
Don’t MEPs have something like this? Official apartments owned by the EU? Or maybe they just sleep in their offices. They are known for their selflessness
No.
They just get ~10k Euro per month in their Daily Allowance, which covers accommodation and related costs.
Paid tax-free into their personal bank account, and from which they pay their staff and expenses.
None of this having to actually account for the spending stuff.
Imo that is a feature, not a bug. We should pay our MPs allowances, not expenses, and let them worry spend it how they like (although imo we should also centralise supply and support of IT and similar). It might even be cheaper as we'd not need to audit expense claims if there are none.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
Q4 looks pretty strong this year and last year we were in lockdown.
Yes, if we stay unlocked down we might see a decent surge. Especially in comparison to parts of Europe. 50,000 cases in Germany yesterday, they will have to bring in strict vaxports nationwide, at the very least.
I read a report that one reason the government has resisted vaxports is the big hit to to the economy they impose. Even a rather mild vaxport scheme would cost the UK £18bn in a few months
Belgium today has the UK equivalent of 90k new cases:
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Chatted to various MPs and political journalists at COP. The general view is that sleaze isn't especially cutting through - people can see there's a problem and they do think the Tories are significantly worse, but their expectations were low anyway and tbh they aren't very interested - in particular, it's not coming up on the doorstep in Bexley. On the other hand, almost nobody thinks the government is very competent, and that is a stronger suit for Labour, since people find Keir boringly managerial but they do think he inspires confidence, precisely as a manager. Reeves is seen as doing well as Shadow Chancellor - everyone I talked to likes Dodds personally, but they think Reeves has more of a cutting edge. On the whole, the Labour MPs were moderately confident that progress is being made.
COP is seen by most of the people I talked to (mostly not political types) as a half-full glass, which is better than expected though falling short of what most think is actually needed. I was struck by the genuine enthusiasm and engagement of the delegates, including people from places that I know embarassingly little about (Guinea, Costa Rica, Madagascar...) - I'd expected a high proportion of portly time-servers on a jolly, but that really wasn't in evidence. Everyone had an agenda, but there was a consensus that there was a real climate problem and we all had to muck in.
When you say "all had to muck in" you mean the governments. Not the people. Because the people seem strangely unwilling to "muck in".
Well, nearly every delegate there was part of a government delegation, so yes, they were talking about what "we the governments" need to do.
Not sure you're right about people in general. They aren't very interested in tremendous personal effort if nobody else is bothering, but on the whole seem up for both (a) modest personal effort (sorting recyclable rubbish, turning the heating down a notch) and (b) government action even if if diverts money from something else (green new deal and all that). I'm not pollyannaish about it but one can be too cynical too.
AFAICS older people who follow events are aware of several things:
Firstly that unless China, India, Russia and USA are on board the whole thing (in terms of saving the planet) is a no go.
Secondly that a mixture of elementary maths, political nous and ordinary level scepticism tells them that if the science is correct (which is a real 'if') we are all stuffed. The CO2 level required isn't going to happen in the timescale required.
Thirdly, they notice that Greta Thunberg has spotted this too and that though she is right she doesn't have a plan.
Fourthly older people are aware that the great and good have all been crying wolf for 30 years on the subject of X years to save the planet, and they still are.
And finally they hope the science is wrong and that we in fact have a chance, and that getting rid of fossil fuels etc is good anyway regardless of consequences, because renewables are obviously a better way to run the world.
(Nothing in mainstream media ever reflects this widespread opinion, which nonetheless has the merit of possibly even being true).
The views of older people are not without value. They really have seen it all before.
Older people DO care! For example I'm a member of the university of the Third Age, and in particular of u3a.communities u3acommunities.org. Can I highlight, from it's Climate Change page. "In 2020 the globally averaged temperature was 1.02 degrees Celsius (1.84 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than the baseline 1951-1980 mean. The last seven years have been the warmest seven years on record. We have to expect that records will continue to be broken!
If Climate Change is of concern to you and you would like to take part in on-line meetings with like-minded people to explore and discuss technological and societal aspects of Global Warming then please join us.
