Good morning from sunny Islington. This Brexit Freedom Bill that will deliver the benefits of Brexit by ripping up "EU Red Tape". Any specifics they have in mind?
Trade red tape? Imposed by this government insisting on 3rd country status? I'd be ecstatic if they ripped all that up, but that only returns us to the status quo ante. Health and Safety red tape? Perhaps we need less namby pamby rules that make our cars safer or force employers to do a risk assessment before sending someone up a ladder Food standards red tape? To be fair we'd all benefit from more botulism
On the latter two haven't this government pledged *not* to do such things?
Laithwates guy on R4 this am, HMG changing the current wine duty of 3 rates (still, sparkling and fortified) to I think 23 rates based on alcohol percentage. Going to destroy small producers/merchants he said.
What’s all that lovely British red tape going to do to the British sparkling wine miracle?
There's a group in Customs and Excise who have spent decades dreaming of more tax on booze. Hence the joy with which they cut down on the personal allowances for import. You could, essentially bring van loads of wine into the country by claiming it was for personal use.
And did. Knew a guy who made a living doing that.
Yes - certain independent wine shops in London were doing quite nicely on the delta between a Transit full of expensive wine direct from the producers cellar and the price of the van load via regular import. By the time you add in a couple of middle men & tax, it made a big difference. They could offer the customers "special prices" and still make a bigger profit.
The chap I knew used to sell to restaurants. I'd not long been to one of his customers, bought (as you do) some wine with the meal, and a week later sat in the pub listening to him telling us all what he'd sold it for. And gloating that he'd made a good profit, at a LOT less than I'd been charged.
He's been dead a few years now.
I've seen wine I bought in France for £12 at the vineyard, on wine lists in not-posh places for £40 in London
Looks like the U-turn for Mandatory Vaccinations is coming after a really difficult week personally of chasing up the vaccination status of staff, dealing with angry and upset staff both in person and face to face or via emails. All that work we have been doing and focusing on, the extra hours and what we have had to deal with was for nothing.
We have put through a lot of staff through the ringer emotionally. I know we are doing what we have been told and it's our job, but right now I find it difficult to focus on seeing it that way.
Thanks for your work in trying to convince them. However, I'd sack all NHS refuseniks.
Basically: I would not trust any medical practioner who did not get vaccinated for *reasons* to give me good medical advice.
So after you've sacked 70 to 80,000 NHS staff, not all patient-facing, of course, how will you run the health service?
The biggest issue is in some sectors, such as the Midwives for example.
It was heading to be a very dangerous April to be born.
Though I also see JJ's point ... presumably the midwives have historically been parallel to and somewhat in opposition to the (until recent decades) largely male and scientific doctors?
Yes there has historically been a difficult relationship between some factions of midwifery and the medical profession. Not all midwives of course, and not all doctors.
There is a faction for "natural child birth" that sees medical intervention as a forceful invasion of a female space. There is too a a view amongst some doctors that midwives leave it too late to call for medical intervention, and refuse to take responsibility when things go badly wrong.
This ideological and cultural split isn't the only reason for the recurrent scandals in maternity units, but it can be part of the toxic culture on some units. Some midwives see themselves as the vanguard of feminism, some doctors refer to "madwives", with little common ground. Not referring to my own Trust here.
The startling bit my wife and I encountered was when the people in the Natural Birth unit were quite proud about not making any provision for a change of plan if the birth didn't proceed naturally. They claimed that just created "failure" and that the only thing they would "allow" was a medical emergency that would be treated like a hospitalisation. That is an emergency medical response team would move you out of their unit, to the regular birth unit. So their unit wouldn't be "compromised" with all that medical stuff....
There is an evidence base, but I'm fully with you on there being some midwifery and health visitor emotion based medicine that is almost witchcraft.
- The hard line breast milk only until 6 months change. Yes, choking is a real hazard when going to solid food, but the number of babies who go through a couple of months where they are utterly distraught trying to hold this line is unbelievable. - The no medication in pregnancy line - the we won't tell you if anything is safe, even if it has been used on pregnant women for decades. OK, I'm happy with a level of caution, but where Britain said no, the Australian pharmacopeia was a no nonsense godsend, when the Mrs got badly allergic to something and wanted a Benadryl.
There are more, but at the risk of going on I'll stop there.
The problem areas for vaccination should be flashing red lights to NICE and the care quality folks to say that 'medical practices might be a problem here'.
One thing that horrified me was the literal bullying of mothers over breast milk. Some can't produce enough for the baby - I witnessed a mother being told she was "bad" for not 100% breast feeding.
Thatd help with the postpartum depression...
Indeed - and bullying people is a *so* well known as a universally successful tactic.
Re COVID - with the changes to cases numbers today -
What changes? Can you explain briefly?
To date reinfections have not been included (except in Wales) so the figures are likely to be higher. We know that Omicron causes a lot of reinfection.
So expect iSage & Leon to run round screaming in small circles at 16:01
Does anyone think that iSage will condemn the revocation of the vaccine mandate for the NHS - if it happens?
They aren’t going to benchmark a reinfection inclusive figure against a reinfection exclusive figure surely? That would be barmy (and useless). And the usual innumerate panickers will have a field day, as you say.
(In the real world the covid numbers have been looking really encouraging)
"That would be barmy (and useless)" - Ah, you have described the Pestonite journalists on the subject of anything involving Maths (hiss, boo, shudder etc) perfectly.....
They are not going to back date the data on the dashboard - the historical data is not available - there will be a step change.
So all the muppets will scream......
That’s absolutely stupid, in which case.
Why not simply separate reinfections out, if they want to include them?
Mr. Divvie, the wine rates change sounds like a pointless exercise to make things more complicated, for no advantage.
In short, it's bloody stupid. I do wonder why they bother with things like that.
I can get people being stupidly lazy, or selfish. But this? Even the people cooking up the crap aren't going to benefit from it.
They are making wine duty proportionate to ABV. Which on the face of it sounds reasonable. Tax people per centilitre of alcohol.
I had an email from Angel Wines, they say this is going to hit the small producers making authentic wines that just turn out at a certain ABV. While the big producers will benefit by being able to churn out huge volumes of low quality low-alcohol wine.
Good morning all. Last night I had a dream that Bozo was mixed up in another 'incident'.
Basically, he had submitted an expenses claim for taxi journeys totaling several thousand pounds, and then 'on advice' he had withdrawn the claim. The media got wind of what had happened, and of course he lied and said that he hadn't submitted the claim in the first place.
Mr. Divvie, the wine rates change sounds like a pointless exercise to make things more complicated, for no advantage.
In short, it's bloody stupid. I do wonder why they bother with things like that.
I can get people being stupidly lazy, or selfish. But this? Even the people cooking up the crap aren't going to benefit from it.
They are making wine duty proportionate to ABV. Which on the face of it sounds reasonable. Tax people per centilitre of alcohol.
I had an email from Angel Wines, they say this is going to hit the small producers making authentic wines that just turn out at a certain ABV. While the big producers will benefit by being able to churn out huge volumes of low quality low-alcohol wine.
Mr. Divvie, the wine rates change sounds like a pointless exercise to make things more complicated, for no advantage.
In short, it's bloody stupid. I do wonder why they bother with things like that.
I can get people being stupidly lazy, or selfish. But this? Even the people cooking up the crap aren't going to benefit from it.
They are making wine duty proportionate to ABV. Which on the face of it sounds reasonable. Tax people per centilitre of alcohol.
I had an email from Angel Wines, they say this is going to hit the small producers making authentic wines that just turn out at a certain ABV. While the big producers will benefit by being able to churn out huge volumes of low quality low-alcohol wine.
Sorry, that's Naked Wines, not Angel.
NW wines seem heavily biased to the 14%+ ABV, so you can see how they'd have a problem
Over the last few days I've thought that Boris Johnson will wriggle out of his wrangles and survive.
This morning I'm not so sure and I think we're heading for a crunch week.
There are two principal issues which are causing me to question his chances of clinging on.
1. Authenticity.
It's all very well doing these right wing reboots but Boris Johnson is such a schmuck that no one believes him anymore. It's not just the soft left who don't. Many people on the right no longer trust the man. And it's easy to see why. He is blown around like chaff in the wind and no one knows where they stand. Not only does he throw people like Owen Patterson under the bus to save his own skin, he lets Sunak push the NI tax hike through. His right-wing reboot is set alongside a load of green and soft-left policies (courtesy of Carrie?) that are totally incongruous with some of his other positions. Besides, the idea that this 1.5% tax increase is specifically for social care is of course total guff. There is only one pot of money and most people can see through hypothecated tax.
So that's the first problem. No one trusts Boris Johnson.
2. Cummings
The man's a complete menace but he's not one to give up and it is to be assumed that he still has plenty of poison left with which to strike.
To be charitable to Cummings, if such a thing is possible, I don't think it's just personal animus. He clearly thinks Johnson is unfit to be PM and, frankly, a lot of people now agree with him.
Cummings owes the country this. He has been central in delivering the most damaging single policy this country has implemented in the last fifty years. The least he can do now is employ everything in his power to remove the most egregious and dishonest Prime Minister any of us have known
Good morning from sunny Islington. This Brexit Freedom Bill that will deliver the benefits of Brexit by ripping up "EU Red Tape". Any specifics they have in mind?
Trade red tape? Imposed by this government insisting on 3rd country status? I'd be ecstatic if they ripped all that up, but that only returns us to the status quo ante. Health and Safety red tape? Perhaps we need less namby pamby rules that make our cars safer or force employers to do a risk assessment before sending someone up a ladder Food standards red tape? To be fair we'd all benefit from more botulism
On the latter two haven't this government pledged *not* to do such things?
Laithwates guy on R4 this am, HMG changing the current wine duty of 3 rates (still, sparkling and fortified) to I think 23 rates based on alcohol percentage. Going to destroy small producers/merchants he said.
What’s all that lovely British red tape going to do to the British sparkling wine miracle?
