Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Why Boris Johnson and the Tories may soon experience a surge in the polls – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited November 21 in General
Why Boris Johnson and the Tories may soon experience a surge in the polls – politicalbetting.com

Britons are expecting new Covid restrictions to be brought in over the Christmas periodLikely – 54%Unlikely – 30% https://t.co/qGeFQOH94s pic.twitter.com/nAlPJM3vBu

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Test
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 319
    edited November 21
    An optimistic post but based largely on the hope that our 'successful' vaccine rollout will be sufficient.

    I beg to differ. We have been piss-poor on vaccinating children and the booster rollout is slack and sloppy. Like our Leader.

    If we don't impose restrictions hospitalisations and death rates will rise to such a point that people will be venting against Boris Johnson in a far more serious manner.

    We're in for a tough winter I'm afraid.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    edited November 21
    Mercedes strategists effed up again.
    Bottas could have come in a couple of laps back.

    Utterly pointless going over half the race on the first set of tyres.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,571
    FPT:
    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    tlg86 said:



    And what’s the average asset wealth of Tories in those seats? And even that doesn’t matter when the politics of this is: “they’re gonna steal your house.”

    Yes, that's the political problem. If the Opposition is sufficiently unscrupulous (I'm not sure that Starmer is, but the LibDems are), that's going to be the message, and even people in richer areas will recoil. It's the same problem as a wealth tax on £1 million+ assets. Most people don't have that, but the campaign against will imply that they'll somehow be threatened.

    The REAL problem, as Foxy points out, is that hotel costs are not covered. So even people with large houses in the south will tend to lose them anyway from their estates. Nobody I know thinks this is a serious problem, but nobody I know is against IHT - the universal sentiment in my circle is "kids can make their own way, what parents leave is just a possible bonus, and we certainly don't want to live in Mum's house when she goes". But polls show that lots of people think differently.
    Yeah I don't really get it. I think my total inheritance from my grandparents was something like £5k, which disappeared into some renovation work we were doing. I don't expect to inherit anything from my parents, don't need the money now and certainly don't imagine I will need it when they die, which I am hoping won't be for another 10-20 years. I've been putting money into junior ISAs for our kids and I imagine may be providing free board and lodging when they're young adults at some point but don't expect to be providing them with any massive inheritance, and if there is any money left when we die I am guessing they will be in late middle age and hopefully making their own way in the world by then. People shouldn't be expecting bank of mum and dad to be supporting them.
    I also think this idea that it's OK for the government to take 50% of your labour income but terrible for them to take 50% of your (potentially unearned windfall) housing equity *to pay for your own care* a bit weird.
    Likewise - to me it seems like the possible income I'd care least about being taxed: Per pound received it's the least valuable income to me, because I don't know when I'll get it, how much I'll get, or if I'll get it at all since my parents might outlive me, blow it on bad by-election bets or connect me to my pb comments and cut me out of the will.

    I wonder if the opposition is mainly from the old folks rather than the potential recipients; I guess they feel like they've already paid a lot of tax on it, and taking out another chunk when they die feels unsporting. This doesn't apply to the heir, for whom its income that they only pay tax on once.
    That is entirely consistent with the Tories' concern with what well off house-owning southern pensioners think (even if it is not entirely rational, as you, OLB, Foxy et al point out). This focus is very clear in HYUFD's postings, which are a very helpful guide to Conservative mentality on the issue inso far as it affects a major chunk of their vote

    Yet how this can be done without alienating other components such as northern red waller voterts is an increasingly tricky matter.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/21/has-boris-johnson-crashed-the-tory-car

    "Last week, an announcement on social care further infuriated Tory MPs from less well-off areas, as it meant poorer pensioners paying the same as wealthier people. The idea that a government led by Johnson would be progressive had fallen victim again to lack of money and the Treasury’s wariness of further tax rises. Senior backbenchers such as Damian Green and former health secretary Jeremy Hunt criticised the plan as unprogressive. A Commons rebellion is brewing ahead of a vote on the issue early this week.

    Many of the Tory party’s recent problems can be put down to poor judgments and poor presentation. But as Johnson struggles to keep a grip, it is also becoming clearer that a core problem is that of how to govern for a new, post-2019 coalition of Tory voters that is so wide and disparate, and includes Tory conquests behind the red wall."
    Probably the only way to preserve inheritances in the parts of England outside the home counties would be to use more or less the current system, but instead of preserving the last £26 000, doing so for the last £100 000.

    It does start to sound a lot like Mrs May's 2017 manifesto proposal...
    Given even in the Red Wall the median house price is £160,000 they will still lose £60,000 even on the May plans.

    The Tory core seats in the South however would lose far more given the median house price in seats the Tories held in 2019 is £270,000.
    https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/news/without-a-cap-on-social-care-cost-former-red-wall-seat-residents

    It must also not be forgotten the Conservatives can win enough seats to stay in power without the Red Wall as they did in 2010, 2015 and 2017. Even if they do not win the comfortable majority they won in 2019 with the Red Wall.

    However the Conservatives cannot win without the South and the seats they won in 2017. If Conservative voters go ReformUK over a dementia tax 2 (which even May had to abandon mid campaign in 2017 as it was so unpopular) then Starmer would become PM due to a split vote on the right
    The problem with your mathematics is this average business, OK 'median' business. But what is the true distribution?

    The median gender for the UK is, of course, hermaphrodite (actually let's say around 52% female to 48% male).



  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    Carnyx said:

    FPT:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    Carnyx said:

    tlg86 said:



    And what’s the average asset wealth of Tories in those seats? And even that doesn’t matter when the politics of this is: “they’re gonna steal your house.”

    Yes, that's the political problem. If the Opposition is sufficiently unscrupulous (I'm not sure that Starmer is, but the LibDems are), that's going to be the message, and even people in richer areas will recoil. It's the same problem as a wealth tax on £1 million+ assets. Most people don't have that, but the campaign against will imply that they'll somehow be threatened.

    The REAL problem, as Foxy points out, is that hotel costs are not covered. So even people with large houses in the south will tend to lose them anyway from their estates. Nobody I know thinks this is a serious problem, but nobody I know is against IHT - the universal sentiment in my circle is "kids can make their own way, what parents leave is just a possible bonus, and we certainly don't want to live in Mum's house when she goes". But polls show that lots of people think differently.
    Yeah I don't really get it. I think my total inheritance from my grandparents was something like £5k, which disappeared into some renovation work we were doing. I don't expect to inherit anything from my parents, don't need the money now and certainly don't imagine I will need it when they die, which I am hoping won't be for another 10-20 years. I've been putting money into junior ISAs for our kids and I imagine may be providing free board and lodging when they're young adults at some point but don't expect to be providing them with any massive inheritance, and if there is any money left when we die I am guessing they will be in late middle age and hopefully making their own way in the world by then. People shouldn't be expecting bank of mum and dad to be supporting them.
    I also think this idea that it's OK for the government to take 50% of your labour income but terrible for them to take 50% of your (potentially unearned windfall) housing equity *to pay for your own care* a bit weird.
    Likewise - to me it seems like the possible income I'd care least about being taxed: Per pound received it's the least valuable income to me, because I don't know when I'll get it, how much I'll get, or if I'll get it at all since my parents might outlive me, blow it on bad by-election bets or connect me to my pb comments and cut me out of the will.

    I wonder if the opposition is mainly from the old folks rather than the potential recipients; I guess they feel like they've already paid a lot of tax on it, and taking out another chunk when they die feels unsporting. This doesn't apply to the heir, for whom its income that they only pay tax on once.
    That is entirely consistent with the Tories' concern with what well off house-owning southern pensioners think (even if it is not entirely rational, as you, OLB, Foxy et al point out). This focus is very clear in HYUFD's postings, which are a very helpful guide to Conservative mentality on the issue inso far as it affects a major chunk of their vote

    Yet how this can be done without alienating other components such as northern red waller voterts is an increasingly tricky matter.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/21/has-boris-johnson-crashed-the-tory-car

    "Last week, an announcement on social care further infuriated Tory MPs from less well-off areas, as it meant poorer pensioners paying the same as wealthier people. The idea that a government led by Johnson would be progressive had fallen victim again to lack of money and the Treasury’s wariness of further tax rises. Senior backbenchers such as Damian Green and former health secretary Jeremy Hunt criticised the plan as unprogressive. A Commons rebellion is brewing ahead of a vote on the issue early this week.

    Many of the Tory party’s recent problems can be put down to poor judgments and poor presentation. But as Johnson struggles to keep a grip, it is also becoming clearer that a core problem is that of how to govern for a new, post-2019 coalition of Tory voters that is so wide and disparate, and includes Tory conquests behind the red wall."
    Probably the only way to preserve inheritances in the parts of England outside the home counties would be to use more or less the current system, but instead of preserving the last £26 000, doing so for the last £100 000.

    It does start to sound a lot like Mrs May's 2017 manifesto proposal...
    Given even in the Red Wall the median house price is £160,000 they will still lose £60,000 even on the May plans.

    The Tory core seats in the South however would lose far more given the median house price in seats the Tories held in 2019 is £270,000.
    https://www.health.org.uk/news-and-comment/news/without-a-cap-on-social-care-cost-former-red-wall-seat-residents

    It must also not be forgotten the Conservatives can win enough seats to stay in power without the Red Wall as they did in 2010, 2015 and 2017. Even if they do not win the comfortable majority they won in 2019 with the Red Wall.

    However the Conservatives cannot win without the South and the seats they won in 2017. If Conservative voters go ReformUK over a dementia tax 2 (which even May had to abandon mid campaign in 2017 as it was so unpopular) then Starmer would become PM due to a split vote on the right
    The problem with your mathematics is this average business, OK 'median' business. But what is the true distribution?

    The median gender for the UK is, of course, hermaphrodite (actually let's say around 52% female to 48% male).