Once a month, on the fourth Wednesday, we link up (via Zoom) for an hour of stimulating videos or talks followed by lively discussions.
Our starting premise is: Man-made climate change is proven beyond doubt, so what can we do individually and as a society?"
Other u3a members made their voices heard about climate change at fringe events at the COP26 Conference in Glasgow sharing their experiences of climate change
Apart from the 'beyond doubt' assertion (beyond doubt is a high bar) this seems pretty sensible to me.
I suspect Newton thought his physics was beyond doubt, and at the time it would have been a reasonable view. But wrong.
u3acommunities Climate Change Group gets about 50 or so (any more would be unmanageable) people to it's Zoom meetings and apparently discussion can get a bit feisty!
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Is there a particular problem with crisps?
They are garbage and not even food but are easily the best accelerant if you want to burn a car with no suspicious forensics left behind.
I believe the decision to effectively ride the exit wave from July (although not advertised as such), was one of the best decisions this government has made.
For many months now I have been living as if Covid never happened, although I have worn a mask on the tube when I’ve had a cold (but not otherwise).
When I move to New York in January I feel like I’ll be going backwards.
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Is there a particular problem with crisps? There have been almost no Walkers multipacks in both my local Sainsbury's or Asda for the last week or so and generally the snack aisles look like a gang has steamed through and raided everything.
Yes Walkers has a production problem. I don't think it is either Covid or Brexit related, at least not directly.
They're claiming it is IT related impacting onto the production lines. Whilst I know that computers are networked and have been on blue chip production floors where the computers work on the same system as the rest of the company, it must have been a serious catastrofuck upgrade to stop production this badly. Like completely wiped the planning and supply systems level chaos.
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Ah right. Well I hope that gets sorted asap. You simply cannot beat Walkers cheese & onion crisps when the munchies strike. As so often, the basic no-frills product is the best product.
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
There seems to be a running theme on this thread where certain people are confusing expenses and pay.
Expenses are provided as needed to enable you to do your work in a business. That's why they're expenses and not pay.
If you live and work in Derbyshire, say, and own a flat in London, are you required to stay there when travelling on business? Or can you stay in a hotel like your colleagues?
Can you stay in the flat overnight at immediate notice ? If so, no you can't expense the hotel.
Cox can’t - he has a tenant
If Cox has a flat in London he shouldn't be claiming accommodation expenses from taxpayers. End of story. If he chooses to rent that flat out then he can use the rental income to pay for his own accommodation. A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
I wonder how many legal actions such a stance would generate?
"We sacked you because we assumed..."
It's a nice fantasy, but how would you enforce it practically?
Would you sack Chris Bryant for doing the same thing between 2012 and 2017?
In my opinion, anyone who claims for London living expenses while owning a property in London that they could be living in should go. Perhaps an exemption if they are renting in their constituency (ie the London property is their only property). There are too many landlord MPs anyway.
What if they have a huge mortgage on it, which they can no longer afford having taken a pay cut to be an MP? Would you force them to sell it rather than let it?
Up to them how they organise their affairs. But if you own two homes then you can live in them and if you choose to rent one out then that will pay for your living costs. If people want to maintain a high end lifestyle and be an MP then they should make sure they can afford to without bleeding the taxpayer dry. (Do a Rishi and marry the daughter of a billionaire - if he can do it anyone can, surely). Otherwise learn to live on an MP's salary. Plenty of people get by on a lot less, and MPs have frequently voted to make some of those people even poorer. (🎻 violin for MPs forced to sell £million London flat shown actual size).
Regardless - it all looks bad: “It’s the perfect storm of the old guard with no promotion prospects worried about losing second jobs, and new guard worried that their best years may be spent in the wilderness if this continues,” said an ex-No10 aide.
“But this is not ransom money. This is a debt. An international court has said so. The defence secretary has said so. We should pay it because it is an irritant to relations and whether or not it should be linked to Nazanin’s case, the Iranians certainly do make that linkage.”
So it is ransom money.
I wonder why we didn't clear our debt at the same time as the Americans?
We should send in the SAS.
Or do nothing as she's an Iranian citizen in Iran.