There's a group in Customs and Excise who have spent decades dreaming of more tax on booze. Hence the joy with which they cut down on the personal allowances for import. You could, essentially bring van loads of wine into the country by claiming it was for personal use.
And did. Knew a guy who made a living doing that.
Yes - certain independent wine shops in London were doing quite nicely on the delta between a Transit full of expensive wine direct from the producers cellar and the price of the van load via regular import. By the time you add in a couple of middle men & tax, it made a big difference. They could offer the customers "special prices" and still make a bigger profit.
The chap I knew used to sell to restaurants. I'd not long been to one of his customers, bought (as you do) some wine with the meal, and a week later sat in the pub listening to him telling us all what he'd sold it for. And gloating that he'd made a good profit, at a LOT less than I'd been charged.
He's been dead a few years now.
I've seen wine I bought in France for £12 at the vineyard, on wine lists in not-posh places for £40 in London
Re COVID - with the changes to cases numbers today -
What changes? Can you explain briefly?
To date reinfections have not been included (except in Wales) so the figures are likely to be higher. We know that Omicron causes a lot of reinfection.
So expect iSage & Leon to run round screaming in small circles at 16:01
Does anyone think that iSage will condemn the revocation of the vaccine mandate for the NHS - if it happens?
They aren’t going to benchmark a reinfection inclusive figure against a reinfection exclusive figure surely? That would be barmy (and useless). And the usual innumerate panickers will have a field day, as you say.
(In the real world the covid numbers have been looking really encouraging)
"That would be barmy (and useless)" - Ah, you have described the Pestonite journalists on the subject of anything involving Maths (hiss, boo, shudder etc) perfectly.....
They are not going to back date the data on the dashboard - the historical data is not available - there will be a step change.
So all the muppets will scream......
That’s absolutely stupid, in which case.
Why not simply separate reinfections out, if they want to include them?
I presume data isn't going to be available - I haven't seen any notices on changes to metrics, to offer numbers on re-infections.
The dashboard people are trying to present the best data set they can. The problem is the fuckwits who mis-use it.
Looks like the U-turn for Mandatory Vaccinations is coming after a really difficult week personally of chasing up the vaccination status of staff, dealing with angry and upset staff both in person and face to face or via emails. All that work we have been doing and focusing on, the extra hours and what we have had to deal with was for nothing.
We have put through a lot of staff through the ringer emotionally. I know we are doing what we have been told and it's our job, but right now I find it difficult to focus on seeing it that way.
Thanks for your work in trying to convince them. However, I'd sack all NHS refuseniks.
Basically: I would not trust any medical practioner who did not get vaccinated for *reasons* to give me good medical advice.
So after you've sacked 70 to 80,000 NHS staff, not all patient-facing, of course, how will you run the health service?
The biggest issue is in some sectors, such as the Midwives for example.
It was heading to be a very dangerous April to be born.
Though I also see JJ's point ... presumably the midwives have historically been parallel to and somewhat in opposition to the (until recent decades) largely male and scientific doctors?
Yes there has historically been a difficult relationship between some factions of midwifery and the medical profession. Not all midwives of course, and not all doctors.
There is a faction for "natural child birth" that sees medical intervention as a forceful invasion of a female space. There is too a a view amongst some doctors that midwives leave it too late to call for medical intervention, and refuse to take responsibility when things go badly wrong.
This ideological and cultural split isn't the only reason for the recurrent scandals in maternity units, but it can be part of the toxic culture on some units. Some midwives see themselves as the vanguard of feminism, some doctors refer to "madwives", with little common ground. Not referring to my own Trust here.
The startling bit my wife and I encountered was when the people in the Natural Birth unit were quite proud about not making any provision for a change of plan if the birth didn't proceed naturally. They claimed that just created "failure" and that the only thing they would "allow" was a medical emergency that would be treated like a hospitalisation. That is an emergency medical response team would move you out of their unit, to the regular birth unit. So their unit wouldn't be "compromised" with all that medical stuff....
There is an evidence base, but I'm fully with you on there being some midwifery and health visitor emotion based medicine that is almost witchcraft.
- The hard line breast milk only until 6 months change. Yes, choking is a real hazard when going to solid food, but the number of babies who go through a couple of months where they are utterly distraught trying to hold this line is unbelievable. - The no medication in pregnancy line - the we won't tell you if anything is safe, even if it has been used on pregnant women for decades. OK, I'm happy with a level of caution, but where Britain said no, the Australian pharmacopeia was a no nonsense godsend, when the Mrs got badly allergic to something and wanted a Benadryl.
There are more, but at the risk of going on I'll stop there.
The problem areas for vaccination should be flashing red lights to NICE and the care quality folks to say that 'medical practices might be a problem here'.
One thing that horrified me was the literal bullying of mothers over breast milk. Some can't produce enough for the baby - I witnessed a mother being told she was "bad" for not 100% breast feeding.
Thatd help with the postpartum depression...
Indeed - and bullying people is a *so* well known as a universally successful tactic.
For our first, who did have some fun latching on, the health visitor's insistence that one could breast feed with NO increase in calorific intake at all, nearly crashed the whole thing, whilst guilt tripping was in full cry.
He was shown the door and no health visitor was welcome in the home from that moment on - the midwives, OK, the health visitors, no.
But, the guilt trip was such that then Mrs Rata over compensated and often put on significant weight AFTER giving birth to ensure the milk was there.
And we were told that any mixed feeding was guaranteed to crash breast feeding. Nope, the one bottle feed a day, and whatever bulking agent is in bottle milk , did wonders for the long sleep and was stable for months.
Re COVID - with the changes to cases numbers today -
What changes? Can you explain briefly?
To date reinfections have not been included (except in Wales) so the figures are likely to be higher. We know that Omicron causes a lot of reinfection.
So expect iSage & Leon to run round screaming in small circles at 16:01
Does anyone think that iSage will condemn the revocation of the vaccine mandate for the NHS - if it happens?
They aren’t going to benchmark a reinfection inclusive figure against a reinfection exclusive figure surely? That would be barmy (and useless). And the usual innumerate panickers will have a field day, as you say.
(In the real world the covid numbers have been looking really encouraging)
"That would be barmy (and useless)" - Ah, you have described the Pestonite journalists on the subject of anything involving Maths (hiss, boo, shudder etc) perfectly.....
They are not going to back date the data on the dashboard - the historical data is not available - there will be a step change.
So all the muppets will scream......
That’s absolutely stupid, in which case.
Why not simply separate reinfections out, if they want to include them?
It would seem the obvious thing to enter them as a new line in the report.
I am told that the headline Scottish figures do not include reinfections, but that the data is there in the tables. I haven't found it in a digestible form though.
Still 2 lines on the LFT though, so no return to work just yet.
The government seem to be having some sort of collective breakdown this morning.
U-turn on NHS vax status, brexit red meat thrown out to its base, NI rise defence (which has the potential to be a bit of a poll tax moment), energy crisis looming, inflation, student loan freeze (punishing the young yet again…)
Has the feeling of a government in its final weeks and months tbh, let along one that had won an 80 seat majority two years ago.
Looks like the U-turn for Mandatory Vaccinations is coming after a really difficult week personally of chasing up the vaccination status of staff, dealing with angry and upset staff both in person and face to face or via emails. All that work we have been doing and focusing on, the extra hours and what we have had to deal with was for nothing.
We have put through a lot of staff through the ringer emotionally. I know we are doing what we have been told and it's our job, but right now I find it difficult to focus on seeing it that way.
Thanks for your work in trying to convince them. However, I'd sack all NHS refuseniks.
Basically: I would not trust any medical practioner who did not get vaccinated for *reasons* to give me good medical advice.
So after you've sacked 70 to 80,000 NHS staff, not all patient-facing, of course, how will you run the health service?
The biggest issue is in some sectors, such as the Midwives for example.
It was heading to be a very dangerous April to be born.
Though I also see JJ's point ... presumably the midwives have historically been parallel to and somewhat in opposition to the (until recent decades) largely male and scientific doctors?
Yes there has historically been a difficult relationship between some factions of midwifery and the medical profession. Not all midwives of course, and not all doctors.
There is a faction for "natural child birth" that sees medical intervention as a forceful invasion of a female space. There is too a a view amongst some doctors that midwives leave it too late to call for medical intervention, and refuse to take responsibility when things go badly wrong.
This ideological and cultural split isn't the only reason for the recurrent scandals in maternity units, but it can be part of the toxic culture on some units. Some midwives see themselves as the vanguard of feminism, some doctors refer to "madwives", with little common ground. Not referring to my own Trust here.
The startling bit my wife and I encountered was when the people in the Natural Birth unit were quite proud about not making any provision for a change of plan if the birth didn't proceed naturally. They claimed that just created "failure" and that the only thing they would "allow" was a medical emergency that would be treated like a hospitalisation. That is an emergency medical response team would move you out of their unit, to the regular birth unit. So their unit wouldn't be "compromised" with all that medical stuff....
There is an evidence base, but I'm fully with you on there being some midwifery and health visitor emotion based medicine that is almost witchcraft.
- The hard line breast milk only until 6 months change. Yes, choking is a real hazard when going to solid food, but the number of babies who go through a couple of months where they are utterly distraught trying to hold this line is unbelievable. - The no medication in pregnancy line - the we won't tell you if anything is safe, even if it has been used on pregnant women for decades. OK, I'm happy with a level of caution, but where Britain said no, the Australian pharmacopeia was a no nonsense godsend, when the Mrs got badly allergic to something and wanted a Benadryl.
There are more, but at the risk of going on I'll stop there.
The problem areas for vaccination should be flashing red lights to NICE and the care quality folks to say that 'medical practices might be a problem here'.
One thing that horrified me was the literal bullying of mothers over breast milk. Some can't produce enough for the baby - I witnessed a mother being told she was "bad" for not 100% breast feeding.
Thatd help with the postpartum depression...