    @HYUFD doesn’t understanding statistics we know this
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 319
    edited November 21
    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,561
    Ha ha ha.

    Voters are increasingly able to tell the difference between accident and design.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,743
    edited November 21
    Heathener said:

    An optimistic post but based largely on the hope that our 'successful' vaccine rollout will be sufficient.

    I beg to differ. We have been piss-poor on vaccinating children and the booster rollout is slack and sloppy. Like our Leader.

    If we don't impose restrictions hospitalisations and death rates will rise to such a point that people will be venting against Boris Johnson in a far more serious manner.

    We're in for a tough winter I'm afraid.

    Even if Winter does become tough, I don't see any further restrictions in England. Johnson will tough it out. A higher death rate is less of a political issue than wearing a mask or signing into a pub. We have already seen 200 UK deaths a day is non problematic. I doubt doubling it would raise an eyebrow.

    The fly in the ointment might be the NHS falling over for a combination of Covid, flu and other assorted ailments.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,579
    Heathener said:

    An optimistic post but based largely on the hope that our 'successful' vaccine rollout will be sufficient.

    I beg to differ. We have been piss-poor on vaccinating children and the booster rollout is slack and sloppy. Like our Leader.

    If we don't impose restrictions hospitalisations and death rates will rise to such a point that people will be venting against Boris Johnson in a far more serious manner.

    We're in for a tough winter I'm afraid.

    Not vaccinating the children is on the jcvi, and no one else. They deliberately prevaricated for months. The boosters? Haven’t we now done 15,000,000 of them? I think your bias is clouding your judgement.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,632
    Heathener said:

    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.

    We've vaccinated and now boosted the right people and the young have now had it in very large numbers.

    It's difficult to see where cases will come from.

    But there's been twists before with this bugger.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,579
    Heathener said:

    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.

    What is going to cause the surge? Opening up, as is happening in Europe? Oh wait, we did that in July. We have endured higher cases and, yes, deaths than other countries for months, but it’s likely this will help us now, in the depths of winter.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,544
    edited November 21
    Heathener said:

    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.

    "I don't think there's any match from polling to covid"


  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,823
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    murali_s said:

    People calling London a "shitheap". Surely some mistake? London is a great World City - arguable the best city in the World. Places like Scunthorpe, Hartlepool, Middlesborough are the real shitheaps - miserable places with miserable uneducated bigotted trash who reside there?

    What a disgusting post

    Ordinary hard working people with families live in these areas and are the salt of the earth

    Who on earth do you think you are
    Are you going to call out Yduffer for calling London a shit heap though? (you don't have to, of course, because we all know it isn't).
    The difference is between calling London a shitheap (I live in London but prefer the country, but it’s not a shitheap IMV) and being offensive about the people who live there.

    There are parts of central London which are absolutely world class - I really enjoy visits. And not just the bustling bits, there are some genuinely quiet neighbourhoods inside the circle line But the surrounding endless grim suburbia is seriously grim. Some of it painfully so, made worse by the absurd money that is asked of people to live there.
    When Charles says 'London' he's thinking of the view over Regent's Park from St John's Wood, not of Ilford or Edmonton or Peckham or Hounslow.
    I'd rather live in Peckham than St John's Wood. I virtually do live in Peckham in fact, SE15 is just a couple of streets over.
    Suburbia isn't grim, it's an oasis of parks and gardens, with thriving communities, friendly neighbours, decent schools, independent shops and restaurants, a plethora of activities for children, a thriving arts scene and reasonable commutes to work in Central London. It's only over priced because it's popular.
    The only thing that could improve London? If we could spend more of our money on London and less on subsidising people whose main leisure activity is sagging off London.
    The old chestnut that London funds the rest of the country rather than the reality that it sucks the life blood out of it and no matter how much is spent there compared to the rest of the country the selfish arseholes are never happy. Full of me me me parasites and bloodsuckers.
    The numbers speak for themselves. Londoners pay thousands of pounds more in tax than they receive back in government spending. That's just a fact, sorry if it's inconvenient.
    I'm very happy. I don't even mind subsidising the rest of the country. I'm not from London, I still have plenty of love for the rest of the UK, including the country of my birth (the same one as yours). I'm just sick of being told how awful we are and what a shit hole I live in by people who are taking my money.
    I don't mind the people in London. It's just the city itself is awful. Look at it with a cold eye. Unplanned, appallingly cramped, mostly full of third-rate Victorian architecture, overpriced, brutally congested, dirty, noisy and smelly, full of restaurants that offer food no better than anywhere else in the country but provide half the quantity at double the price - if I'm honest, that's particularly what I remember about being an impoverished student there.

    That's even before we get on to the issue of its woefully inadequate utilities network, which means it is chronically short of water, and the bizarre public transport system which nobody would probably use if it wasn't for the fact the roads are so twisty it takes even longer to walk than to take the sardine can, er, underground.

    (Your other point is wrong as well, incidentally, as the town I work in is a net contributor to the treasury, so I'm not taking your money.)

    If you like it, fine. You're welcome. Means I don't have to live there, which I'm even happier about because it's just not a nice place to be.

    Edit - I will admit I do find it annoying when people preach at me that I should love London because it 'subsidises everywhere else.' From that point of view, you should love all farmers in Oxfordshire because they allow the residue from your treated sewage to be spread on their fields. Or the people of the Thames Valley for providing you with water.
    I don't want love, indifference would be fine. It's the constant compulsive slagging off of London by people who don't live in London, don't know London and seem convinced that London is leeching off them that I find so monumentally boring, especially as there are things in London that need money spent on them, but apparently there's no money.
    Most of the horrible things you attribute to London could be applied to more or less every town and city in Britain. We live in a country built by the Victorians in a hurry and on the cheap and have been living with the consequences ever since.
    London's most immediate problem (and it's one that is going to scare Khan and TFL in the new future) is that there is no way Boris can agree to given TFL the money it needs to survive now.

    So TFL is going to have to start working out how to rapidly cut costs...

    Separately, the whole point of investing up North is that for a one off sum of money (albeit a lot) is that by making the north more efficient there should would be more tax revenue generated up north.
    Perhaps a serendipitous kick up the Rs will encourage Mayor Sadiq to discover some appropropriate moral courage, and first of all follow Paris in dealing with inefficiency in the tube system, and then to address the phalanxes of overpaid managers in TFL.

    They are at last a decade behind Paris.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20985642
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 15,348
    Top tip:

    Beware of living downwind of someone with lots of big trees in their garden.

    Although an hour of raking and shoveling leaves is good exercise.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,571

    Top tip:

    Beware of living downwind of someone with lots of big trees in their garden.

    Although an hour of raking and shoveling leaves is good exercise.

    Too true. MY late father's neighbour has a huge sycamore. The real problems come in mast years, where it seeds absolutely everywhere.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 1,503
    Heathener said:

    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.

    I recall you making the same argument in the summer as we headed into another lockdown.

    Oh. We didn’t.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,823
    Heathener said:

    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.

    Huh?

    The continent has so far been 4-12 weeks lagging the UK, including getting in gear with vax research/manufacture/procurement, and in the boosters which were necessary hear earlier as the first doses wore off earlier.

    Vaccinating children early is perhaps the one thing we delayed, with a case on both sides.
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    edited November 21
    MattW said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    murali_s said:

    People calling London a "shitheap". Surely some mistake? London is a great World City - arguable the best city in the World. Places like Scunthorpe, Hartlepool, Middlesborough are the real shitheaps - miserable places with miserable uneducated bigotted trash who reside there?

    What a disgusting post

    Ordinary hard working people with families live in these areas and are the salt of the earth

    Who on earth do you think you are
    Are you going to call out Yduffer for calling London a shit heap though? (you don't have to, of course, because we all know it isn't).
    The difference is between calling London a shitheap (I live in London but prefer the country, but it’s not a shitheap IMV) and being offensive about the people who live there.

    There are parts of central London which are absolutely world class - I really enjoy visits. And not just the bustling bits, there are some genuinely quiet neighbourhoods inside the circle line But the surrounding endless grim suburbia is seriously grim. Some of it painfully so, made worse by the absurd money that is asked of people to live there.
    When Charles says 'London' he's thinking of the view over Regent's Park from St John's Wood, not of Ilford or Edmonton or Peckham or Hounslow.
    I'd rather live in Peckham than St John's Wood. I virtually do live in Peckham in fact, SE15 is just a couple of streets over.
    Suburbia isn't grim, it's an oasis of parks and gardens, with thriving communities, friendly neighbours, decent schools, independent shops and restaurants, a plethora of activities for children, a thriving arts scene and reasonable commutes to work in Central London. It's only over priced because it's popular.
    The only thing that could improve London? If we could spend more of our money on London and less on subsidising people whose main leisure activity is sagging off London.
    The old chestnut that London funds the rest of the country rather than the reality that it sucks the life blood out of it and no matter how much is spent there compared to the rest of the country the selfish arseholes are never happy. Full of me me me parasites and bloodsuckers.
    The numbers speak for themselves. Londoners pay thousands of pounds more in tax than they receive back in government spending. That's just a fact, sorry if it's inconvenient.
    I'm very happy. I don't even mind subsidising the rest of the country. I'm not from London, I still have plenty of love for the rest of the UK, including the country of my birth (the same one as yours). I'm just sick of being told how awful we are and what a shit hole I live in by people who are taking my money.
    I don't mind the people in London. It's just the city itself is awful. Look at it with a cold eye. Unplanned, appallingly cramped, mostly full of third-rate Victorian architecture, overpriced, brutally congested, dirty, noisy and smelly, full of restaurants that offer food no better than anywhere else in the country but provide half the quantity at double the price - if I'm honest, that's particularly what I remember about being an impoverished student there.