We should never pay that money as long as Iran is holding hostages though.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of particular courses of action someone has to break the log-jam.
I suggest part at least of the reason is that our FO is still smarting because the Anglo-Persian Oil Company was nationalised and whatever we tried to do about it didn't work.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
Wasn't there somewhere like that at one time? Dolphin Square, Court or something like that. Got, after a while, a slightly 'iffy' reputation.
Dolphin Square. But it was never official, just a block used by a lot of MPs because of proximity. And yes it got a seedy rep
Also really ugly
But super convenient. You could walk to Chelsea or the West End.
Only slight downside was that Lupus Street was (and still is I believe) pretty iffy.
Iffy? In what way!? It is the middle of Pimlico!
364 crimes within half a mile in September this year.
If you zoom in on the map, it's just behind Pimlico Academy, and it shows the recorded crimes on the streets around Dolphin Square in one recent month.
There's "violence and sexual offences" recorded on almost every street around Dolphin Square.
Is that not "iffy"?
According to Dolphin Square, Dolphin Square is "LONDON'S MOST DISTINGUISHED RENTAL ADDRESS"
*{scans down page}*
Jeeeeesus. £450 a WEEK for a 460 sqft 1 bed flat...
Quite a lot of posh London areas are hotspots for crime, Kenton, for example.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
Wasn't there somewhere like that at one time? Dolphin Square, Court or something like that. Got, after a while, a slightly 'iffy' reputation.
Dolphin Square. But it was never official, just a block used by a lot of MPs because of proximity. And yes it got a seedy rep
Also really ugly
But super convenient. You could walk to Chelsea or the West End.
Only slight downside was that Lupus Street was (and still is I believe) pretty iffy.
Iffy? In what way!? It is the middle of Pimlico!
364 crimes within half a mile in September this year.
If you zoom in on the map, it's just behind Pimlico Academy, and it shows the recorded crimes on the streets around Dolphin Square in one recent month.
There's "violence and sexual offences" recorded on almost every street around Dolphin Square.
Is that not "iffy"?
Not at all, just checked my postcode and it is 421 crimes within half a mile, and it is definitely not dodgy.
For context Buckingham Palace has 375 crimes within half a mile. (Not sure how many might be down to Andy!)
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Ah right. Well I hope that gets sorted asap. You simply cannot beat Walkers cheese & onion crisps when the munchies strike. As so often, the basic no-frills product is the best product.
I have a bar bell crisp strategy. Either Walkers ready salted, or Kettle Sweet Chilli and Cream Cheese. No middle ground.
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Seriously though, what pants-shitting NHS data?
Are we supposed to squash the sombrero for ever?
I don't think we are there yet, but they already have some hospitals beyond overflowing. Remember that Covid and cuts have utterly shagged the system so that everything is backlogged.
The way they set it out was that if we had another surge the NHS would be swamped. Whilst we have seen some encouraging data in the last week it needs to be sustained. If we swing back the other way (and the daily count already has) then we could be in trouble.
That is all they are planning for. Its their jobs. Not sure why planning by NHS managers based on science and live data to avoid massive problems warrants the "get fucked" approach from pray the pox away types. We all want it to be over. Its certainly better than it was. But clearly not over.
I believe the decision to effectively ride the exit wave from July (although not advertised as such), was one of the best decisions this government has made.
For many months now I have been living as if Covid never happened, although I have worn a mask on the tube when I’ve had a cold (but not otherwise).
When I move to New York in January I feel like I’ll be going backwards.
Yup, I've said it a few times - it's the only policy of note for which I can give credit to this shambles of a government.
The decision in most European countries to keep hold of NPIs in the summer while vaccine efficacy was high and delta taking over was poor. I think there is still a lack of understanding that every single person is now going to get COVID at some point in the next year so the race is to vaccinate and protect people from severe symptoms not to prevent them from ever getting it.
Just back from Waitrose and for the first time noticed a serious shortage problem. Many gaps on shelves with apologetic notices in lieu of products. Snacks section particularly denuded. No hula hoops, no crisps apart from poncy rip off brands, not much by way of nuts. Any impact on me? Yes, a very tangible one. Pringles aren't my idea of a taste sensation but I was left with little choice other than to buy some of those. Blow cushioned just slightly by them being on special offer, £1 off.