Indeed - and bullying people is a *so* well known as a universally successful tactic.
For our first, who did have some fun latching on, the health visitor's insistence that one could breast feed with NO increase in calorific intake at all, nearly crashed the whole thing, whilst guilt tripping was in full cry.
He was shown the door and no health visitor was welcome in the home from that moment on - the midwives, OK, the health visitors, no.
But, the guilt trip was such that then Mrs Rata over compensated and often put on significant weight AFTER giving birth to ensure the milk was there.
And we were told that any mixed feeding was guaranteed to crash breast feeding. Nope, the one bottle feed a day, and whatever bulking agent is in bottle milk , did wonders for the long sleep and was stable for months.
The first health visitor we had (we moved) was less useful than a lump of wood.
The second one was very good.
This probably had something to with the fact the first one had no children. The second one introduced herself with "I've got x children and y grand children - all healthy"....
The government seem to be having some sort of collective breakdown this morning.
U-turn on NHS vax status, brexit red meat thrown out to its base, NI rise defence (which has the potential to be a bit of a poll tax moment), energy crisis looming, inflation, student loan freeze (punishing the young yet again…)
Has the feeling of a government in its final weeks and months tbh, let along one that had won an 80 seat majority two years ago.
It does have something of a "try everything" feel at the moment ; the pre-tantrum moment when a frustrated toddler finally smashes all the buttons on a toy at once, before discarding it.
Good header, and absolutely agree that reasonable people can disagree. I also agree that the government defence vs opposition defence could be a crucial difference between the seats - or it could not matter at all. We've never seen this scenario before, and only had one uncontested by-election before in B&S so there is a fair bit of uncertainty here.
I guess I can't wish Mike luck in the circumstances, but I'd always wish him well.
So, we're getting a "Brexit Freedom Bill". The effect is to give Boris Johnson and his cronies the freedom to enact legislation without troubling parliament and to embed additional dictatorship.
Noteworthy the significant Brexit benefit claimed:
Data and AI – moving in a faster, more agile way to regulate new digital markets and AI and creating a more proportionate and less burdensome data rights regime compared to the EU’s GDPR
This is an interesting one because you a trading an ability to do new and interesting things against a weakening of data privacy rules and accountability. This will almost certainly result in the loss of EU data adequacy agreements (the government claims not). You can't do AI unless you have the data to do it on. The UK could do clever AI things with UK data subjects but it won't be a world centre of it. Also people may not be happy that important decisions are made about them entirely by black box algorithms - which is a big difference between the EU and the proposed UK regime. On the other hand more automation of data is the way the world is going and the UK may well lose access to EU data anyway. Generally countries are tightening up on data flows - the EU would be the biggest source of such data. In that case you might as well be hung for a sheep as a goat. It isn't exactly a Brexit "benefit" but it kind of makes sense.
Climate, the Environment and Agriculture – reforming our environmental regulation, 80% of which came from the EU, to deliver cleaner air, create new habitats, and reduce waste, while changing the rules on gene edited organisms, to enable more sustainable and efficient farming.
Changing the rules on gene editing (which unlike genetic modification is limited to the same species, so not quite as controversial) is still big in relation to farm animals. For example, factory farming of egg-laying hens involves shutting them in a cage with lots of others, preventing natural behaviour. This has serious health effects as well as welfare issues, and the trend is to phase it out as it's not efficient to have unhealthy birds. Gene editing could give it a new lease of life, by reducing the health impact, without doing anything for welfare. So it's more efficient, but also perpetuates suffering.
There are however areas where gene editing would be beneficial or harmless. What's needed is thorough legislative scrutiny with evidence from experts to get the balance right, and this Bill would remove that by (as I understand it) allowing the change to be made at a stroke by delegated legislation.
A more accurate name for the legislation would be the Blank Cheque Bill.
Mr. Divvie, the wine rates change sounds like a pointless exercise to make things more complicated, for no advantage.
In short, it's bloody stupid. I do wonder why they bother with things like that.
I can get people being stupidly lazy, or selfish. But this? Even the people cooking up the crap aren't going to benefit from it.
They are making wine duty proportionate to ABV. Which on the face of it sounds reasonable. Tax people per centilitre of alcohol.
I had an email from Angel Wines, they say this is going to hit the small producers making authentic wines that just turn out at a certain ABV. While the big producers will benefit by being able to churn out huge volumes of low quality low-alcohol wine.
The Laithwates man said part of the problem is that specific wines have varying ABV year on year so keeping on top of that involves a helluva lot of admin.
Looks like the U-turn for Mandatory Vaccinations is coming after a really difficult week personally of chasing up the vaccination status of staff, dealing with angry and upset staff both in person and face to face or via emails. All that work we have been doing and focusing on, the extra hours and what we have had to deal with was for nothing.
We have put through a lot of staff through the ringer emotionally. I know we are doing what we have been told and it's our job, but right now I find it difficult to focus on seeing it that way.
Thanks for your work in trying to convince them. However, I'd sack all NHS refuseniks.
Basically: I would not trust any medical practioner who did not get vaccinated for *reasons* to give me good medical advice.
So after you've sacked 70 to 80,000 NHS staff, not all patient-facing, of course, how will you run the health service?
The biggest issue is in some sectors, such as the Midwives for example.
It was heading to be a very dangerous April to be born.
Though I also see JJ's point ... presumably the midwives have historically been parallel to and somewhat in opposition to the (until recent decades) largely male and scientific doctors?
Yes there has historically been a difficult relationship between some factions of midwifery and the medical profession. Not all midwives of course, and not all doctors.
There is a faction for "natural child birth" that sees medical intervention as a forceful invasion of a female space. There is too a a view amongst some doctors that midwives leave it too late to call for medical intervention, and refuse to take responsibility when things go badly wrong.
This ideological and cultural split isn't the only reason for the recurrent scandals in maternity units, but it can be part of the toxic culture on some units. Some midwives see themselves as the vanguard of feminism, some doctors refer to "madwives", with little common ground. Not referring to my own Trust here.
The startling bit my wife and I encountered was when the people in the Natural Birth unit were quite proud about not making any provision for a change of plan if the birth didn't proceed naturally. They claimed that just created "failure" and that the only thing they would "allow" was a medical emergency that would be treated like a hospitalisation. That is an emergency medical response team would move you out of their unit, to the regular birth unit. So their unit wouldn't be "compromised" with all that medical stuff....
There is an evidence base, but I'm fully with you on there being some midwifery and health visitor emotion based medicine that is almost witchcraft.
- The hard line breast milk only until 6 months change. Yes, choking is a real hazard when going to solid food, but the number of babies who go through a couple of months where they are utterly distraught trying to hold this line is unbelievable. - The no medication in pregnancy line - the we won't tell you if anything is safe, even if it has been used on pregnant women for decades. OK, I'm happy with a level of caution, but where Britain said no, the Australian pharmacopeia was a no nonsense godsend, when the Mrs got badly allergic to something and wanted a Benadryl.
There are more, but at the risk of going on I'll stop there.
The problem areas for vaccination should be flashing red lights to NICE and the care quality folks to say that 'medical practices might be a problem here'.
One thing that horrified me was the literal bullying of mothers over breast milk. Some can't produce enough for the baby - I witnessed a mother being told she was "bad" for not 100% breast feeding.
Thatd help with the postpartum depression...
Indeed - and bullying people is a *so* well known as a universally successful tactic.
For our first, who did have some fun latching on, the health visitor's insistence that one could breast feed with NO increase in calorific intake at all, nearly crashed the whole thing, whilst guilt tripping was in full cry.
He was shown the door and no health visitor was welcome in the home from that moment on - the midwives, OK, the health visitors, no.
But, the guilt trip was such that then Mrs Rata over compensated and often put on significant weight AFTER giving birth to ensure the milk was there.
And we were told that any mixed feeding was guaranteed to crash breast feeding. Nope, the one bottle feed a day, and whatever bulking agent is in bottle milk , did wonders for the long sleep and was stable for months.
The first health visitor we had (we moved) was less useful than a lump of wood.
The second one was very good.
This probably had something to with the fact the first one had no children. The second one introduced herself with "I've got x children and y grand children - all healthy"....
I feel I could riff all day on this. I won't, but one final thought.
Daring to get pregnant a couple of years into your 40s outside the prescribed nappy valley bits of London. Good lord, she was treated like she was an evil person for daring to do so. No happiness for us, just wall to wall doom, risk and outright lectures. Tracy Neville raised this one a while back, and she was spot on.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
@Foxy , is the change to testing positive but still coming in an England thing?
My gf (Doctor) spams LFTs and is mildly depressed every time they come back negative. Off for another 13 hour shift this morning!
She's pretty settled on becoming a part time Highland GP... could be very lucrative if I can get paid my Edinburgh salary while living in Kinlochbervie.
Looks like the U-turn for Mandatory Vaccinations is coming after a really difficult week personally of chasing up the vaccination status of staff, dealing with angry and upset staff both in person and face to face or via emails. All that work we have been doing and focusing on, the extra hours and what we have had to deal with was for nothing.
We have put through a lot of staff through the ringer emotionally. I know we are doing what we have been told and it's our job, but right now I find it difficult to focus on seeing it that way.
Thanks for your work in trying to convince them. However, I'd sack all NHS refuseniks.
Basically: I would not trust any medical practioner who did not get vaccinated for *reasons* to give me good medical advice.
So after you've sacked 70 to 80,000 NHS staff, not all patient-facing, of course, how will you run the health service?
The biggest issue is in some sectors, such as the Midwives for example.
It was heading to be a very dangerous April to be born.
Though I also see JJ's point ... presumably the midwives have historically been parallel to and somewhat in opposition to the (until recent decades) largely male and scientific doctors?
Yes there has historically been a difficult relationship between some factions of midwifery and the medical profession. Not all midwives of course, and not all doctors.