    That's even before we get on to the issue of its woefully inadequate utilities network, which means it is chronically short of water, and the bizarre public transport system which nobody would probably use if it wasn't for the fact the roads are so twisty it takes even longer to walk than to take the sardine can, er, underground.

    (Your other point is wrong as well, incidentally, as the town I work in is a net contributor to the treasury, so I'm not taking your money.)

    If you like it, fine. You're welcome. Means I don't have to live there, which I'm even happier about because it's just not a nice place to be.

    Edit - I will admit I do find it annoying when people preach at me that I should love London because it 'subsidises everywhere else.' From that point of view, you should love all farmers in Oxfordshire because they allow the residue from your treated sewage to be spread on their fields. Or the people of the Thames Valley for providing you with water.
    I don't want love, indifference would be fine. It's the constant compulsive slagging off of London by people who don't live in London, don't know London and seem convinced that London is leeching off them that I find so monumentally boring, especially as there are things in London that need money spent on them, but apparently there's no money.
    Most of the horrible things you attribute to London could be applied to more or less every town and city in Britain. We live in a country built by the Victorians in a hurry and on the cheap and have been living with the consequences ever since.
    London's most immediate problem (and it's one that is going to scare Khan and TFL in the new future) is that there is no way Boris can agree to given TFL the money it needs to survive now.

    So TFL is going to have to start working out how to rapidly cut costs...

    Separately, the whole point of investing up North is that for a one off sum of money (albeit a lot) is that by making the north more efficient there should would be more tax revenue generated up north.
    Perhaps a serendipitous kick up the Rs will encourage Mayor Sadiq to discover some appropropriate moral courage, and first of all follow Paris in dealing with inefficiency in the tube system, and then to address the phalanxes of overpaid managers in TFL.

    They are at last a decade behind Paris.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20985642
    All that requires is rebuilding the underground to allow barriers between the train and track - which costs big money (and remember there is NO money).

    https://www.londonreconnections.com/2021/the-political-myth-of-the-driverless-tube-train/ is an explanation as to why driverless trains aren't the solution people think they are.

    Nice line in there from the London's 2008-2016 Mayor in that report

    “I would rather prioritise capacity… ”
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 15,571
    eek said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    murali_s said:

    People calling London a "shitheap". Surely some mistake? London is a great World City - arguable the best city in the World. Places like Scunthorpe, Hartlepool, Middlesborough are the real shitheaps - miserable places with miserable uneducated bigotted trash who reside there?

    What a disgusting post

    Ordinary hard working people with families live in these areas and are the salt of the earth

    Who on earth do you think you are
    Are you going to call out Yduffer for calling London a shit heap though? (you don't have to, of course, because we all know it isn't).
    The difference is between calling London a shitheap (I live in London but prefer the country, but it’s not a shitheap IMV) and being offensive about the people who live there.

    There are parts of central London which are absolutely world class - I really enjoy visits. And not just the bustling bits, there are some genuinely quiet neighbourhoods inside the circle line But the surrounding endless grim suburbia is seriously grim. Some of it painfully so, made worse by the absurd money that is asked of people to live there.
    When Charles says 'London' he's thinking of the view over Regent's Park from St John's Wood, not of Ilford or Edmonton or Peckham or Hounslow.
    I'd rather live in Peckham than St John's Wood. I virtually do live in Peckham in fact, SE15 is just a couple of streets over.
    Suburbia isn't grim, it's an oasis of parks and gardens, with thriving communities, friendly neighbours, decent schools, independent shops and restaurants, a plethora of activities for children, a thriving arts scene and reasonable commutes to work in Central London. It's only over priced because it's popular.
    The only thing that could improve London? If we could spend more of our money on London and less on subsidising people whose main leisure activity is sagging off London.
    The old chestnut that London funds the rest of the country rather than the reality that it sucks the life blood out of it and no matter how much is spent there compared to the rest of the country the selfish arseholes are never happy. Full of me me me parasites and bloodsuckers.
    The numbers speak for themselves. Londoners pay thousands of pounds more in tax than they receive back in government spending. That's just a fact, sorry if it's inconvenient.
    I'm very happy. I don't even mind subsidising the rest of the country. I'm not from London, I still have plenty of love for the rest of the UK, including the country of my birth (the same one as yours). I'm just sick of being told how awful we are and what a shit hole I live in by people who are taking my money.
    I don't mind the people in London. It's just the city itself is awful. Look at it with a cold eye. Unplanned, appallingly cramped, mostly full of third-rate Victorian architecture, overpriced, brutally congested, dirty, noisy and smelly, full of restaurants that offer food no better than anywhere else in the country but provide half the quantity at double the price - if I'm honest, that's particularly what I remember about being an impoverished student there.

    That's even before we get on to the issue of its woefully inadequate utilities network, which means it is chronically short of water, and the bizarre public transport system which nobody would probably use if it wasn't for the fact the roads are so twisty it takes even longer to walk than to take the sardine can, er, underground.

    (Your other point is wrong as well, incidentally, as the town I work in is a net contributor to the treasury, so I'm not taking your money.)

    If you like it, fine. You're welcome. Means I don't have to live there, which I'm even happier about because it's just not a nice place to be.

    Edit - I will admit I do find it annoying when people preach at me that I should love London because it 'subsidises everywhere else.' From that point of view, you should love all farmers in Oxfordshire because they allow the residue from your treated sewage to be spread on their fields. Or the people of the Thames Valley for providing you with water.
    I don't want love, indifference would be fine. It's the constant compulsive slagging off of London by people who don't live in London, don't know London and seem convinced that London is leeching off them that I find so monumentally boring, especially as there are things in London that need money spent on them, but apparently there's no money.
    Most of the horrible things you attribute to London could be applied to more or less every town and city in Britain. We live in a country built by the Victorians in a hurry and on the cheap and have been living with the consequences ever since.
    London's most immediate problem (and it's one that is going to scare Khan and TFL in the new future) is that there is no way Boris can agree to given TFL the money it needs to survive now.

    So TFL is going to have to start working out how to rapidly cut costs...

    Separately, the whole point of investing up North is that for a one off sum of money (albeit a lot) is that by making the north more efficient there should would be more tax revenue generated up north.
    Perhaps a serendipitous kick up the Rs will encourage Mayor Sadiq to discover some appropropriate moral courage, and first of all follow Paris in dealing with inefficiency in the tube system, and then to address the phalanxes of overpaid managers in TFL.

    They are at last a decade behind Paris.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20985642
    All that requires is rebuilding the underground to allow barriers between the train and track - which costs big money (and remember there is NO money).

    https://www.londonreconnections.com/2021/the-political-myth-of-the-driverless-tube-train/ is an explanation as to why driverless trains aren't the solution people think they are.

    Nice line in there from the London's 2008-2016 Mayor in that report

    “I would rather prioritise capacity… ”
    I enjoyed that!

    'Indeed one could argue that the most effective Turing Test in the world right now would be to ask a computer to successfully operate (in every sense of that word) a Metropolitan line train. It may well happen one day, but unfortunately at that point the first thing the now-sentient AI will likely do on completion of its first shift is go join a union.'
  • isamisam Posts: 38,544
    edited November 21
    A new spectator sport has emerged — and it’s destroying our way of life
    As Azeem Rafiq has found, private messages have become a vast database of potential recrimination

    Matthew Syed

    “For what, today, constitutes a private life? I can categorically say that I have said things in person or via text to my wife and friends which, if surgically removed from context, and cobbled together with other comments designed to incriminate, would eviscerate my reputation. I have made off-colour jokes, barbed criticisms of my editors, and claims on sensitive subjects — trans rights, racism — that I don’t necessarily believe, but which were about letting off steam, and inviting challenge.

    Isn’t this what John Locke meant when he talked about the sanctity of private life, a space to debate and discuss, to learn from criticism and feedback, thus enabling one to reach more considered positions? The court of Twitter makes no such distinctions, however. Whispered conversions are turned into battering rams. Private text messages become de facto suicide notes.”

    https://t.co/u6EPBfM35x
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    Mercedes stupid not to tell Lewis to bank a fastest lap
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 25,493

    Heathener said:

    An optimistic post but based largely on the hope that our 'successful' vaccine rollout will be sufficient.

    I beg to differ. We have been piss-poor on vaccinating children and the booster rollout is slack and sloppy. Like our Leader.

    If we don't impose restrictions hospitalisations and death rates will rise to such a point that people will be venting against Boris Johnson in a far more serious manner.

    We're in for a tough winter I'm afraid.

    Even if Winter does become tough, I don't see any further restrictions in England. Johnson will tough it out. A higher death rate is less of a political issue than wearing a mask or signing into a pub. We have already seen 200 UK deaths a day is non problematic. I doubt doubling it would raise an eyebrow.

    The fly in the ointment might be the NHS falling over for a combination of Covid, flu and other assorted ailments.
    Agreed. No new restrictions barring something very unforeseen, and if the public think there will be that's good for the government when there aren't. But this could be negated by a steady stream of NHS news that's so bad the public get to thinking there should have been some restrictions.

    Also in the pipeline is a rerun of last year's 'Will there be a deal with the EU or not?' seasonal drama. This time on NI and with 'We are prepared to walk away' replaced in the bombastic bullshit stakes by 'We are prepared to trigger Article 16'. Otherwise same script, inevitable compromise deal announced on or around Christmas Eve and presented as a triumph for Johnson and his 'take no shit from Brussels' negotiating balls of steel.

    Will it work again and put a couple of points on the polls? I really don't know. Suppose it could.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,022
    Heathener said:

    the booster rollout is slack and sloppy.

    Really?