Is there a particular problem with crisps? There have been almost no Walkers multipacks in both my local Sainsbury's or Asda for the last week or so and generally the snack aisles look like a gang has steamed through and raided everything.
Yes Walkers has a production problem. I don't think it is either Covid or Brexit related, at least not directly.
Too much money on Gary Lineker, and not enough on testing their new IT system before upgrading it.
I believe the decision to effectively ride the exit wave from July (although not advertised as such), was one of the best decisions this government has made.
For many months now I have been living as if Covid never happened, although I have worn a mask on the tube when I’ve had a cold (but not otherwise).
When I move to New York in January I feel like I’ll be going backwards.
The people dying while waiting for an ambulance that is stuck in a queue outside a hospital stuffed with Covid and other patients would probably disagree.
What's striking, comparing the UK to other countries around the world, is how much of a laggard Britain seems to be.
The US economy is now already bigger than it was before the pandemic struck.
France is close to regaining its pre-crisis levels.
Indeed, of the major European countries only Spain remains further from its pre-pandemic GDP than the UK.
The problem for the chancellor is not only does this raise questions about whether Britain's economic measures could have been stronger in helping people get back into work, it all comes ahead of a difficult winter for the economy.
Prices are rising, energy costs are at historic levels and real earnings - wages adjusted for inflation - are stagnating.
In other words, any prospect that strong economic growth could turn into the much-vaunted "feelgood factor" seems to look dim at present.
I suspect the hope was that by lagging behind the rest of the world, Britain would enjoy a larger bounce conveniently timed for the election, though the revised figures suggest even that might be pushing it.
Could be a problem for Sunak
“ONS say that adds up to annualised GDP growth of 5.1%. That's well down from the OBR's revision up to 6.5% for this year at the Budget only two weeks ago. That means less tax takings for Rishi Sunak, so either spending cuts on his plans... or more tax rises (2)”
However post-pandemic growth is going to be super volatile. Could go either way, yet
Q4 looks pretty strong this year and last year we were in lockdown.
Yes, if we stay unlocked down we might see a decent surge. Especially in comparison to parts of Europe. 50,000 cases in Germany yesterday, they will have to bring in strict vaxports nationwide, at the very least.
I read a report that one reason the government has resisted vaxports is the big hit to to the economy they impose. Even a rather mild vaxport scheme would cost the UK £18bn in a few months
Belgium today has the UK equivalent of 90k new cases:
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Moreover, we can assume that similar issues generally affect other nations - but we don't get to see it.
Sure, and the balance of each economy will be different to others. But again again you cannot ignore the unique to GB additional costs and delays and restrictions on top of the global supply fandango. To pretend they aren't there or are no disruption is delusion. It isn't every item imported from everywhere. But it is there. Go ask anyone who imports.
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Seriously though, what pants-shitting NHS data?
Are we supposed to squash the sombrero for ever?
I don't think we are there yet, but they already have some hospitals beyond overflowing. Remember that Covid and cuts have utterly shagged the system so that everything is backlogged.
The way they set it out was that if we had another surge the NHS would be swamped. Whilst we have seen some encouraging data in the last week it needs to be sustained. If we swing back the other way (and the daily count already has) then we could be in trouble.
That is all they are planning for. Its their jobs. Not sure why planning by NHS managers based on science and live data to avoid massive problems warrants the "get fucked" approach from pray the pox away types. We all want it to be over. Its certainly better than it was. But clearly not over.
No, anyone who wants to send us back into lockdown restrictions needs to get fucked.
This needs to be a country with an NHS, not an NHS with a country. If the NHS gets swamped from here, it gets swamped from here. It needs to do the best it can, with the resources it has, and that's that.
Buy a block of basic student like flats. Offer that to MPs to use whilst they're in London. Stick a canteen at the bottom. Job done.
I know you’re being facetious, but I would actually do something like this
But make them big, luxury flats owned by the state in a nice part of Westminster. So the state ultimately gets the capital value of the investment - but the MPs get free accommodation in a very agreeable part of town
It would be a decent perk of the job. All MPs would be equal. No one would be forced to live there but if they decide not to, they won’t get any expenses for somewhere else
Simple.