There is a faction for "natural child birth" that sees medical intervention as a forceful invasion of a female space. There is too a a view amongst some doctors that midwives leave it too late to call for medical intervention, and refuse to take responsibility when things go badly wrong.
This ideological and cultural split isn't the only reason for the recurrent scandals in maternity units, but it can be part of the toxic culture on some units. Some midwives see themselves as the vanguard of feminism, some doctors refer to "madwives", with little common ground. Not referring to my own Trust here.
The startling bit my wife and I encountered was when the people in the Natural Birth unit were quite proud about not making any provision for a change of plan if the birth didn't proceed naturally. They claimed that just created "failure" and that the only thing they would "allow" was a medical emergency that would be treated like a hospitalisation. That is an emergency medical response team would move you out of their unit, to the regular birth unit. So their unit wouldn't be "compromised" with all that medical stuff....
There is an evidence base, but I'm fully with you on there being some midwifery and health visitor emotion based medicine that is almost witchcraft.
- The hard line breast milk only until 6 months change. Yes, choking is a real hazard when going to solid food, but the number of babies who go through a couple of months where they are utterly distraught trying to hold this line is unbelievable. - The no medication in pregnancy line - the we won't tell you if anything is safe, even if it has been used on pregnant women for decades. OK, I'm happy with a level of caution, but where Britain said no, the Australian pharmacopeia was a no nonsense godsend, when the Mrs got badly allergic to something and wanted a Benadryl.
There are more, but at the risk of going on I'll stop there.
The problem areas for vaccination should be flashing red lights to NICE and the care quality folks to say that 'medical practices might be a problem here'.
One thing that horrified me was the literal bullying of mothers over breast milk. Some can't produce enough for the baby - I witnessed a mother being told she was "bad" for not 100% breast feeding.
Thatd help with the postpartum depression...
Indeed - and bullying people is a *so* well known as a universally successful tactic.
For our first, who did have some fun latching on, the health visitor's insistence that one could breast feed with NO increase in calorific intake at all, nearly crashed the whole thing, whilst guilt tripping was in full cry.
He was shown the door and no health visitor was welcome in the home from that moment on - the midwives, OK, the health visitors, no.
But, the guilt trip was such that then Mrs Rata over compensated and often put on significant weight AFTER giving birth to ensure the milk was there.
And we were told that any mixed feeding was guaranteed to crash breast feeding. Nope, the one bottle feed a day, and whatever bulking agent is in bottle milk , did wonders for the long sleep and was stable for months.
The first health visitor we had (we moved) was less useful than a lump of wood.
The second one was very good.
This probably had something to with the fact the first one had no children. The second one introduced herself with "I've got x children and y grand children - all healthy"....
I feel I could riff all day on this. I won't, but one final thought.
Daring to get pregnant a couple of years into your 40s outside the prescribed nappy valley bits of London. Good lord, she was treated like she was an evil person for daring to do so. No happiness for us, just wall to wall doom, risk and outright lectures. Tracy Neville raised this one a while back, and she was spot on.
The numbers are a bit grim.... There was an attempt to bin a Prof of Medicine a few years back for daring to say that telling women that having children late was absolutely fine, was a lie.
Good morning from sunny Islington. This Brexit Freedom Bill that will deliver the benefits of Brexit by ripping up "EU Red Tape". Any specifics they have in mind?
Trade red tape? Imposed by this government insisting on 3rd country status? I'd be ecstatic if they ripped all that up, but that only returns us to the status quo ante. Health and Safety red tape? Perhaps we need less namby pamby rules that make our cars safer or force employers to do a risk assessment before sending someone up a ladder Food standards red tape? To be fair we'd all benefit from more botulism
On the latter two haven't this government pledged *not* to do such things?
Laithwates guy on R4 this am, HMG changing the current wine duty of 3 rates (still, sparkling and fortified) to I think 23 rates based on alcohol percentage. Going to destroy small producers/merchants he said.
What’s all that lovely British red tape going to do to the British sparkling wine miracle?
There's a group in Customs and Excise who have spent decades dreaming of more tax on booze. Hence the joy with which they cut down on the personal allowances for import. You could, essentially bring van loads of wine into the country by claiming it was for personal use.
And did. Knew a guy who made a living doing that.
Yes - certain independent wine shops in London were doing quite nicely on the delta between a Transit full of expensive wine direct from the producers cellar and the price of the van load via regular import. By the time you add in a couple of middle men & tax, it made a big difference. They could offer the customers "special prices" and still make a bigger profit.
The chap I knew used to sell to restaurants. I'd not long been to one of his customers, bought (as you do) some wine with the meal, and a week later sat in the pub listening to him telling us all what he'd sold it for. And gloating that he'd made a good profit, at a LOT less than I'd been charged.
He's been dead a few years now.
I've seen wine I bought in France for £12 at the vineyard, on wine lists in not-posh places for £40 in London
The markup on wine in a restaurant is often 200%.
Hmm.
Bit of a misrepresentation to only talk about wine (or perhaps whine is better as the default activity of the Food Trade Federation), as it is across the board. And a lot of anomalies are being ironed out.
The British sparkling wine miracle will continue because tax per bottle is 87p less, the special extra tax on bubbles having been removed.
I'd say it is setting up a gentle pressure towards less alcoholic drinks. Agree that there seem to be too many bands - somebody should have given the Treasury a spreadsheet set to one digit so they could only have 10 bands.
What is the impact on Scotch sales in the UK, since the boom in Whisky exports is one of the more obvious Brexit successes (up 30-40% 2020 to 2021)?
200% seems a minimal mark up for a restaurant on wine. I thought the usual was 200% over the retail price, and the retail price already has a typical mark up of 1.4x (double plus VAT). I'd expect about 3-5x over a vineyard price.
Good morning all. Last night I had a dream that Bozo was mixed up in another 'incident'.
Basically, he had submitted an expenses claim for taxi journeys totaling several thousand pounds, and then 'on advice' he had withdrawn the claim. The media got wind of what had happened, and of course he lied and said that he hadn't submitted the claim in the first place.
Good morning from sunny Islington. This Brexit Freedom Bill that will deliver the benefits of Brexit by ripping up "EU Red Tape". Any specifics they have in mind?
Trade red tape? Imposed by this government insisting on 3rd country status? I'd be ecstatic if they ripped all that up, but that only returns us to the status quo ante. Health and Safety red tape? Perhaps we need less namby pamby rules that make our cars safer or force employers to do a risk assessment before sending someone up a ladder Food standards red tape? To be fair we'd all benefit from more botulism
On the latter two haven't this government pledged *not* to do such things?
Laithwates guy on R4 this am, HMG changing the current wine duty of 3 rates (still, sparkling and fortified) to I think 23 rates based on alcohol percentage. Going to destroy small producers/merchants he said.
What’s all that lovely British red tape going to do to the British sparkling wine miracle?
There's a group in Customs and Excise who have spent decades dreaming of more tax on booze. Hence the joy with which they cut down on the personal allowances for import. You could, essentially bring van loads of wine into the country by claiming it was for personal use.
And did. Knew a guy who made a living doing that.
Yes - certain independent wine shops in London were doing quite nicely on the delta between a Transit full of expensive wine direct from the producers cellar and the price of the van load via regular import. By the time you add in a couple of middle men & tax, it made a big difference. They could offer the customers "special prices" and still make a bigger profit.
The chap I knew used to sell to restaurants. I'd not long been to one of his customers, bought (as you do) some wine with the meal, and a week later sat in the pub listening to him telling us all what he'd sold it for. And gloating that he'd made a good profit, at a LOT less than I'd been charged.
He's been dead a few years now.
I've seen wine I bought in France for £12 at the vineyard, on wine lists in not-posh places for £40 in London
The markup on wine in a restaurant is often 200%.
Some years ago we decided to go for the 'posh' breakfast a ,local restaurant were advertising. 'Fresh Orange juice' starter was £1 a glass, IIRC. Later I went to pay and there on the bar was a tetrapack of orange juice which the local grocer was selling at 65p a pack.
Looks like the U-turn for Mandatory Vaccinations is coming after a really difficult week personally of chasing up the vaccination status of staff, dealing with angry and upset staff both in person and face to face or via emails. All that work we have been doing and focusing on, the extra hours and what we have had to deal with was for nothing.
We have put through a lot of staff through the ringer emotionally. I know we are doing what we have been told and it's our job, but right now I find it difficult to focus on seeing it that way.
Thanks for your work in trying to convince them. However, I'd sack all NHS refuseniks.
Basically: I would not trust any medical practioner who did not get vaccinated for *reasons* to give me good medical advice.
So after you've sacked 70 to 80,000 NHS staff, not all patient-facing, of course, how will you run the health service?
The biggest issue is in some sectors, such as the Midwives for example.
It was heading to be a very dangerous April to be born.
Though I also see JJ's point ... presumably the midwives have historically been parallel to and somewhat in opposition to the (until recent decades) largely male and scientific doctors?
Yes there has historically been a difficult relationship between some factions of midwifery and the medical profession. Not all midwives of course, and not all doctors.
There is a faction for "natural child birth" that sees medical intervention as a forceful invasion of a female space. There is too a a view amongst some doctors that midwives leave it too late to call for medical intervention, and refuse to take responsibility when things go badly wrong.
This ideological and cultural split isn't the only reason for the recurrent scandals in maternity units, but it can be part of the toxic culture on some units. Some midwives see themselves as the vanguard of feminism, some doctors refer to "madwives", with little common ground. Not referring to my own Trust here.
The startling bit my wife and I encountered was when the people in the Natural Birth unit were quite proud about not making any provision for a change of plan if the birth didn't proceed naturally. They claimed that just created "failure" and that the only thing they would "allow" was a medical emergency that would be treated like a hospitalisation. That is an emergency medical response team would move you out of their unit, to the regular birth unit. So their unit wouldn't be "compromised" with all that medical stuff....
There is an evidence base, but I'm fully with you on there being some midwifery and health visitor emotion based medicine that is almost witchcraft.