  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    edited November 21

    Mercedes stupid not to tell Lewis to bank a fastest lap

    No, Verstappen was always going to be able to pit just before the last lap, so there was no real chance.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    Nigelb said:

    Mercedes stupid not to tell Lewis to bank a fastest lap

    No, Verstappen was always going to be able to pit just before the last lap, s there was no real chance.
    There was always the danger of a safety car or yellow flags
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,022
    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.

    the boosters which were necessary hear earlier as the first doses wore off earlier.
    Given much of the continent stuck to the (less effective) short dosing gap, I'm not sure our vaccine effectiveness decline will have been much ahead of them. Added to which the NHS was a lot more effective in prioritising the more vulnerable first than for example, France, which has been ahead of us on vaccinating teenagers, but behind us on older cohorts:




  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074
    edited November 21

    Nigelb said:

    Mercedes stupid not to tell Lewis to bank a fastest lap

    No, Verstappen was always going to be able to pit just before the last lap, s there was no real chance.
    There was always the danger of a safety car or yellow flags
    Pushing for a fastest lap means riding the kerbs - and as we've seen that's an unnecessary risk at this point.

    Shoutout for Alonso, though.
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    Carnyx said:

    eek said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    murali_s said:

    People calling London a "shitheap". Surely some mistake? London is a great World City - arguable the best city in the World. Places like Scunthorpe, Hartlepool, Middlesborough are the real shitheaps - miserable places with miserable uneducated bigotted trash who reside there?

    What a disgusting post

    Ordinary hard working people with families live in these areas and are the salt of the earth

    Who on earth do you think you are
    Are you going to call out Yduffer for calling London a shit heap though? (you don't have to, of course, because we all know it isn't).
    The difference is between calling London a shitheap (I live in London but prefer the country, but it’s not a shitheap IMV) and being offensive about the people who live there.

    There are parts of central London which are absolutely world class - I really enjoy visits. And not just the bustling bits, there are some genuinely quiet neighbourhoods inside the circle line But the surrounding endless grim suburbia is seriously grim. Some of it painfully so, made worse by the absurd money that is asked of people to live there.
    When Charles says 'London' he's thinking of the view over Regent's Park from St John's Wood, not of Ilford or Edmonton or Peckham or Hounslow.
    I'd rather live in Peckham than St John's Wood. I virtually do live in Peckham in fact, SE15 is just a couple of streets over.
    Suburbia isn't grim, it's an oasis of parks and gardens, with thriving communities, friendly neighbours, decent schools, independent shops and restaurants, a plethora of activities for children, a thriving arts scene and reasonable commutes to work in Central London. It's only over priced because it's popular.
    The only thing that could improve London? If we could spend more of our money on London and less on subsidising people whose main leisure activity is sagging off London.
    The old chestnut that London funds the rest of the country rather than the reality that it sucks the life blood out of it and no matter how much is spent there compared to the rest of the country the selfish arseholes are never happy. Full of me me me parasites and bloodsuckers.
    The numbers speak for themselves. Londoners pay thousands of pounds more in tax than they receive back in government spending. That's just a fact, sorry if it's inconvenient.
    I'm very happy. I don't even mind subsidising the rest of the country. I'm not from London, I still have plenty of love for the rest of the UK, including the country of my birth (the same one as yours). I'm just sick of being told how awful we are and what a shit hole I live in by people who are taking my money.
    I don't mind the people in London. It's just the city itself is awful. Look at it with a cold eye. Unplanned, appallingly cramped, mostly full of third-rate Victorian architecture, overpriced, brutally congested, dirty, noisy and smelly, full of restaurants that offer food no better than anywhere else in the country but provide half the quantity at double the price - if I'm honest, that's particularly what I remember about being an impoverished student there.

    That's even before we get on to the issue of its woefully inadequate utilities network, which means it is chronically short of water, and the bizarre public transport system which nobody would probably use if it wasn't for the fact the roads are so twisty it takes even longer to walk than to take the sardine can, er, underground.

    (Your other point is wrong as well, incidentally, as the town I work in is a net contributor to the treasury, so I'm not taking your money.)

    If you like it, fine. You're welcome. Means I don't have to live there, which I'm even happier about because it's just not a nice place to be.

    Edit - I will admit I do find it annoying when people preach at me that I should love London because it 'subsidises everywhere else.' From that point of view, you should love all farmers in Oxfordshire because they allow the residue from your treated sewage to be spread on their fields. Or the people of the Thames Valley for providing you with water.
    I don't want love, indifference would be fine. It's the constant compulsive slagging off of London by people who don't live in London, don't know London and seem convinced that London is leeching off them that I find so monumentally boring, especially as there are things in London that need money spent on them, but apparently there's no money.
    Most of the horrible things you attribute to London could be applied to more or less every town and city in Britain. We live in a country built by the Victorians in a hurry and on the cheap and have been living with the consequences ever since.
    London's most immediate problem (and it's one that is going to scare Khan and TFL in the new future) is that there is no way Boris can agree to given TFL the money it needs to survive now.

    So TFL is going to have to start working out how to rapidly cut costs...

    Separately, the whole point of investing up North is that for a one off sum of money (albeit a lot) is that by making the north more efficient there should would be more tax revenue generated up north.
    Perhaps a serendipitous kick up the Rs will encourage Mayor Sadiq to discover some appropropriate moral courage, and first of all follow Paris in dealing with inefficiency in the tube system, and then to address the phalanxes of overpaid managers in TFL.

    They are at last a decade behind Paris.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20985642
    All that requires is rebuilding the underground to allow barriers between the train and track - which costs big money (and remember there is NO money).

    https://www.londonreconnections.com/2021/the-political-myth-of-the-driverless-tube-train/ is an explanation as to why driverless trains aren't the solution people think they are.

    Nice line in there from the London's 2008-2016 Mayor in that report

    “I would rather prioritise capacity… ”
    I enjoyed that!

    'Indeed one could argue that the most effective Turing Test in the world right now would be to ask a computer to successfully operate (in every sense of that word) a Metropolitan line train. It may well happen one day, but unfortunately at that point the first thing the now-sentient AI will likely do on completion of its first shift is go join a union.'
    I would think that a fully automated Metropolitan line train is easier to build than a fully automated car.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 25,493
    Lewis clear betting fav for WDC now. Quite the turnaround. He touched 7 after the grid penalty last week.
  • TazTaz Posts: 2,476
    Anyone heard from @CorrectHorseBattery recently ? Is he okay ?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,561

    Top tip:

    Beware of living downwind of someone with lots of big trees in their garden.

    Although an hour of raking and shoveling leaves is good exercise.

    Let them rot over the winter; you’re not using the garden out of season, and ultimately it’ll be good for the lawn and plants.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    kinabalu said:

    Lewis clear betting fav for WDC now. Quite the turnaround. He touched 7 after the grid penalty last week.

    I don't see how. Max only needs to beat him once.

    I'm going to put a bet on Max.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,366
    Afternoon all :)

    The truth is for most of us the virus is now in the past as regards the health impacts but in the present as regards the economic impacts. If we are, as the Express claims, going to spend £85 billion on Christmas, the last thing we'll need to hear is story about popular toys or foodstuffs being unavailable or in short supply.

    The next four weeks will be a big test of the "supply chain" and where shortages do occur, you can be assured they will be reported and probably exaggerated (much to the chagrin of the pro-Government posters).

    The evidence therefore is case numbers and vaccination numbers are increasingly less relevant. We are "living with" the virus and will no doubt dutifully troop along for our fourth vaccinations in due time.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    Taz said:

    Anyone heard from @CorrectHorseBattery recently ? Is he okay ?

    Posted last night and said he was up and down but doing OK, I believe.
  • pingping Posts: 1,421
    I don’t think the tories get a “handling covid better than the Europeans” bounce. The electorate tend to be rather ungrateful sods.

    That, and the “NHS breaking under pressure” is only going to weigh on the Tory VI

    I think the real pressure for the blues will come in May of next year, when the cost of living crisis really hits. Especially if the BoE are still playing silly buggers with interest rates.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,370
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. Gate, next two tracks also reckoned to be good for Mercedes. We shall see.

    Quite pleased Alonso did so well.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. Gate, next two tracks also reckoned to be good for Mercedes. We shall see.

    Quite pleased Alonso did so well.

    They need Bottas to get a grip - a Mercedes 1-2 in Jeddah would be huge.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 1,503

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Mr. Gate, next two tracks also reckoned to be good for Mercedes. We shall see.

    Quite pleased Alonso did so well.

    And Hamilton back with his Brazil engine…
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 34,074

    kinabalu said:

    Lewis clear betting fav for WDC now. Quite the turnaround. He touched 7 after the grid penalty last week.

    I don't see how. Max only needs to beat him once.

    I'm going to put a bet on Max.
    Currently the quickest car, which the last couple of tracks ought to favour, and a one race old engine which he didn't use here.
    Of course it could all go pear shaped, but I think he's reasonably the favourite right now.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,743
    kinabalu said:

    Heathener said:

    An optimistic post but based largely on the hope that our 'successful' vaccine rollout will be sufficient.

    I beg to differ. We have been piss-poor on vaccinating children and the booster rollout is slack and sloppy. Like our Leader.

    If we don't impose restrictions hospitalisations and death rates will rise to such a point that people will be venting against Boris Johnson in a far more serious manner.

    We're in for a tough winter I'm afraid.

    Even if Winter does become tough, I don't see any further restrictions in England. Johnson will tough it out. A higher death rate is less of a political issue than wearing a mask or signing into a pub. We have already seen 200 UK deaths a day is non problematic. I doubt doubling it would raise an eyebrow.

    The fly in the ointment might be the NHS falling over for a combination of Covid, flu and other assorted ailments.
    Agreed. No new restrictions barring something very unforeseen, and if the public think there will be that's good for the government when there aren't. But this could be negated by a steady stream of NHS news that's so bad the public get to thinking there should have been some restrictions.

    Also in the pipeline is a rerun of last year's 'Will there be a deal with the EU or not?' seasonal drama. This time on NI and with 'We are prepared to walk away' replaced in the bombastic bullshit stakes by 'We are prepared to trigger Article 16'. Otherwise same script, inevitable compromise deal announced on or around Christmas Eve and presented as a triumph for Johnson and his 'take no shit from Brussels' negotiating balls of steel.