There was a block of flats at the bottom of Waterloo bridge (Stamford street?) they looked at and passed on. Imperial turned it into student accommodation.
Your proposal seems reasonable. I’d make them 2 bedroom flats (no need to be mean). If MPs want to bring their families to London they can rent a hotel like everyone else.
Yes, no need to scrimp. The taxpayer will benefit as the state will get the capital gain from the property. Spacious 2 bed flats.
Takes away all the hassle of renting in London. You can move in immediately. Day one of Parliament. Don’t like it, fine, don’t live there but you won’t get money for anywhere else
A nice little perk of the job, but impossible to abuse the system. Sorted
Don’t MEPs have something like this? Official apartments owned by the EU? Or maybe they just sleep in their offices. They are known for their selflessness
No.
They just get ~10k Euro per month in their Daily Allowance, which covers accommodation and related costs.
Paid tax-free into their personal bank account, and from which they pay their staff and expenses.
None of this having to actually account for the spending stuff.
Imo that is a feature, not a bug. We should pay our MPs allowances, not expenses, and let them worry spend it how they like (although imo we should also centralise supply and support of IT and similar). It might even be cheaper as we'd not need to audit expense claims if there are none.
Great idea, so long as other small businesses are subject to the same level of compliance and audit as the MPs.
I suggested at the end of the last thread that we should be congratulating Cox on both his contributions to the trade deficit and the fiscal deficit. The man will be paying enough tax to cover his MP salary several times over. So the Commons and his constituents get the benefits of his considerable knowledge and expertise for free.
MPs who hang around Westminster all the time as unqualified but seriously overpaid social workers contributing nothing to the public good should really stand in awe and hang their heads in shame.
And it's not just the tax that he's paying.
His clients pay VAT on top of his charges for his services, which I think should appear at least parenthetically in his credit column.
I believe the decision to effectively ride the exit wave from July (although not advertised as such), was one of the best decisions this government has made.
For many months now I have been living as if Covid never happened, although I have worn a mask on the tube when I’ve had a cold (but not otherwise).
When I move to New York in January I feel like I’ll be going backwards.
The people dying while waiting for an ambulance that is stuck in a queue outside a hospital stuffed with Covid and other patients would probably disagree.
I would be interested to see some reports of this, if you can share?
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Seriously though, what pants-shitting NHS data?
Are we supposed to squash the sombrero for ever?
I don't think we are there yet, but they already have some hospitals beyond overflowing. Remember that Covid and cuts have utterly shagged the system so that everything is backlogged.
The way they set it out was that if we had another surge the NHS would be swamped. Whilst we have seen some encouraging data in the last week it needs to be sustained. If we swing back the other way (and the daily count already has) then we could be in trouble.
That is all they are planning for. Its their jobs. Not sure why planning by NHS managers based on science and live data to avoid massive problems warrants the "get fucked" approach from pray the pox away types. We all want it to be over. Its certainly better than it was. But clearly not over.
No, anyone who wants to send us back into lockdown restrictions needs to get fucked.
This needs to be a country with an NHS, not an NHS with a country. If the NHS gets swamped from here, it gets swamped from here. It needs to do the best it can, with the resources it has, and that's that.
I believe the decision to effectively ride the exit wave from July (although not advertised as such), was one of the best decisions this government has made.
For many months now I have been living as if Covid never happened, although I have worn a mask on the tube when I’ve had a cold (but not otherwise).
When I move to New York in January I feel like I’ll be going backwards.
The people dying while waiting for an ambulance that is stuck in a queue outside a hospital stuffed with Covid and other patients would probably disagree.
Isn't the point that countries which held onto their NPIs are about to also go through this anyway? Looking across at Germany it is definitely going to happen exactly as you describe, yet they have got NPIs and we haven't. I think we need to be realistic and understand that there's no escaping COVID and there's no escaping the exit wave.
I believe the decision to effectively ride the exit wave from July (although not advertised as such), was one of the best decisions this government has made.