- The hard line breast milk only until 6 months change. Yes, choking is a real hazard when going to solid food, but the number of babies who go through a couple of months where they are utterly distraught trying to hold this line is unbelievable. - The no medication in pregnancy line - the we won't tell you if anything is safe, even if it has been used on pregnant women for decades. OK, I'm happy with a level of caution, but where Britain said no, the Australian pharmacopeia was a no nonsense godsend, when the Mrs got badly allergic to something and wanted a Benadryl.
There are more, but at the risk of going on I'll stop there.
The problem areas for vaccination should be flashing red lights to NICE and the care quality folks to say that 'medical practices might be a problem here'.
One thing that horrified me was the literal bullying of mothers over breast milk. Some can't produce enough for the baby - I witnessed a mother being told she was "bad" for not 100% breast feeding.
Thatd help with the postpartum depression...
Indeed - and bullying people is a *so* well known as a universally successful tactic.
For our first, who did have some fun latching on, the health visitor's insistence that one could breast feed with NO increase in calorific intake at all, nearly crashed the whole thing, whilst guilt tripping was in full cry.
He was shown the door and no health visitor was welcome in the home from that moment on - the midwives, OK, the health visitors, no.
But, the guilt trip was such that then Mrs Rata over compensated and often put on significant weight AFTER giving birth to ensure the milk was there.
And we were told that any mixed feeding was guaranteed to crash breast feeding. Nope, the one bottle feed a day, and whatever bulking agent is in bottle milk , did wonders for the long sleep and was stable for months.
The first health visitor we had (we moved) was less useful than a lump of wood.
The second one was very good.
This probably had something to with the fact the first one had no children. The second one introduced herself with "I've got x children and y grand children - all healthy"....
I feel I could riff all day on this. I won't, but one final thought.
Daring to get pregnant a couple of years into your 40s outside the prescribed nappy valley bits of London. Good lord, she was treated like she was an evil person for daring to do so. No happiness for us, just wall to wall doom, risk and outright lectures. Tracy Neville raised this one a while back, and she was spot on.
The numbers are a bit grim.... There was an attempt to bin a Prof of Medicine a few years back for daring to say that telling women that having children late was absolutely fine, was a lie.
There is an increase of risk of quite serious consequences from very low to low. The last conception was attempted later than planned and then took a while. The risks didn't need to be soft soaped, and checks made, fine - but the pervasive "how dare you" attitude was wrong.
Mr. Divvie, the wine rates change sounds like a pointless exercise to make things more complicated, for no advantage.
In short, it's bloody stupid. I do wonder why they bother with things like that.
I can get people being stupidly lazy, or selfish. But this? Even the people cooking up the crap aren't going to benefit from it.
They are making wine duty proportionate to ABV. Which on the face of it sounds reasonable. Tax people per centilitre of alcohol.
I had an email from Angel Wines, they say this is going to hit the small producers making authentic wines that just turn out at a certain ABV. While the big producers will benefit by being able to churn out huge volumes of low quality low-alcohol wine.
I have had that email too.
There has been a drift upward in wine strength over the decades. It is an easy way to give the impression of body and depth to a wine, a bit like adding salt or fat to food. It takes more skill to add it in other ways.
I do buy from Naked Wines, but there is a tendency to a homogenised taste to their wines, reflecting the modern palate for fruity high alcohol single varietal wines. A sort of modern Leibfraumilch of Shiraz, Merlot or Sauvignion Blanc, that is very drinkable but also rather uniform across countries and regions.
Mr. Divvie, the wine rates change sounds like a pointless exercise to make things more complicated, for no advantage.
In short, it's bloody stupid. I do wonder why they bother with things like that.
I can get people being stupidly lazy, or selfish. But this? Even the people cooking up the crap aren't going to benefit from it.
They claim the point of this is to make the duty rates better reflect the health risks associated with the alcohol in the wines. So the higher the alcohol level the higher the duty. That makes sense theoretically but how it works out in practice is another matter. But this is something that was called for by a lot of people including those inside the wine trade (which my wife works in) for many years.
Good morning from sunny Islington. This Brexit Freedom Bill that will deliver the benefits of Brexit by ripping up "EU Red Tape". Any specifics they have in mind?
Trade red tape? Imposed by this government insisting on 3rd country status? I'd be ecstatic if they ripped all that up, but that only returns us to the status quo ante. Health and Safety red tape? Perhaps we need less namby pamby rules that make our cars safer or force employers to do a risk assessment before sending someone up a ladder Food standards red tape? To be fair we'd all benefit from more botulism
On the latter two haven't this government pledged *not* to do such things?
Laithwates guy on R4 this am, HMG changing the current wine duty of 3 rates (still, sparkling and fortified) to I think 23 rates based on alcohol percentage. Going to destroy small producers/merchants he said.
What’s all that lovely British red tape going to do to the British sparkling wine miracle?
There's a group in Customs and Excise who have spent decades dreaming of more tax on booze. Hence the joy with which they cut down on the personal allowances for import. You could, essentially bring van loads of wine into the country by claiming it was for personal use.
And did. Knew a guy who made a living doing that.
Yes - certain independent wine shops in London were doing quite nicely on the delta between a Transit full of expensive wine direct from the producers cellar and the price of the van load via regular import. By the time you add in a couple of middle men & tax, it made a big difference. They could offer the customers "special prices" and still make a bigger profit.
The chap I knew used to sell to restaurants. I'd not long been to one of his customers, bought (as you do) some wine with the meal, and a week later sat in the pub listening to him telling us all what he'd sold it for. And gloating that he'd made a good profit, at a LOT less than I'd been charged.
He's been dead a few years now.
I've seen wine I bought in France for £12 at the vineyard, on wine lists in not-posh places for £40 in London
Usual mark up of wine in a restaurant is 3x so you were getting a great deal for that £12=> £40 wine in the restaurant in the UK.
Good morning from sunny Islington. This Brexit Freedom Bill that will deliver the benefits of Brexit by ripping up "EU Red Tape". Any specifics they have in mind?
Trade red tape? Imposed by this government insisting on 3rd country status? I'd be ecstatic if they ripped all that up, but that only returns us to the status quo ante. Health and Safety red tape? Perhaps we need less namby pamby rules that make our cars safer or force employers to do a risk assessment before sending someone up a ladder Food standards red tape? To be fair we'd all benefit from more botulism
On the latter two haven't this government pledged *not* to do such things?
Laithwates guy on R4 this am, HMG changing the current wine duty of 3 rates (still, sparkling and fortified) to I think 23 rates based on alcohol percentage. Going to destroy small producers/merchants he said.
What’s all that lovely British red tape going to do to the British sparkling wine miracle?
There's a group in Customs and Excise who have spent decades dreaming of more tax on booze. Hence the joy with which they cut down on the personal allowances for import. You could, essentially bring van loads of wine into the country by claiming it was for personal use.
And did. Knew a guy who made a living doing that.
Yes - certain independent wine shops in London were doing quite nicely on the delta between a Transit full of expensive wine direct from the producers cellar and the price of the van load via regular import. By the time you add in a couple of middle men & tax, it made a big difference. They could offer the customers "special prices" and still make a bigger profit.
The chap I knew used to sell to restaurants. I'd not long been to one of his customers, bought (as you do) some wine with the meal, and a week later sat in the pub listening to him telling us all what he'd sold it for. And gloating that he'd made a good profit, at a LOT less than I'd been charged.
He's been dead a few years now.
I've seen wine I bought in France for £12 at the vineyard, on wine lists in not-posh places for £40 in London
The markup on wine in a restaurant is often 200%.
Hmm.
Bit of a misrepresentation to only talk about wine (or perhaps whine is better as the default activity of the Food Trade Federation), as it is across the board. And a lot of anomalies are being ironed out.
The British sparkling wine miracle will continue because tax per bottle is 87p less, the special extra tax on bubbles having been removed.
I'd say it is setting up a gentle pressure towards less alcoholic drinks. Agree that there seem to be too many bands - somebody should have given the Treasury a spreadsheet set to one digit so they could only have 10 bands.
What is the impact on Scotch sales in the UK, since the boom in Whisky exports is one of the more obvious Brexit successes (up 30-40% 2020 to 2021)?
200% seems a minimal mark up for a restaurant on wine. I thought the usual was 200% over the retail price, and the retail price already has a typical mark up of 1.4x (double plus VAT). I'd expect about 3-5x over a vineyard price.
Doesn't look more complex than the existing scheme to me:
I note another 10% Labour lead with Deltapoll. I don't think the figures matter too much now. Johnson's reputation is trashed and the longer he hangs around the better for Starmer. Every time a minister appears and says they trust the Prime Minister's honesty the greater the damage
On Any Questions it was the hapless Michelle Donnelly. God knows what the poor woman's post bag looks like today. "Do you believe the Prime Minister?" "Yes" she said. The Gloucester audience couldn't contain themselves. They were in stitches.
They seem to be almost the only website in the UK so breezily confident there's no stitch-up at this time, in that case.
Has anyone supplied any evidence of a stitch-up beyond hearsay and political mudslinging?
Has anyone delivered any evidence to the contrary, so far ? Almost none of the former DPP's, former attorneys-general and the many others who have commented, seem to think they have.
It's a very odd situation, which I assume he expects will be solved by sitting on the roof of a tank in all-weather gear and ear muffs.
Good morning. I can't see that Lab or LD voters will turn out for a UKIP candidate, even in these circumstances. I think they'll either not vote or vote for one of the 'odd' candidates; personally I'd be tempted by the Psychedelic Movement, although they seem, like all the others, to be right-wingers. Evidence for the latter; attack on Black Lives matter.
In other news, just looked at the BBC site and note that 'Portugal's ruling Socialist Party has won an unexpected outright majority in Sunday's snap general election for only the second time in its history.'
Tend to agree - I think turnout will be low but the Tories should get 60%+. Honestly not sure what I'd do if I lived there, but probably abstain.