    Will it work again and put a couple of points on the polls? I really don't know. Suppose it could.
    I really don't know how any of it plays out now. Johnson had his bounce for inventing the vaccine, I am unconvinced he gets a rerun of that. I had a scare on Friday. My business partner tested positive (as a result of having to do a RFT to enter a customer's premises) I didn't. I think there will be a lot of this sort of inconvenience in the months ahead, but thankfully no repeat of Christmas 2020 chaos.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    edited November 21
    Nigelb said:

    kinabalu said:

    Lewis clear betting fav for WDC now. Quite the turnaround. He touched 7 after the grid penalty last week.

    I don't see how. Max only needs to beat him once.

    I'm going to put a bet on Max.
    Currently the quickest car, which the last couple of tracks ought to favour, and a one race old engine which he didn't use here.
    Of course it could all go pear shaped, but I think he's reasonably the favourite right now.
    If Lewis wins in Jeddah, Max just needs to touch him in the first corner in Abu Dhabi to have a good chance of winning the championship.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 6,910
    Heathener said:

    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.

    This is complete nonsense, frankly. The only time through the pandemic when events in the U.K. have “followed” the continent is in the first wave. At all other times, through the Alpha wave, the vaccine led riding of that wave, and the Delta wave the continent has followed the U.K. And now we are miles ahead on boosters, which is what really matters where hospitalisations and deaths are concerned. We have effectively “vaccinated” the vast majority of children already anyway, via infection, not that this has a large impact either way for the health service.

    There is no doubt that the NHS is going to be under enormous strain this winter. But current levels of Covid are unlikely to be a major issue in that. It’s all about backlogs of care, and new Covid restrictions will do little to alleviate that.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 25,493

    kinabalu said:

    Lewis clear betting fav for WDC now. Quite the turnaround. He touched 7 after the grid penalty last week.

    I don't see how. Max only needs to beat him once.

    I'm going to put a bet on Max.
    Has the lead still and a great driver. But merc looking the faster car now and also with a great driver. Mega climax. No bet for me at current prices but a must watch.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 6,910

    Mercedes stupid not to tell Lewis to bank a fastest lap

    Wasn’t possible, but anyway the only relevance fastest laps have to the title race is if there is a double DNF. If both cars finish the last two races then if Hamilton wins both he wins, if he doesn’t (and Verstappen wins one) then he doesn’t.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,544
    kinabalu said:

    Lewis clear betting fav for WDC now. Quite the turnaround. He touched 7 after the grid penalty last week.

    Genuinely thought you were talking about Adrian Lewis and the Wolrd Darts then! That's the PDC though I think
  • ping said:

    I don’t think the tories get a “handling covid better than the Europeans” bounce. The electorate tend to be rather ungrateful sods.

    That, and the “NHS breaking under pressure” is only going to weigh on the Tory VI

    I think the real pressure for the blues will come in May of next year, when the cost of living crisis really hits. Especially if the BoE are still playing silly buggers with interest rates.

    It will give some waverers an excuse to stock with Boris, but that's not quite the same thing. But the general rule is you don't get credit for bad things not happening.

    And whilst the PM has never wanted restrictions, there comes a point where he would have no choice.

    Two doublings from here, maybe?
  • isamisam Posts: 38,544
    edited November 21
    ping said:

    I don’t think the tories get a “handling covid better than the Europeans” bounce. The electorate tend to be rather ungrateful sods.

    That, and the “NHS breaking under pressure” is only going to weigh on the Tory VI

    I think the real pressure for the blues will come in May of next year, when the cost of living crisis really hits. Especially if the BoE are still playing silly buggers with interest rates.

    The Labour VI has more or less tracked Covid cases though. Quite amazing, I hadn't even looked until this afternoon

    Could someone who is good at this kind of thing trace the Lab line over the Covid case graph?


  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,366
    On to other things and as usual I'm well behind the discursive curve.

    Considering social care funding, the Government states the 1.5% Health & Social Care Levy will rise £12 billion per year (apparently).

    The cap on care costs per individual is £86,000 so that's just over 18 months residential care in London (where many hones charge £1000-1200 per week). Presumably, someone has worked out the average stay in residential care though of course "costs" presumably include domiciliary care as well.

    Care is a complex subject because it's not (or shouldn't be) just about assets - it's about the "contract" we have or should have with the elderly. The priority, in my view, is the elderly are afforded a dignified, comfortable life whether at home or in care. The scourge of dementia notwithstanding, it's my experience people want to stay in the familiarity of their own homes and there's the thorny question of care within the family.

    To what extent and in what way should the Government and society be doing even more to recognise the role of unpaid family carers and to encourage (where possible) families to take care of their own older relatives? These are questions which transcend means testing and asset values.

    Yet if we're talking money, Surrey County Council spends £372 million on adult social care or more than £1 million per day. I would imagine other authorities in areas with higher elderly populations are also having to allocate big chunks of their budget to these services while my borough, Newham, as a "young" area with below average numbers of elderly, doesn't have the same priorities.

    If the Government is to get this additional £12 billion in tax income, my questions would be:

    1) Where is the guarantee this money will be ring fenced for adult social care?
    2) How will it be doled out to the various agencies involved in adult social care including local councils and the NHS?

    MY view is the increase in adult social care should have been met through Council Tax increases so each area can determine its need and budget accordingly. Relying on the politically-motivated largesse of central Government is fundamentally unwise.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899
    edited November 21
    "...if we have a new vaccine resistant, flesh eating Covid-19 variant" ...I'll be holding you personally responsible @TSE!

    What were you thinking of giving the Chinese ideas like that?!
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    @stodge absolutely nothing is ring-fenced in this country
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,863
    I think this is unlikely, it's more likely that old voters will see the government as being irresponsible for keeping everything open because young people being social is inherently evil and everyone under 40 should be locked up forever so old people don't die. At least that's my read of Tory voters.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 36,561

    Taz said:

    Anyone heard from @CorrectHorseBattery recently ? Is he okay ?

    Posted last night and said he was up and down but doing OK, I believe.
    Out on the town spending all his winnings?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,888
    IanB2 said:

    Taz said:

    Anyone heard from @CorrectHorseBattery recently ? Is he okay ?

    Posted last night and said he was up and down but doing OK, I believe.
    Out on the town spending all his winnings?
    Inflation can't hurt you if you have no savings...
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,863

    ping said:

    I don’t think the tories get a “handling covid better than the Europeans” bounce. The electorate tend to be rather ungrateful sods.

    That, and the “NHS breaking under pressure” is only going to weigh on the Tory VI

    I think the real pressure for the blues will come in May of next year, when the cost of living crisis really hits. Especially if the BoE are still playing silly buggers with interest rates.

    It will give some waverers an excuse to stock with Boris, but that's not quite the same thing. But the general rule is you don't get credit for bad things not happening.

    And whilst the PM has never wanted restrictions, there comes a point where he would have no choice.

    Two doublings from here, maybe?
    On the latter point the route to two doublings in the UK needs an immunity diluting variant to occur, so far we haven't seen that and as lots of people have very clearly said, anything which significantly evades the vaccine will also have a completely different binding mechanism rather than using the ACE-2 site potentially making it significantly less deadly.
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    edited November 21
    stodge said:

    On to other things and as usual I'm well behind the discursive curve.

    Considering social care funding, the Government states the 1.5% Health & Social Care Levy will rise £12 billion per year (apparently).

    The cap on care costs per individual is £86,000 so that's just over 18 months residential care in London (where many hones charge £1000-1200 per week). Presumably, someone has worked out the average stay in residential care though of course "costs" presumably include domiciliary care as well.

    Care is a complex subject because it's not (or shouldn't be) just about assets - it's about the "contract" we have or should have with the elderly. The priority, in my view, is the elderly are afforded a dignified, comfortable life whether at home or in care. The scourge of dementia notwithstanding, it's my experience people want to stay in the familiarity of their own homes and there's the thorny question of care within the family.

    To what extent and in what way should the Government and society be doing even more to recognise the role of unpaid family carers and to encourage (where possible) families to take care of their own older relatives? These are questions which transcend means testing and asset values.

    Yet if we're talking money, Surrey County Council spends £372 million on adult social care or more than £1 million per day. I would imagine other authorities in areas with higher elderly populations are also having to allocate big chunks of their budget to these services while my borough, Newham, as a "young" area with below average numbers of elderly, doesn't have the same priorities.

    If the Government is to get this additional £12 billion in tax income, my questions would be:

    1) Where is the guarantee this money will be ring fenced for adult social care?
    2) How will it be doled out to the various agencies involved in adult social care including local councils and the NHS?

    MY view is the increase in adult social care should have been met through Council Tax increases so each area can determine its need and budget accordingly. Relying on the politically-motivated largesse of central Government is fundamentally unwise.

    It's not 1.5% by the way it's 2.5% (split between "employers" and employee NI).

    Increasing council tax has been tried for the past 5 years (remember the social care precept). To raise £12bn from the council tax, council tax would need to be raised 40% btw and the sort of figures demanded would scare a lot of people

    It's why I end up saying we need to use a wealth tax. You need to cover £50bn and UK house prices are currently worth about £10tn (so a 0.5% annual value tax will do).
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,022
    I see our slack and sloppy booster roll out posted 450,000 in a day.....

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
  • PhilPhil Posts: 616
    edited November 21
    Taz said:

    Anyone heard from @CorrectHorseBattery recently ? Is he okay ?

    He commented this morning. (11.57am according to Vanilla.)
  • I see our slack and sloppy booster roll out posted 450,000 in a day.....