For many months now I have been living as if Covid never happened, although I have worn a mask on the tube when I’ve had a cold (but not otherwise).
When I move to New York in January I feel like I’ll be going backwards.
The people dying while waiting for an ambulance that is stuck in a queue outside a hospital stuffed with Covid and other patients would probably disagree.
I would be interested to see some reports of this, if you can share?
I suggested at the end of the last thread that we should be congratulating Cox on both his contributions to the trade deficit and the fiscal deficit. The man will be paying enough tax to cover his MP salary several times over. So the Commons and his constituents get the benefits of his considerable knowledge and expertise for free.
MPs who hang around Westminster all the time as unqualified but seriously overpaid social workers contributing nothing to the public good should really stand in awe and hang their heads in shame.
And it's not just the tax that he's paying.
His clients pay VAT on top of his charges for his services, which I think should appear at least parenthetically in his credit column.
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Seriously though, what pants-shitting NHS data?
Are we supposed to squash the sombrero for ever?
I don't think we are there yet, but they already have some hospitals beyond overflowing. Remember that Covid and cuts have utterly shagged the system so that everything is backlogged.
The way they set it out was that if we had another surge the NHS would be swamped. Whilst we have seen some encouraging data in the last week it needs to be sustained. If we swing back the other way (and the daily count already has) then we could be in trouble.
That is all they are planning for. Its their jobs. Not sure why planning by NHS managers based on science and live data to avoid massive problems warrants the "get fucked" approach from pray the pox away types. We all want it to be over. Its certainly better than it was. But clearly not over.
No, anyone who wants to send us back into lockdown restrictions needs to get fucked.
This needs to be a country with an NHS, not an NHS with a country. If the NHS gets swamped from here, it gets swamped from here. It needs to do the best it can, with the resources it has, and that's that.
What a heartless, selfish prick you are.
Because lockdowns are cost-free?
What a heartless, selfish prick you are.
People die, it happens, get over it already. You can fuck right off with your sanctimonious bullshit, sacrificing children's education and the rest of the lockdown effects are not a price worth paying to prevent some inevitable deaths, especially post-vaccines.
I believe the decision to effectively ride the exit wave from July (although not advertised as such), was one of the best decisions this government has made.
For many months now I have been living as if Covid never happened, although I have worn a mask on the tube when I’ve had a cold (but not otherwise).
When I move to New York in January I feel like I’ll be going backwards.
The people dying while waiting for an ambulance that is stuck in a queue outside a hospital stuffed with Covid and other patients would probably disagree.
They might, but that's no reason to keep the rest of us locked down.
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Moreover, we can assume that similar issues generally affect other nations - but we don't get to see it.
Sure, and the balance of each economy will be different to others. But again again you cannot ignore the unique to GB additional costs and delays and restrictions on top of the global supply fandango. To pretend they aren't there or are no disruption is delusion. It isn't every item imported from everywhere. But it is there. Go ask anyone who imports.
If you mean Brexit, then I wold agree that it is not helping the recovery. I don't really think you see it in these figures though.
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
It's to do with where the quarterly measure starts I think. The monthly measure compares to Feb 2020 and the quarterly one compares to December 2019.
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
And when the main advocate of Plan B remains Whitty / Taylor et al looking at pants-shitting NHS data? We don't need it now. We might do in a few weeks unless we see a sustained drop on all metrics.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Seriously though, what pants-shitting NHS data?
Are we supposed to squash the sombrero for ever?
I don't think we are there yet, but they already have some hospitals beyond overflowing. Remember that Covid and cuts have utterly shagged the system so that everything is backlogged.
The way they set it out was that if we had another surge the NHS would be swamped. Whilst we have seen some encouraging data in the last week it needs to be sustained. If we swing back the other way (and the daily count already has) then we could be in trouble.
That is all they are planning for. Its their jobs. Not sure why planning by NHS managers based on science and live data to avoid massive problems warrants the "get fucked" approach from pray the pox away types. We all want it to be over. Its certainly better than it was. But clearly not over.
No, anyone who wants to send us back into lockdown restrictions needs to get fucked.