The Portugese result is interesting - the Socialists got a huge "stop messing about" vote, notably from former supporters of their left-wing allies who voted with the right to bring the Government down. If we ever had PR with a left-wing party on 10-15% (perfectly plausible) they would run into precisely that problem - they'd always have to support a Labour government in a crunch of get squeezed.
Mr. Divvie, the wine rates change sounds like a pointless exercise to make things more complicated, for no advantage.
In short, it's bloody stupid. I do wonder why they bother with things like that.
I can get people being stupidly lazy, or selfish. But this? Even the people cooking up the crap aren't going to benefit from it.
They are making wine duty proportionate to ABV. Which on the face of it sounds reasonable. Tax people per centilitre of alcohol.
I had an email from Angel Wines, they say this is going to hit the small producers making authentic wines that just turn out at a certain ABV. While the big producers will benefit by being able to churn out huge volumes of low quality low-alcohol wine.
I have had that email too.
There has been a drift upward in wine strength over the decades. It is an easy way to give the impression of body and depth to a wine, a bit like adding salt or fat to food. It takes more skill to add it in other ways.
I do buy from Naked Wines, but there is a tendency to a homogenised taste to their wines, reflecting the modern palate for fruity high alcohol single varietal wines. A sort of modern Leibfraumilch of Shiraz, Merlot or Sauvignion Blanc, that is very drinkable but also rather uniform across countries and regions.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
They seem to be almost the only website in the UK so breezily confident there's no stitch-up at this time, in that case.
Has anyone supplied any evidence of a stitch-up beyond hearsay and political mudslinging?
Has anyone delivered any evidence to the contrary, so far, though ? Almost none of the former DPP's, former attorneys-general and several others, seem to think they have.
It's a very odd situation, which I assume he expects will be solved by sitting on the roof of a tank in all-weather gear and ear muffs.
You can't prove a negative.
If you're making a proposition the evidence needs to be made for it, never the other way around unless the other way around has already been proven.
I presume data isn't going to be available - I haven't seen any notices on changes to metrics, to offer numbers on re-infections.
The dashboard people are trying to present the best data set they can. The problem is the fuckwits who mis-use it.
I know you track this closer than I do so quite likely I'm misinterpreting the text, but their note about adding reinfections says "specimen date metrics will be revised back to the beginning of the pandemic", which I read as meaning that any of the specimen-date-based statistics and graphs will get historically-revised and won't have artificial jumps in them (whereas the by-reporting-date ones will). Is that right?
My impression is that by-specimen-date figures are more useful than by-reporting-date anyway, so if I'm also wrong about that do let me know :-)
Good morning. I can't see that Lab or LD voters will turn out for a UKIP candidate, even in these circumstances. I think they'll either not vote or vote for one of the 'odd' candidates; personally I'd be tempted by the Psychedelic Movement, although they seem, like all the others, to be right-wingers. Evidence for the latter; attack on Black Lives matter.
In other news, just looked at the BBC site and note that 'Portugal's ruling Socialist Party has won an unexpected outright majority in Sunday's snap general election for only the second time in its history.'
Tend to agree - I think turnout will be low but the Tories should get 60%+. Honestly not sure what I'd do if I lived there, but probably abstain.
The Portugese result is interesting - the Socialists got a huge "stop messing about" vote, notably from former supporters of their left-wing allies who voted with the right to bring the Government down. If we ever had PR with a left-wing party on 10-15% (perfectly plausible) they would run into precisely that problem - they'd always have to support a Labour government in a crunch of get squeezed.
They got a majority of 1 after the Communists and far left refused to support their previous minority government. Note too a far right party came third
They seem to be almost the only website in the UK so breezily confident there's no stitch-up at this time, in that case.
Has anyone supplied any evidence of a stitch-up beyond hearsay and political mudslinging?
Has anyone delivered any evidence to the contrary, so far, though ? Almost none of the former DPP's, former attorneys-general and several others, seem to think they have.
It's a very odd situation, which I assume he expects will be solved by sitting on the roof of a tank in all-weather gear and ear muffs.
You can't prove a negative.
If you're making a proposition the evidence needs to be made for it, never the other way around unless the other way around has already been proven.
The former DPP's and AT's seem to see it rather differently. They seem to think that normal procedure is not being followed, which is proof positive of something being askew. This is what it looks like Ken Macdonald is writing in the Mail today, for instance.
The positive evidence in that case would be long-established procedures apparently being ignored for some extraneous reason, or at least so they seem to imply.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
I guess one interesting question is the makeup of that 18%- what proportion are "Brexit is in peril and only Boris will defend it", and what proportion are "Brexit is a mistake to reverse ASAP"?
The government got where they were by playing the first tune, and they still like to wheel it out (see today's papers). If people are getting bored of it, and wouldn't mind tentative steps towards Brapprochment (especially if it's done on the quiet and cuts prices in the shops), the government are in a bit of a pickle.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
An equally question is why so many people seem to dislike her.
One problem with Social media is that you need a really thick skin to be an MP in this day and age - and a lot of people don't have a thick enough one.
Good morning. I can't see that Lab or LD voters will turn out for a UKIP candidate, even in these circumstances. I think they'll either not vote or vote for one of the 'odd' candidates; personally I'd be tempted by the Psychedelic Movement, although they seem, like all the others, to be right-wingers. Evidence for the latter; attack on Black Lives matter.
In other news, just looked at the BBC site and note that 'Portugal's ruling Socialist Party has won an unexpected outright majority in Sunday's snap general election for only the second time in its history.'
The Pyschedelic Movement are a pro cannabis legalisation party, I suspect some leftwingers and liberals will vote for them
An equally question is why so many people seem to dislike her.
One problem with Social media is that you need a really thick skin to be an MP in this day and age - and a lot of people don't have a thick enough one.
SKS has certainly been very silent on this and does not seem to be providing her with any obvious support.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
+1 - given that more tax revenue is (seemingly) required and there is nothing that isn't already taxed to the maximum I think a wealth tax is inevitable.
They seem to be almost the only website in the UK so breezily confident there's no stitch-up at this time, in that case.
Has anyone supplied any evidence of a stitch-up beyond hearsay and political mudslinging?
Has anyone delivered any evidence to the contrary, so far, though ? Almost none of the former DPP's, former attorneys-general and several others, seem to think they have.
It's a very odd situation, which I assume he expects will be solved by sitting on the roof of a tank in all-weather gear and ear muffs.
You can't prove a negative.
If you're making a proposition the evidence needs to be made for it, never the other way around unless the other way around has already been proven.
This is good analysis from that article:
"At the moment, this appears to be the predominant view and the intervention by the police appears to have helped him in that sense. But, to step back from this for a moment, the fact that the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police has concluded that there is evidence of a “flagrant and serious breach” of the lockdown restrictions by people who knew or should have known that this was the case is not encouraging for the Prime Minister. So no, the Met Police have not saved him. His fate is still in the balance."
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
Good morning. I can't see that Lab or LD voters will turn out for a UKIP candidate, even in these circumstances. I think they'll either not vote or vote for one of the 'odd' candidates; personally I'd be tempted by the Psychedelic Movement, although they seem, like all the others, to be right-wingers. Evidence for the latter; attack on Black Lives matter.
In other news, just looked at the BBC site and note that 'Portugal's ruling Socialist Party has won an unexpected outright majority in Sunday's snap general election for only the second time in its history.'
The Pyschedelic Movement are a pro cannabis legalisation party, I suspect some leftwingers and liberals will vote for them
That, TBH, was why I said that I'd be tempted by them.
There seem to be a significant number of people (primarily the iSAGE followers I imagine) who are totally preoccupied with case numbers to the exclusion of any other metrics.
I have one Facebook contact who has yet to have Covid and is getting themselves worked up into a frenzy on the "madness" of schools removing masks. The son now has Covid (flu like symptoms I believe) and has been locked up in his room for a week. I had previously said I was against masks in schools (and I still am) due to the work science has done on mitigating the big risks of Covid and longer term harmful side effects of masks (e.g. mental health).
I am now extremely unpopular because "look more kids have got Covid". It doesn't matter if they are all sitting at home locked in their room feeling fine and playing computer games. It doesn't matter that hospitalisations, patients on ventilators and deaths are all falling. I could get into a Facebook argument on it but it is pointless when so much is based on emotion rather than data.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
One one hand, a wealth tax is inevitable, and it probably has to include residential property- so much of our national income ends up in that bucket that it's bad for the nation and we can't really pay for the things we want the government to do without taxing it.
But looking at who votes Conservative these days, it would be electoral suicide. And whilst this government is uniquely awful for cynical clientism, it's hard to think of any PM who would bite the hand that feeds it to that degree.
Re COVID - with the changes to cases numbers today -
What changes? Can you explain briefly?
To date reinfections have not been included (except in Wales) so the figures are likely to be higher. We know that Omicron causes a lot of reinfection.
So expect iSage & Leon to run round screaming in small circles at 16:01
Does anyone think that iSage will condemn the revocation of the vaccine mandate for the NHS - if it happens?
They aren’t going to benchmark a reinfection inclusive figure against a reinfection exclusive figure surely? That would be barmy (and useless). And the usual innumerate panickers will have a field day, as you say.
(In the real world the covid numbers have been looking really encouraging)
"That would be barmy (and useless)" - Ah, you have described the Pestonite journalists on the subject of anything involving Maths (hiss, boo, shudder etc) perfectly.....
They are not going to back date the data on the dashboard - the historical data is not available - there will be a step change.
So all the muppets will scream......
That’s absolutely stupid, in which case.
Why not simply separate reinfections out, if they want to include them?
They WILL be backdating the crucial data on the dashboard. From Meaghan Kall, who's one of those working on it:
"Historical back series (by specimen date) will be revised " It's one of the reasons the update is such a big one and taking so much time to carry out.