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

    I got mine yesterday.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992
    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,022
    Lead story on the Mail website:

    Violence breaks out at Brussels anti-vaccine protest in Europe's latest day of rage: Fury over rules banning unjabbed from bars sparks clashes hours after Germany revealed COMPULSORY vaccinations are 'unavoidable

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10226551/Now-Germany-says-set-make-Covid-vaccinations-COMPULSORY-unavoidable-move.html
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,366
    eek said:


    It's not 1.5% by the way it's 2.5% (split between "employers" and employee NI).

    Increasing council tax has been tried for the past 5 years (remember the social care precept). To raise £12bn from the council tax, council tax would need to be raised 40% btw and the sort of figures demanded would scare a lot of people

    It's why I end up saying we need to use a wealth tax. You need to cover £50bn and UK house prices are currently worth about £10tn (so a 0.5% annual value tax will do).

    I'd forgotten about the employers NI which might explain my scepticism about the £12 billion.

    To bring your two other points together, Council Tax is essentially a property-value based tax so what's needed is more bands at the top end of the scale which would bring in more revenue.

    The original 1991 valuations (on which we are still working) need to be updated but of course this current Government won't because it wants to protect home owners (which is why your wealth tax idea won't fly either).

    The other aspect of a wealth tax is it's seen as a deterrent to aspiration. I mused last night the experience of those who believe their lives would be better if they had a little more money (the evidence of those who receive sudden large infusions of money suggests otherwise) and the Conservative offering talks to that aspiration by promising people can keep more of their hard earned.

    The message you can spend your money better than the State is a hard one to gainsay but of course most individuals aren't going to buy a tank (actually there are a couple on here who might). Sometimes getting all the money together to buy important things or pay for important services (things like schools, refuse collection or caring for the elderly) isn't such a bad idea.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992
    stodge said:

    eek said:


    It's not 1.5% by the way it's 2.5% (split between "employers" and employee NI).

    Increasing council tax has been tried for the past 5 years (remember the social care precept). To raise £12bn from the council tax, council tax would need to be raised 40% btw and the sort of figures demanded would scare a lot of people

    It's why I end up saying we need to use a wealth tax. You need to cover £50bn and UK house prices are currently worth about £10tn (so a 0.5% annual value tax will do).

    I'd forgotten about the employers NI which might explain my scepticism about the £12 billion.

    To bring your two other points together, Council Tax is essentially a property-value based tax so what's needed is more bands at the top end of the scale which would bring in more revenue.

    The original 1991 valuations (on which we are still working) need to be updated but of course this current Government won't because it wants to protect home owners (which is why your wealth tax idea won't fly either).

    The other aspect of a wealth tax is it's seen as a deterrent to aspiration. I mused last night the experience of those who believe their lives would be better if they had a little more money (the evidence of those who receive sudden large infusions of money suggests otherwise) and the Conservative offering talks to that aspiration by promising people can keep more of their hard earned.

    The message you can spend your money better than the State is a hard one to gainsay but of course most individuals aren't going to buy a tank (actually there are a couple on here who might). Sometimes getting all the money together to buy important things or pay for important services (things like schools, refuse collection or caring for the elderly) isn't such a bad idea.
    Current council tax revenues are £32bn, so if we want to raise another £12bn council tax goes up by nearly 40%. How we do think that goes down with the electorate?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 16,501
    Official figures show the UK has recorded 61 COVID-19 related deaths and 40,004 positive cases of the virus in the latest 24-hour period

    For more on this and other news visit http://news.sky.com
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 6,910

    MattW said:

    Heathener said:

    p.s. I don't think there's any match from polling to covid. The sole exception was the initial boost when it looked as if we were ahead of the game.

    The surge in mainland Europe is going to thwack the UK too. We have always followed the Continent so far with a few weeks' lag and our vaccination rate is no better than our fellow human beings across the Channel.

    We're in for a tough winter with a big surge in cases, especially over Christmas, and the cold weather hitting us isn't going to help.

    You have been warned.

    the boosters which were necessary hear earlier as the first doses wore off earlier.
    Given much of the continent stuck to the (less effective) short dosing gap, I'm not sure our vaccine effectiveness decline will have been much ahead of them. Added to which the NHS was a lot more effective in prioritising the more vulnerable first than for example, France, which has been ahead of us on vaccinating teenagers, but behind us on older cohorts:




    This is a very important point. Not all vaccinations are equal. There have been lots of people very keen to tell us how relatively poorly the U.K. has done in the vaccination stakes compared to other countries. But there are few that have outperformed the U.K. in getting vaccines in to the arms of the old and vulnerable.

    Vaccines in children and young adults is a nice to have, and is somewhat relevant to those who still only focus on “cases” (positive tests). But it is not the most important thing by a long way.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899
    eek said:

    Carnyx said:

    eek said:

    MattW said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    malcolmg said:

    IanB2 said:

    Charles said:

    murali_s said:

    People calling London a "shitheap". Surely some mistake? London is a great World City - arguable the best city in the World. Places like Scunthorpe, Hartlepool, Middlesborough are the real shitheaps - miserable places with miserable uneducated bigotted trash who reside there?

    What a disgusting post

    Ordinary hard working people with families live in these areas and are the salt of the earth

    Who on earth do you think you are
    Are you going to call out Yduffer for calling London a shit heap though? (you don't have to, of course, because we all know it isn't).
    The difference is between calling London a shitheap (I live in London but prefer the country, but it’s not a shitheap IMV) and being offensive about the people who live there.

    There are parts of central London which are absolutely world class - I really enjoy visits. And not just the bustling bits, there are some genuinely quiet neighbourhoods inside the circle line But the surrounding endless grim suburbia is seriously grim. Some of it painfully so, made worse by the absurd money that is asked of people to live there.
    When Charles says 'London' he's thinking of the view over Regent's Park from St John's Wood, not of Ilford or Edmonton or Peckham or Hounslow.
    I'd rather live in Peckham than St John's Wood. I virtually do live in Peckham in fact, SE15 is just a couple of streets over.
    Suburbia isn't grim, it's an oasis of parks and gardens, with thriving communities, friendly neighbours, decent schools, independent shops and restaurants, a plethora of activities for children, a thriving arts scene and reasonable commutes to work in Central London. It's only over priced because it's popular.
    The only thing that could improve London? If we could spend more of our money on London and less on subsidising people whose main leisure activity is sagging off London.
    The old chestnut that London funds the rest of the country rather than the reality that it sucks the life blood out of it and no matter how much is spent there compared to the rest of the country the selfish arseholes are never happy. Full of me me me parasites and bloodsuckers.
    The numbers speak for themselves. Londoners pay thousands of pounds more in tax than they receive back in government spending. That's just a fact, sorry if it's inconvenient.
    I'm very happy. I don't even mind subsidising the rest of the country. I'm not from London, I still have plenty of love for the rest of the UK, including the country of my birth (the same one as yours). I'm just sick of being told how awful we are and what a shit hole I live in by people who are taking my money.
    I don't mind the people in London. It's just the city itself is awful. Look at it with a cold eye. Unplanned, appallingly cramped, mostly full of third-rate Victorian architecture, overpriced, brutally congested, dirty, noisy and smelly, full of restaurants that offer food no better than anywhere else in the country but provide half the quantity at double the price - if I'm honest, that's particularly what I remember about being an impoverished student there.

    That's even before we get on to the issue of its woefully inadequate utilities network, which means it is chronically short of water, and the bizarre public transport system which nobody would probably use if it wasn't for the fact the roads are so twisty it takes even longer to walk than to take the sardine can, er, underground.

    (Your other point is wrong as well, incidentally, as the town I work in is a net contributor to the treasury, so I'm not taking your money.)

    If you like it, fine. You're welcome. Means I don't have to live there, which I'm even happier about because it's just not a nice place to be.

    Edit - I will admit I do find it annoying when people preach at me that I should love London because it 'subsidises everywhere else.' From that point of view, you should love all farmers in Oxfordshire because they allow the residue from your treated sewage to be spread on their fields. Or the people of the Thames Valley for providing you with water.
    I don't want love, indifference would be fine. It's the constant compulsive slagging off of London by people who don't live in London, don't know London and seem convinced that London is leeching off them that I find so monumentally boring, especially as there are things in London that need money spent on them, but apparently there's no money.
    Most of the horrible things you attribute to London could be applied to more or less every town and city in Britain. We live in a country built by the Victorians in a hurry and on the cheap and have been living with the consequences ever since.
    London's most immediate problem (and it's one that is going to scare Khan and TFL in the new future) is that there is no way Boris can agree to given TFL the money it needs to survive now.

    So TFL is going to have to start working out how to rapidly cut costs...

    Separately, the whole point of investing up North is that for a one off sum of money (albeit a lot) is that by making the north more efficient there should would be more tax revenue generated up north.
    Perhaps a serendipitous kick up the Rs will encourage Mayor Sadiq to discover some appropropriate moral courage, and first of all follow Paris in dealing with inefficiency in the tube system, and then to address the phalanxes of overpaid managers in TFL.

    They are at last a decade behind Paris.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20985642
    All that requires is rebuilding the underground to allow barriers between the train and track - which costs big money (and remember there is NO money).

    https://www.londonreconnections.com/2021/the-political-myth-of-the-driverless-tube-train/ is an explanation as to why driverless trains aren't the solution people think they are.

    Nice line in there from the London's 2008-2016 Mayor in that report

    “I would rather prioritise capacity… ”
    I enjoyed that!

    'Indeed one could argue that the most effective Turing Test in the world right now would be to ask a computer to successfully operate (in every sense of that word) a Metropolitan line train. It may well happen one day, but unfortunately at that point the first thing the now-sentient AI will likely do on completion of its first shift is go join a union.'
    I would think that a fully automated Metropolitan line train is easier to build than a fully automated car.
    Both will be ready just after fusion-generated grid electricity?