This needs to be a country with an NHS, not an NHS with a country. If the NHS gets swamped from here, it gets swamped from here. It needs to do the best it can, with the resources it has, and that's that.
You do accept though that your "fuck the NHS" approach isn't widely shared?
Comments
I read a report that one reason the government has resisted vaxports is the big hit to to the economy they impose. Even a rather mild vaxport scheme would cost the UK £18bn in a few months
Same as the companies with ‘rich’ directors who put staff on furlough during the pandemic, who still appear from time to time in the papers.
No, wait.....
Rishi is positioning.
Honestly, Sunak is as far from these effete self-aggrandising idiots in most of the rest of the cabinet as you can get.
He doesn't need to do corruption. He already has all the cash
Ditto China. It’s a global ting
The whole point of vaccines is to enable us to return to normal, not to enable the state to LARP as the Chinese Communist Party.
If he already had a tenant when he became an MP then it would be unreasonable to expect the tenant to be evicted, but otherwise I would see it as an abuse of the system.
Any MP that claims in the Register that their role is "providing strategic advice" to a profit-making concern is, in all likelihood, raking in money in exchange for influence on government decision-making, and is therefore corrupt. Easy.
A man earning £millions and he expects taxpayers on the minimum wage to pay for his accommodation in a city where he owns a flat? Unbelievable greed, and shocked to see anyone defending it on here. He's got to go.
They just get ~10k Euro per month in their Daily Allowance, which covers accommodation and related costs.
“The German Council of Economic Experts, which advises the government, became the latest group to cut its forecasts for growth in Europe’s largest economy on Wednesday, warning that supply problems are taking a greater toll than expected on manufacturers.”
- FT yesterday (££)
"We sacked you because we assumed..."
It's a nice fantasy, but how would you enforce it practically?
Would you sack Chris Bryant for doing the same thing between 2012 and 2017?
What some MEPs do, literally, is sleep in their offices but still claim the enormous daily living expenses. Thus effectively adding €100,000 to their annual salaries. Such nice people
"In 2020 the globally averaged temperature was 1.02 degrees Celsius (1.84 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than the baseline 1951-1980 mean. The last seven years have been the warmest seven years on record. We have to expect that records will continue to be broken!
If Climate Change is of concern to you and you would like to take part in on-line meetings with like-minded people to explore and discuss technological and societal aspects of Global Warming then please join us.
Once a month, on the fourth Wednesday, we link up (via Zoom) for an hour of stimulating videos or talks followed by lively discussions.
Our starting premise is: Man-made climate change is proven beyond doubt, so what can we do individually and as a society?"
Other u3a members made their voices heard about climate change at fringe events at the COP26 Conference in Glasgow sharing their experiences of climate change
I haven't even begun to procrastinate.
He’s got one month to get the Villa ready for a trip to Anfield!
None of this having to actually account for the spending stuff.
Remember that the global logistics map hasn't been redrawn because of Brexit. Where it made sense to ship everything into Rotterdam and then distribute onwards that is still the case. With said delays and costs now applied to the final leg into GB that aren't needed for anywhere else.
Max - do you have much experience as an importer...?
https://www.streetcheck.co.uk/crime/sw1v3er
If you zoom in on the map, it's just behind Pimlico Academy, and it shows the recorded crimes on the streets around Dolphin Square in one recent month.
There's "violence and sexual offences" recorded on almost every street around Dolphin Square.
Is that not "iffy"?
As far as I can tell there are two measures, with different methodologies.
On a quarterly basis, U.K. is the clear laggard of the G7; on a monthly basis there’s not much separating us from France and Germany.
The figures are construed as disappointing, however, and the pound has fallen on the news.
Analysts seem divided on whether we should expect a great Q4 or a sluggish one.
They made their expenses a specially protected secret, with severe penalties for leaking them.
I suspect Newton thought his physics was beyond doubt, and at the time it would have been a reasonable view. But wrong.
Everyone Stop and Think for a minute how egregiously horrible it would be to live and work as a giant community of MPs 5 days a week. Like being on the Apprentice but with less skills and never ending.