However, reporting date data will not be revised, but that's less useful in any case. It does take a few days for specimen date data to come through, but that's the reference we need to use (7-day averaged to overcome day-of-week issues) against hospitalisations (lagged) and deaths. And deaths will also be revised for reinfections.
I do get that the more innumerate journalists and commentators will go hysterical, but no-one should pay attention to those idiots.
Looks like the U-turn for Mandatory Vaccinations is coming after a really difficult week personally of chasing up the vaccination status of staff, dealing with angry and upset staff both in person and face to face or via emails. All that work we have been doing and focusing on, the extra hours and what we have had to deal with was for nothing.
We have put through a lot of staff through the ringer emotionally. I know we are doing what we have been told and it's our job, but right now I find it difficult to focus on seeing it that way.
Thanks for your work in trying to convince them. However, I'd sack all NHS refuseniks.
Basically: I would not trust any medical practioner who did not get vaccinated for *reasons* to give me good medical advice.
So after you've sacked 70 to 80,000 NHS staff, not all patient-facing, of course, how will you run the health service?
The biggest issue is in some sectors, such as the Midwives for example.
It was heading to be a very dangerous April to be born.
Though I also see JJ's point ... presumably the midwives have historically been parallel to and somewhat in opposition to the (until recent decades) largely male and scientific doctors?
Yes there has historically been a difficult relationship between some factions of midwifery and the medical profession. Not all midwives of course, and not all doctors.
There is a faction for "natural child birth" that sees medical intervention as a forceful invasion of a female space. There is too a a view amongst some doctors that midwives leave it too late to call for medical intervention, and refuse to take responsibility when things go badly wrong.
This ideological and cultural split isn't the only reason for the recurrent scandals in maternity units, but it can be part of the toxic culture on some units. Some midwives see themselves as the vanguard of feminism, some doctors refer to "madwives", with little common ground. Not referring to my own Trust here.
The startling bit my wife and I encountered was when the people in the Natural Birth unit were quite proud about not making any provision for a change of plan if the birth didn't proceed naturally. They claimed that just created "failure" and that the only thing they would "allow" was a medical emergency that would be treated like a hospitalisation. That is an emergency medical response team would move you out of their unit, to the regular birth unit. So their unit wouldn't be "compromised" with all that medical stuff....
There is an evidence base, but I'm fully with you on there being some midwifery and health visitor emotion based medicine that is almost witchcraft.
- The hard line breast milk only until 6 months change. Yes, choking is a real hazard when going to solid food, but the number of babies who go through a couple of months where they are utterly distraught trying to hold this line is unbelievable. - The no medication in pregnancy line - the we won't tell you if anything is safe, even if it has been used on pregnant women for decades. OK, I'm happy with a level of caution, but where Britain said no, the Australian pharmacopeia was a no nonsense godsend, when the Mrs got badly allergic to something and wanted a Benadryl.
There are more, but at the risk of going on I'll stop there.
The problem areas for vaccination should be flashing red lights to NICE and the care quality folks to say that 'medical practices might be a problem here'.
One thing that horrified me was the literal bullying of mothers over breast milk. Some can't produce enough for the baby - I witnessed a mother being told she was "bad" for not 100% breast feeding.
Thatd help with the postpartum depression...
We had the same experience with our children and it was utterly horrifying the way we were treated by some of the NHS staff for our eldest.
Second time around we basically had enough confidence to tell certain types to leave us alone and move on.
I'm not surprised there's a core in the NHS opposed to medicine. If it were up to me I'd sack the lot of them and rebuild the NHS with people who actually understand how medicine works.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
You keep going on about people defecting to Re-fuk, but the truth is that even quite right wing conservatives consider them to be loonies and fascists. It is more credible to suggest people might chose not to vote.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
You have no such problem on increasing taxation on workers though.
Do you believe that income from ownership is superior to income from work ?
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
You are locked in a time warp
The conservative party has an opportunity to lead on a subject that is inevitable and to show they care about fairness
Good morning. I can't see that Lab or LD voters will turn out for a UKIP candidate, even in these circumstances. I think they'll either not vote or vote for one of the 'odd' candidates; personally I'd be tempted by the Psychedelic Movement, although they seem, like all the others, to be right-wingers. Evidence for the latter; attack on Black Lives matter.
In other news, just looked at the BBC site and note that 'Portugal's ruling Socialist Party has won an unexpected outright majority in Sunday's snap general election for only the second time in its history.'
The Pyschedelic Movement are a pro cannabis legalisation party, I suspect some leftwingers and liberals will vote for them
If Boris Johnson had got involved with them at university and ditched his plans to become world king, we probably would all have had a lot less trouble, or at least some light entertainment.
They seem to be almost the only website in the UK so breezily confident there's no stitch-up at this time, in that case.
Has anyone supplied any evidence of a stitch-up beyond hearsay and political mudslinging?
Has anyone delivered any evidence to the contrary, so far, though ? Almost none of the former DPP's, former attorneys-general and several others, seem to think they have.
It's a very odd situation, which I assume he expects will be solved by sitting on the roof of a tank in all-weather gear and ear muffs.
You can't prove a negative.
If you're making a proposition the evidence needs to be made for it, never the other way around unless the other way around has already been proven.
This is good analysis from that article:
"At the moment, this appears to be the predominant view and the intervention by the police appears to have helped him in that sense. But, to step back from this for a moment, the fact that the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police has concluded that there is evidence of a “flagrant and serious breach” of the lockdown restrictions by people who knew or should have known that this was the case is not encouraging for the Prime Minister. So no, the Met Police have not saved him. His fate is still in the balance."
I agree 100%.
The idea that it's a stitch up to escalate a story and make it even more serious and potentially criminal is ... Odd.
Lawmakers can not be lawbreakers. The fact evidence of lawbreaking has been found means that this is extremely serious. If it hadn't been found, then it wouldn't be.
@Foxy , is the change to testing positive but still coming in an England thing?
My gf (Doctor) spams LFTs and is mildly depressed every time they come back negative. Off for another 13 hour shift this morning!
She's pretty settled on becoming a part time Highland GP... could be very lucrative if I can get paid my Edinburgh salary while living in Kinlochbervie.
Yes, it is England only as far as I know. Quite likely that some businesses such as hospitals, won't loosen guidance.
If your GF is getting down about work then she isn't alone. Indeed all the best doctors that I know have had their doubts about it as a career. Indeed I would go so far as to say that anyone without that questioning of their choices probably lacks the insight to be a good doctor. Work can be a drag, indeed that is why we have to be paid to do it.
Medicine though has a very wide range of options for a satisfying career to suit nearly all tastes. I have a friend who runs an ICU in a trauma centre. He is quite open about not liking conscious patients! Others that find in that human contact real job satisfaction.
Personally, I would find part time working difficult. I like to be at it hammer and tongs or not at all. The worst jobs that I had in my training were the quiet ones.
I think too that there is a malaise in General Practice, that I cannot quite put my finger on. GPS seem to burn out quite young, with fewer and fewer reaching normal retirement age. When I qualified 30 years ago, it was the opposite problem, with GPs staying on long past their sell by date. Maybe it is different in Scotland. Essential though to find a practice with partners on the same wavelength as good or bad colleagues are the makings and breaking of a contented career.
I presume data isn't going to be available - I haven't seen any notices on changes to metrics, to offer numbers on re-infections.
The dashboard people are trying to present the best data set they can. The problem is the fuckwits who mis-use it.
I know you track this closer than I do so quite likely I'm misinterpreting the text, but their note about adding reinfections says "specimen date metrics will be revised back to the beginning of the pandemic", which I read as meaning that any of the specimen-date-based statistics and graphs will get historically-revised and won't have artificial jumps in them (whereas the by-reporting-date ones will). Is that right?
My impression is that by-specimen-date figures are more useful than by-reporting-date anyway, so if I'm also wrong about that do let me know :-)
The reporting day stuff is what the panic merchants will be running round screaming about....
The reporting day data I have never bothered with - and that is the one where revising it historically is not possible. My understanding is that the when it is compiled, the data does not contain linkages to the specimen date data and visa versa. So for a given day, we can't say what "days of specimen day data" the reporting data number consists of...
I look at the data as a series of "layers" away from The Truth. We can't get The Truth - reality isn't perfect. Reporting day adds another layer. Specimen date/day of data is that bit colder to what has actually happened.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
+1 - given that more tax revenue is (seemingly) required and there is nothing that isn't already taxed to the maximum I think a wealth tax is inevitable.
I am not sure. The Blair government did not go down this route because there is significant evidence to suggest it ends up hitting middle income people hardest (those with houses and investments) and simply drives the genuinely wealthy's money overseas and reduces investment. Those with land (landowning farmers) will not be able to cough up because (as anyone who has watched Clarkson's Farm will know), they make sod-all from their land anyway.
Wealth tax is one of those things that gets socialists all excited (because they don't like anyone else having more wealth than they do), but in practice it is just an envy tax and nothing else.
@Foxy , is the change to testing positive but still coming in an England thing?
My gf (Doctor) spams LFTs and is mildly depressed every time they come back negative. Off for another 13 hour shift this morning!
She's pretty settled on becoming a part time Highland GP... could be very lucrative if I can get paid my Edinburgh salary while living in Kinlochbervie.
Yes, it is England only as far as I know. Quite likely that some businesses such as hospitals, won't loosen guidance.
If your GF is getting down about work then she isn't alone. Indeed all the best doctors that I know have had their doubts about it as a career. Indeed I would go so far as to say that anyone without that questioning of their choices probably lacks the insight to be a good doctor. Work can be a drag, indeed that is why we have to be paid to do it.
Medicine though has a very wide range of options for a satisfying career to suit nearly all tastes. I have a friend who runs an ICU in a trauma centre. He is quite open about not liking conscious patients! Others that find in that human contact real job satisfaction.
Personally, I would find part time working difficult. I like to be at it hammer and tongs or not at all. The worst jobs that I had in my training were the quiet ones.