    So that's circa 30 years time, as usual.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
    Agreed - but not at F1, at some low-level club meeting with a 6am reporting time and 6pm finishing time, unpaid. Same place the marshals he’s criticising had to start.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 6,910
    Scott_xP said:

    Official figures show the UK has recorded 61 COVID-19 related deaths and 40,004 positive cases of the virus in the latest 24-hour period

    For more on this and other news visit http://news.sky.com

    7 day % Increase in “cases” on the turn again. Expect numbers to start coming down again very soon I think.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899
    edited November 21
    stodge said:

    eek said:


    It's not 1.5% by the way it's 2.5% (split between "employers" and employee NI).

    Increasing council tax has been tried for the past 5 years (remember the social care precept). To raise £12bn from the council tax, council tax would need to be raised 40% btw and the sort of figures demanded would scare a lot of people

    It's why I end up saying we need to use a wealth tax. You need to cover £50bn and UK house prices are currently worth about £10tn (so a 0.5% annual value tax will do).

    I'd forgotten about the employers NI which might explain my scepticism about the £12 billion.

    To bring your two other points together, Council Tax is essentially a property-value based tax so what's needed is more bands at the top end of the scale which would bring in more revenue.

    The original 1991 valuations (on which we are still working) need to be updated but of course this current Government won't because it wants to protect home owners (which is why your wealth tax idea won't fly either).

    The other aspect of a wealth tax is it's seen as a deterrent to aspiration. I mused last night the experience of those who believe their lives would be better if they had a little more money (the evidence of those who receive sudden large infusions of money suggests otherwise) and the Conservative offering talks to that aspiration by promising people can keep more of their hard earned.

    The message you can spend your money better than the State is a hard one to gainsay but of course most individuals aren't going to buy a tank (actually there are a couple on here who might). Sometimes getting all the money together to buy important things or pay for important services (things like schools, refuse collection or caring for the elderly) isn't such a bad idea.

    Why is wealth tax at 0.5% or 1% a deterrent to aspiration?

    "I've decided not to become a millionaire because it would cost me £5-£10k pa". Er, no.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,370
    Mr. Pointer, if you can live anywhere why would you choose the place that makes you pay more?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
    What does Christian Horner's disrepute charge relate to specifically?
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 6,910

    Mr. Pointer, if you can live anywhere why would you choose the place that makes you pay more?

    Because you like living in the place that you live?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 9,366
    Sandpit said:


    Current council tax revenues are £32bn, so if we want to raise another £12bn council tax goes up by nearly 40%. How we do think that goes down with the electorate?

    It would go hand-in-hand with a revision of the bands at the higher ends so those with higher value properties for example get to pay much more than is the case under the current banding which ends at H - we probably need a minimum of another five bands.

    With a new set of bands in place, we can revise the "40%" figure down quite a bit.
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    stodge said:

    eek said:


    It's not 1.5% by the way it's 2.5% (split between "employers" and employee NI).

    Increasing council tax has been tried for the past 5 years (remember the social care precept). To raise £12bn from the council tax, council tax would need to be raised 40% btw and the sort of figures demanded would scare a lot of people

    It's why I end up saying we need to use a wealth tax. You need to cover £50bn and UK house prices are currently worth about £10tn (so a 0.5% annual value tax will do).

    I'd forgotten about the employers NI which might explain my scepticism about the £12 billion.

    To bring your two other points together, Council Tax is essentially a property-value based tax so what's needed is more bands at the top end of the scale which would bring in more revenue.

    The original 1991 valuations (on which we are still working) need to be updated but of course this current Government won't because it wants to protect home owners (which is why your wealth tax idea won't fly either).

    The other aspect of a wealth tax is it's seen as a deterrent to aspiration. I mused last night the experience of those who believe their lives would be better if they had a little more money (the evidence of those who receive sudden large infusions of money suggests otherwise) and the Conservative offering talks to that aspiration by promising people can keep more of their hard earned.

    The message you can spend your money better than the State is a hard one to gainsay but of course most individuals aren't going to buy a tank (actually there are a couple on here who might). Sometimes getting all the money together to buy important things or pay for important services (things like schools, refuse collection or caring for the elderly) isn't such a bad idea.
    The last thing the government wants is to have to do a revaluation process - the end result would be

    1) all houses up North being band A-C while down South it's band E-G or worse
    2) different bands values in different regions

    and you would also need to run a full revaluation which can't be done as the VOA are currently doing one for business rates.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 7,199

    stodge said:

    eek said:


    It's not 1.5% by the way it's 2.5% (split between "employers" and employee NI).

    Increasing council tax has been tried for the past 5 years (remember the social care precept). To raise £12bn from the council tax, council tax would need to be raised 40% btw and the sort of figures demanded would scare a lot of people

    It's why I end up saying we need to use a wealth tax. You need to cover £50bn and UK house prices are currently worth about £10tn (so a 0.5% annual value tax will do).

    I'd forgotten about the employers NI which might explain my scepticism about the £12 billion.

    To bring your two other points together, Council Tax is essentially a property-value based tax so what's needed is more bands at the top end of the scale which would bring in more revenue.

    The original 1991 valuations (on which we are still working) need to be updated but of course this current Government won't because it wants to protect home owners (which is why your wealth tax idea won't fly either).

    The other aspect of a wealth tax is it's seen as a deterrent to aspiration. I mused last night the experience of those who believe their lives would be better if they had a little more money (the evidence of those who receive sudden large infusions of money suggests otherwise) and the Conservative offering talks to that aspiration by promising people can keep more of their hard earned.

    The message you can spend your money better than the State is a hard one to gainsay but of course most individuals aren't going to buy a tank (actually there are a couple on here who might). Sometimes getting all the money together to buy important things or pay for important services (things like schools, refuse collection or caring for the elderly) isn't such a bad idea.

    Why is wealth tax at 0.5% or 1% a deterrent to aspiration?

    "I've decided not to become a millionaire because it would cost me £5-£10k pa". Er, no.
    You've identified one of the (numerous) flaws in the Laffer Curve.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    Scott_xP said:

    Official figures show the UK has recorded 61 COVID-19 related deaths and 40,004 positive cases of the virus in the latest 24-hour period

    For more on this and other news visit http://news.sky.com

    We continue to run hot on infections but both deaths and hospital admissions slowly decline.

    I have mentioned my brother who currently has Covid and is exceptionally vulnerable for other reasons. Because he had had 2 vaccinations the advice from the hospital was go home where you will be more comfortable. The covid wards are very noisy because of ventilators. He was told that everyone on the ventilators in Ninewells had not had the vaccines and their advice to him is the normal advice given to anyone with a positive test that is vaccinated. It is interesting that this is so even in extreme cases like his (he is currently receiving chemotherapy).

    The rate at which we are giving out the boosters is remarkable, more than 450k yesterday. We are seeing the results of this in the immunity levels in older people who have had it for long enough. I think our strategy of minimal NPIs makes sense in this scenario but I am sure the government would love to see cases peak soon.
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    stodge said:

    Sandpit said:


    Current council tax revenues are £32bn, so if we want to raise another £12bn council tax goes up by nearly 40%. How we do think that goes down with the electorate?

    It would go hand-in-hand with a revision of the bands at the higher ends so those with higher value properties for example get to pay much more than is the case under the current banding which ends at H - we probably need a minimum of another five bands.

    With a new set of bands in place, we can revise the "40%" figure down quite a bit.
    How - see my points below - the new bands would annoy people more than a wealth tax would.

    I'm not kidding when I say a wealth tax is the least worst option.
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
    What does Christian Horner's disrepute charge relate to specifically?
    He said one of the two marshall's waving his yellow flag yesterday was rogue and shouldn't have been doing so.

    Got to say it's one of the things where you really do need to throw the book at those who make such comments.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899

    Mr. Pointer, if you can live anywhere why would you choose the place that makes you pay more?

    Because, Mr. Morris, money isn't everything. People do not choose to live in Britain because it is cheapest but because: a) it's a great place to live, and b) they have emotional/family ties to the UK - a sense of belonging.

    In any event, I'd place this (small percentage) tax on the wealth of every British citizen, no matter where they reside or whetre their assets are. If an individual chooses to give up their British citizenship, so be it (but don't let them expect to get it back later). Frankly if they care that little for Britain they can feck right off.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,484
    stodge said:

    Afternoon all :)

    The truth is for most of us the virus is now in the past as regards the health impacts but in the present as regards the economic impacts. If we are, as the Express claims, going to spend £85 billion on Christmas, the last thing we'll need to hear is story about popular toys or foodstuffs being unavailable or in short supply.

    The next four weeks will be a big test of the "supply chain" and where shortages do occur, you can be assured they will be reported and probably exaggerated (much to the chagrin of the pro-Government posters).

    The evidence therefore is case numbers and vaccination numbers are increasingly less relevant. We are "living with" the virus and will no doubt dutifully troop along for our fourth vaccinations in due time.

    Tell that to the 200 or so that are dying every day.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899
    eek said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
    What does Christian Horner's disrepute charge relate to specifically?
    He said one of the two marshall's waving his yellow flag yesterday was rogue and shouldn't have been doing so.

    Got to say it's one of the things where you really do need to throw the book at those who make such comments.
    Thanks - and agreed.
  • Scott_xP said:

    Official figures show the UK has recorded 61 COVID-19 related deaths and 40,004 positive cases of the virus in the latest 24-hour period

    For more on this and other news visit http://news.sky.com

    40,004 (+9.4%) 61 deaths (-5.9%) admissions 881 (-4.7%)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    edited November 21
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
    "The Team Principle is required to attend..." Embarrassing grammatical error.

    Everyone knows that Red Bull don't have any principles.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,544
    ...
    DavidL said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Official figures show the UK has recorded 61 COVID-19 related deaths and 40,004 positive cases of the virus in the latest 24-hour period

    For more on this and other news visit http://news.sky.com

    We continue to run hot on infections but both deaths and hospital admissions slowly decline.