Edit - I see @DecrepiterJohnL has answered immediately below
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/07/walkers-crisps-shortage-could-last-until-end-of-month-after-it-glitch
They could choose to do so though.
“But this is not ransom money. This is a debt. An international court has said so. The defence secretary has said so. We should pay it because it is an irritant to relations and whether or not it should be linked to Nazanin’s case, the Iranians certainly do make that linkage.”
So it is ransom money.
I wonder why we didn't clear our debt at the same time as the Americans?
*{scans down page}*
Jeeeeesus. £450 a WEEK for a 460 sqft 1 bed flat...
On Q4, the data is coming in pretty hot, the October indices were much stronger than expected and the real time data for November is a continuation of that with some sings of a pick up in activity. One of the key drivers has been the government standing firm on plan b and lockdown measures. Businesses seem more confident investing this month than they did in September.
The big question mark is still the whole plan b saga, the government needs to stand really firm on it and tell the forever lockdowners to get fucked.
"On the broader point and just reflecting over recent events, I think for us as a government, it’s fair to say that we need to do better than we did last week and we know that."
In one respect this is not surprising. Ministers have admitted that it was a mistake to get MPs to vote for the motion shelving the Owen Paterson report, and so of course the government has to do better. But, because they are coming from a cabinet minster who (at least until now) has not been implicated in controversy about sleaze or second jobs, and one seen as the favourite to be next PM, Sunak’s words also sound like an implied rebuke to Boris Johnson.
Or do nothing as she's an Iranian citizen in Iran.
We should never pay that money as long as Iran is holding hostages though.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/belgium/
Likewise big increases in the Netherlands:
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/netherlands/
The decision there to reimpose restrictions in July looks increasingly dubious.
Nobody sane wants more lockdown or masks. But the people saying that we should ignore the scientists and the NHS managers with their real world data because their personal clicky research / ideology disagrees can, how did you put it, "get fucked".
Zombie Apocalypse!
For many months now I have been living as if Covid never happened, although I have worn a mask on the tube when I’ve had a cold (but not otherwise).
When I move to New York in January I feel like I’ll be going backwards.
Are we supposed to squash the sombrero for ever?
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/articles/measuringmonthlyandquarterlyukgrossdomesticproductduringthecoronaviruscovid19pandemic/2021-11-11
Moreover, we can assume that similar issues generally affect other nations - but we don't get to see it.
(🎻 violin for MPs forced to sell £million London flat shown actual size).
https://www.politico.eu/article/great-britain-boris-johnson-lobby-rules-corruption/
I suggest part at least of the reason is that our FO is still smarting because the Anglo-Persian Oil Company was nationalised and whatever we tried to do about it didn't work.
For context Buckingham Palace has 375 crimes within half a mile. (Not sure how many might be down to Andy!)
The way they set it out was that if we had another surge the NHS would be swamped. Whilst we have seen some encouraging data in the last week it needs to be sustained. If we swing back the other way (and the daily count already has) then we could be in trouble.
That is all they are planning for. Its their jobs. Not sure why planning by NHS managers based on science and live data to avoid massive problems warrants the "get fucked" approach from pray the pox away types. We all want it to be over. Its certainly better than it was. But clearly not over.
The decision in most European countries to keep hold of NPIs in the summer while vaccine efficacy was high and delta taking over was poor. I think there is still a lack of understanding that every single person is now going to get COVID at some point in the next year so the race is to vaccinate and protect people from severe symptoms not to prevent them from ever getting it.
This needs to be a country with an NHS, not an NHS with a country. If the NHS gets swamped from here, it gets swamped from here. It needs to do the best it can, with the resources it has, and that's that.
His clients pay VAT on top of his charges for his services, which I think should appear at least parenthetically in his credit column.
What a heartless, selfish prick you are.
People die, it happens, get over it already. You can fuck right off with your sanctimonious bullshit, sacrificing children's education and the rest of the lockdown effects are not a price worth paying to prevent some inevitable deaths, especially post-vaccines.
NOT allowed into hotels, restaurants, bars, nightclubs, gyms, cinemas, museums or theatres etc – children over 12 are NOT exempt
https://twitter.com/darrenmccaffrey/status/1458739930629382147?s=20