    I have mentioned my brother who currently has Covid and is exceptionally vulnerable for other reasons. Because he had had 2 vaccinations the advice from the hospital was go home where you will be more comfortable. The covid wards are very noisy because of ventilators. He was told that everyone on the ventilators in Ninewells had not had the vaccines and their advice to him is the normal advice given to anyone with a positive test that is vaccinated. It is interesting that this is so even in extreme cases like his (he is currently receiving chemotherapy).

    The rate at which we are giving out the boosters is remarkable, more than 450k yesterday. We are seeing the results of this in the immunity levels in older people who have had it for long enough. I think our strategy of minimal NPIs makes sense in this scenario but I am sure the government would love to see cases peak soon.
    On my regional news the other day (BBC East not BBC London now) they showed a fellow who was being treated for Covid in a virtual ward to save space in the hospital for those who need it more urgently. Makes sense.

    Good luck to your brother
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899

    stodge said:

    eek said:


    It's not 1.5% by the way it's 2.5% (split between "employers" and employee NI).

    Increasing council tax has been tried for the past 5 years (remember the social care precept). To raise £12bn from the council tax, council tax would need to be raised 40% btw and the sort of figures demanded would scare a lot of people

    It's why I end up saying we need to use a wealth tax. You need to cover £50bn and UK house prices are currently worth about £10tn (so a 0.5% annual value tax will do).

    I'd forgotten about the employers NI which might explain my scepticism about the £12 billion.

    To bring your two other points together, Council Tax is essentially a property-value based tax so what's needed is more bands at the top end of the scale which would bring in more revenue.

    The original 1991 valuations (on which we are still working) need to be updated but of course this current Government won't because it wants to protect home owners (which is why your wealth tax idea won't fly either).

    The other aspect of a wealth tax is it's seen as a deterrent to aspiration. I mused last night the experience of those who believe their lives would be better if they had a little more money (the evidence of those who receive sudden large infusions of money suggests otherwise) and the Conservative offering talks to that aspiration by promising people can keep more of their hard earned.

    The message you can spend your money better than the State is a hard one to gainsay but of course most individuals aren't going to buy a tank (actually there are a couple on here who might). Sometimes getting all the money together to buy important things or pay for important services (things like schools, refuse collection or caring for the elderly) isn't such a bad idea.

    Why is wealth tax at 0.5% or 1% a deterrent to aspiration?

    "I've decided not to become a millionaire because it would cost me £5-£10k pa". Er, no.
    You've identified one of the (numerous) flaws in the Laffer Curve.
    Lol! Don't get me started on that piece of neoliberal clapttrap!

    (Oh, I see I have already...)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
    What does Christian Horner's disrepute charge relate to specifically?
    Max Verstappen was penalised for ignoring a yellow flag in qualifying. Horner said that the flag was the work of “a rogue marshal”, and that the FIA need to manage their marshals better.

    The marshals, hundreds of them, are all volunteers, and were doing exactly what would be expected of them in the situation.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 55,701

    Mr. Pointer, if you can live anywhere why would you choose the place that makes you pay more?

    Because, Mr. Morris, money isn't everything. People do not choose to live in Britain because it is cheapest but because: a) it's a great place to live, and b) they have emotional/family ties to the UK - a sense of belonging.

    In any event, I'd place this (small percentage) tax on the wealth of every British citizen, no matter where they reside or whetre their assets are. If an individual chooses to give up their British citizenship, so be it (but don't let them expect to get it back later). Frankly if they care that little for Britain they can feck right off.
    Money isn't everything, but it certainly is something. Otherwise you wouldn't have people like Hamilton. No one is suggesting every high net worth individual would leave with a wealth tax, but a 0.5% might convince 1 in 100 to leave. Up that to 1% and it might be 5 in 100.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 17,899
    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
    What does Christian Horner's disrepute charge relate to specifically?
    Max Verstappen was penalised for ignoring a yellow flag in qualifying. Horner said that the flag was the work of “a rogue marshal”, and that the FIA need to manage their marshals better.

    The marshals, hundreds of them, are all volunteers, and were doing exactly what would be expected of them in the situation.
    Yep, agreed. Horner sounds like he's being a bit of tit tbh.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,609

    Heathener said:

    the booster rollout is slack and sloppy.

    Really?



    Is that rebased to be 6 months post second dose?, because as most of Europe was a couple of months behind us, a lot more of the boosters are not yet due.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 34,484

    Scott_xP said:

    Official figures show the UK has recorded 61 COVID-19 related deaths and 40,004 positive cases of the virus in the latest 24-hour period

    For more on this and other news visit http://news.sky.com

    40,004 (+9.4%) 61 deaths (-5.9%) admissions 881 (-4.7%)
    Never worth looking at sunday's, the numbers are always down. Compare the 7 day average and do not try to kid yourself and other people. Bit like using subsamples.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 57,370
    Mr. Pointer, if money matters so little then there wouldn't be so many Frenchmen living in London.

    Mr. Sandpit, sounds like Horner needs a bollocking. The yellow flag situation was a bit weird/on and off but that isn't the fault of a marshal.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    Foxy said:

    Heathener said:

    the booster rollout is slack and sloppy.

    Really?



    Is that rebased to be 6 months post second dose?, because as most of Europe was a couple of months behind us, a lot more of the boosters are not yet due.
    I got my booster on Friday, something like 22 weeks after my second jab, so we are trimming things a little to get them done. 24 hours of a sore arm and a bit of tiredness the only consequence I am pleased to report.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 34,992

    Sandpit said:

    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    LOL, Christian Horner summoned to see the stewards, for allegedly bringing the sport into disrepute.

    https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files/decision-document/2021 Qatar Grand Prix - Summons - Christian Horner.pdf

    I covered the most suitable punishment, earlier - Horner should be made to work as a Marshall for the next 3 races.
    What does Christian Horner's disrepute charge relate to specifically?
    Max Verstappen was penalised for ignoring a yellow flag in qualifying. Horner said that the flag was the work of “a rogue marshal”, and that the FIA need to manage their marshals better.

    The marshals, hundreds of them, are all volunteers, and were doing exactly what would be expected of them in the situation.
    Yep, agreed. Horner sounds like he's being a bit of tit tbh.
    It’s been a slowly escalating pattern of behaviour as we move towards the end of the season, and he really does deserve to be reined in for comments like that.

    It’s the same as when a football manager says the referee was biased, and - like it or not - the reason we have rules about Parliamentary language. The MP opposite is always referred to as the honourable member for where they represent, not becuase they are, but because we’d have a free-for-all of foul language otherwise.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 55,701
    Foxy said:

    Heathener said:

    the booster rollout is slack and sloppy.

    Really?



    Is that rebased to be 6 months post second dose?, because as most of Europe was a couple of months behind us, a lot more of the boosters are not yet due.
    Here's an update of the plot I made a couple of weeks ago comparing the UK and France. Ahead is a correct description.

    https://i.imgur.com/S43Gztv.png
  • eekeek Posts: 15,853
    edited November 21
    RobD said:

    Mr. Pointer, if you can live anywhere why would you choose the place that makes you pay more?

    Because, Mr. Morris, money isn't everything. People do not choose to live in Britain because it is cheapest but because: a) it's a great place to live, and b) they have emotional/family ties to the UK - a sense of belonging.

    In any event, I'd place this (small percentage) tax on the wealth of every British citizen, no matter where they reside or whetre their assets are. If an individual chooses to give up their British citizenship, so be it (but don't let them expect to get it back later). Frankly if they care that little for Britain they can feck right off.
    Money isn't everything, but it certainly is something. Otherwise you wouldn't have people like Hamilton. No one is suggesting every high net worth individual would leave with a wealth tax, but a 0.5% might convince 1 in 100 to leave. Up that to 1% and it might be 5 in 100.
    But we aren't really looking at a wealth tax on all asset classes (it's too complex and is a problem given how ISAs and pensions work), we really are only looking at taxing the current value of the residential properties you own in place of council tax and stamp duty.

    For anything else is too blooming complex and probably covered by other taxes (capital gains) anyway.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 55,701
    eek said:

    RobD said:

    Mr. Pointer, if you can live anywhere why would you choose the place that makes you pay more?

    Because, Mr. Morris, money isn't everything. People do not choose to live in Britain because it is cheapest but because: a) it's a great place to live, and b) they have emotional/family ties to the UK - a sense of belonging.

    In any event, I'd place this (small percentage) tax on the wealth of every British citizen, no matter where they reside or whetre their assets are. If an individual chooses to give up their British citizenship, so be it (but don't let them expect to get it back later). Frankly if they care that little for Britain they can feck right off.
    Money isn't everything, but it certainly is something. Otherwise you wouldn't have people like Hamilton. No one is suggesting every high net worth individual would leave with a wealth tax, but a 0.5% might convince 1 in 100 to leave. Up that to 1% and it might be 5 in 100.
    But we aren't really looking at a wealth tax on all asset classes (it's too complex and is a problem given how ISAs and pensions work), we really are only looking at taxing the current value of the residential properties you own in place of council tax and stamp duty.

    For anything else is too blooming complex and probably covered by other taxes (capital gains) anyway.
    I don't that is what @Benpointer has been proposing, rather a tax on the complete wealth of an individual (and apparently all overseas citizens, too).
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,280
    malcolmg said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Official figures show the UK has recorded 61 COVID-19 related deaths and 40,004 positive cases of the virus in the latest 24-hour period

    For more on this and other news visit http://news.sky.com

    40,004 (+9.4%) 61 deaths (-5.9%) admissions 881 (-4.7%)
    Never worth looking at sunday's, the numbers are always down. Compare the 7 day average and do not try to kid yourself and other people. Bit like using subsamples.
    The 7 day average is now down to 150 and continues to have a positive trend. It still adds up of course.
Sign In or Register to comment.