I think too that there is a malaise in General Practice, that I cannot quite put my finger on. GPS seem to burn out quite young, with fewer and fewer reaching normal retirement age. When I qualified 30 years ago, it was the opposite problem, with GPs staying on long past their sell by date. Maybe it is different in Scotland. Essential though to find a practice with partners on the same wavelength as good or bad colleagues are the makings and breaking of a contented career.
Is part of this still about early retirement encouraged by a tax rate hike when the max pension pot size is reached around 50?
(Not making a point; I can see it could be an issue).
One trend I have noticed in General Practice is that the individual it is becoming more specialised, corporate and more 'salaried' as practice size has increased and practices go more into combined ownership.
It's complicated. Some Labour supporters claim that she is useless, not doing her job and has moved 200 miles from the constituency. There is also a trans-rights issue.
She is stating that she has received a great deal of personal harassment.
Dig a bit deeper and the complainers seem to be linked to er.... enthusiasm for Corbyn.
There seem to be a significant number of people (primarily the iSAGE followers I imagine) who are totally preoccupied with case numbers to the exclusion of any other metrics.
I have one Facebook contact who has yet to have Covid and is getting themselves worked up into a frenzy on the "madness" of schools removing masks. The son now has Covid (flu like symptoms I believe) and has been locked up in his room for a week. I had previously said I was against masks in schools (and I still am) due to the work science has done on mitigating the big risks of Covid and longer term harmful side effects of masks (e.g. mental health).
I am now extremely unpopular because "look more kids have got Covid". It doesn't matter if they are all sitting at home locked in their room feeling fine and playing computer games. It doesn't matter that hospitalisations, patients on ventilators and deaths are all falling. I could get into a Facebook argument on it but it is pointless when so much is based on emotion rather than data.
Come on here and have an argument about it instead
Not from me, that said, far from it - but we have definitely got our "but what harm do masks do" contingent.
Since the FTPA was passed 2/3 General Elections have been held early.
Since the FTPA was passed 100% of new PMs have had an early election after they became PM.
The FPTA is a failure that should and likely will be repealed and can easily be circumvented.
Hypothetically if Boris goes and is replaced by Sunak who thinks that he could win a 40 seat majority after an early election he might go for that despite it being a reduced majority since it resets the clock and gives him five full years then, plus a legacy and mandate as an election winner. However if you're an MP facing a loss of your seat, the fact that Sunak gets a majority without you isn't much reassurance.
It's complicated. Some Labour supporters claim that she is useless, not doing her job and has moved 200 miles from the constituency. There is also a trans-rights issue.
She is stating that she has received a great deal of personal harassment.
Dig a bit deeper and the complainers seem to be linked to er.... enthusiasm for Corbyn.
I’ve come to the conclusion that Sunak either doesn’t believe that Boris is going to get the boot or doesn’t want it to happen yet and therefore why he hasn’t really triggered anything (this is where he steps down today….).
I think if he had thought there was going to be an imminent leadership election he wouldn’t have gone all in on the NI rise as he knows it’s contentious in the party and would potentially hole his chances.
As a guess I reckon that he is thinking that if Boris was to be dethroned after the May locals then the NI raise has time to work through the system and become old news and it can be tethered to Boris as much as to Sunak.
If it’s something Sunak really believes is necessary to impose then he gets it done but also it doesn’t have such a strong effect on his leadership chances later down the line.
It’s probably in his interests to leave as much shit at Boris’ doorstep as possible if he takes over so now would not be the optimal time for him to take over.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
Haha. I look forward to the reverse-ferret when a Johnson introduces a stealth wealth tax next year.
Why is a wealth tax 'socialist' when an income tax isn't? Why is it ok to tax the famous 'hard-woking families' whilst those sitting on their arses enjoying their silver spoon inherited millions are allowed to avoid taxes?
@Foxy , is the change to testing positive but still coming in an England thing?
My gf (Doctor) spams LFTs and is mildly depressed every time they come back negative. Off for another 13 hour shift this morning!
She's pretty settled on becoming a part time Highland GP... could be very lucrative if I can get paid my Edinburgh salary while living in Kinlochbervie.
Yes, it is England only as far as I know. Quite likely that some businesses such as hospitals, won't loosen guidance.
If your GF is getting down about work then she isn't alone. Indeed all the best doctors that I know have had their doubts about it as a career. Indeed I would go so far as to say that anyone without that questioning of their choices probably lacks the insight to be a good doctor. Work can be a drag, indeed that is why we have to be paid to do it.
Medicine though has a very wide range of options for a satisfying career to suit nearly all tastes. I have a friend who runs an ICU in a trauma centre. He is quite open about not liking conscious patients! Others that find in that human contact real job satisfaction.
Personally, I would find part time working difficult. I like to be at it hammer and tongs or not at all. The worst jobs that I had in my training were the quiet ones.
I think too that there is a malaise in General Practice, that I cannot quite put my finger on. GPS seem to burn out quite young, with fewer and fewer reaching normal retirement age. When I qualified 30 years ago, it was the opposite problem, with GPs staying on long past their sell by date. Maybe it is different in Scotland. Essential though to find a practice with partners on the same wavelength as good or bad colleagues are the makings and breaking of a contented career.
Is part of this still about early retirement encouraged by a tax rate hike when the max pension pot size is reached around 50?
(Not making a point; I can see it could be an issue).
Yes, that is part of it, but even part time GPs who therefore have much smaller pensions seem to burn out quite young and quit.
The solution to the NHS staffing issue is really about retention, which is not all about pay. It needs to be about restoring some degree of autonomy and control to staff, otherwise they exercise that autonomy and control by leaving.
Brains Trust: what is the impact of the Fixed Terms Parliament Act on any moves to create an early election should BoJo be Gogo?
I noticed JRM arguing that democracy required a General Election should the Tories go for a new leader.
The Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Bill has Lords Report Stage on 9th Feb. I think it's pretty likely that it'll be law before Boris is forced out - and if not, the new leader will wait for it to become law before doing anything else. Labour support it so it will go through pretty quickly.
That said, it's implaisible that the new leader would go to the country before the much-delayed boundary changes come in.
Good morning all. Last night I had a dream that Bozo was mixed up in another 'incident'.
Basically, he had submitted an expenses claim for taxi journeys totaling several thousand pounds, and then 'on advice' he had withdrawn the claim. The media got wind of what had happened, and of course he lied and said that he hadn't submitted the claim in the first place.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
+1 - given that more tax revenue is (seemingly) required and there is nothing that isn't already taxed to the maximum I think a wealth tax is inevitable.
I am not sure. The Blair government did not go down this route because there is significant evidence to suggest it ends up hitting middle income people hardest (those with houses and investments) and simply drives the genuinely wealthy's money overseas and reduces investment. Those with land (landowning farmers) will not be able to cough up because (as anyone who has watched Clarkson's Farm will know), they make sod-all from their land anyway.
Wealth tax is one of those things that gets socialists all excited (because they don't like anyone else having more wealth than they do), but in practice it is just an envy tax and nothing else.
Which is the reasoning for a mansion tax - money can be moved easily but houses cannot.
And there's not many votes to lose by taxing the properties of foreign oligarchs and premiership footballers.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
You have no such problem on increasing taxation on workers though.
Do you believe that income from ownership is superior to income from work ?
Aside from the practical problems, the argument usually forwarded is that taxing wealth amounts to a tax on money that has already been taxed. The public are (puzzlingly) vehemently opposed to death duties for that reason and I can only imagine that this opposition would be enhanced by taxing wealth whilst folk are still alive.
Wealth tax is one of those things that gets socialists all excited (because they don't like anyone else having more wealth than they do), but in practice it is just an envy tax and nothing else.
Is it any more of an envy tax than graduated income tax, though? It's the same principle of making those in a better position to pay shoulder more of the burden and on-balance redistributing money to those with less -- it's just trying to tax a stock rather than a flow. As you note that brings some practical difficulties which might make it unworkable, but I don't think the whole concept is dismissable purely on principle (unless your principles are in favour of a totally flat tax or pay-for-what-you-use, but most peoples' aren't and government is never going to legislate for either of those).
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
It's a socialist policy to take people's income too.
I stopped supporting the party when they increased National Insurance because that's not what I voted for them for. You supported that.
You're the socialist. If Tories embrace socialism, so do you.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
+1 - given that more tax revenue is (seemingly) required and there is nothing that isn't already taxed to the maximum I think a wealth tax is inevitable.
I am not sure. The Blair government did not go down this route because there is significant evidence to suggest it ends up hitting middle income people hardest (those with houses and investments) and simply drives the genuinely wealthy's money overseas and reduces investment. Those with land (landowning farmers) will not be able to cough up because (as anyone who has watched Clarkson's Farm will know), they make sod-all from their land anyway.
Wealth tax is one of those things that gets socialists all excited (because they don't like anyone else having more wealth than they do), but in practice it is just an envy tax and nothing else.
Which is the reasoning for a mansion tax - money can be moved easily but houses cannot.
And there's not many votes to lose by taxing the properties of foreign oligarchs and premiership footballers.
Possibly, but it depends where the threshold is set. It is also unlikely to raise a lot of money if it is just focussed on mega-properties, so it is still just an envy tax. For that reason alone, if Labour are sensible and want to break with Corbynism, they would do well to leave that one well alone too.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
+1 - given that more tax revenue is (seemingly) required and there is nothing that isn't already taxed to the maximum I think a wealth tax is inevitable.
I think there's quite a bit of opportunity.
Residential property is not taxed like anything to the maximum, or on an appropriate balance, including overseas ownership of UK property.
The differential Stamp Duty based on energy efficiency looks encouraging, though it's only the 3rd or 4th best way to do it and they want it to be revenue neutral.
Re COVID - with the changes to cases numbers today -
What changes? Can you explain briefly?
To date reinfections have not been included (except in Wales) so the figures are likely to be higher. We know that Omicron causes a lot of reinfection.
So expect iSage & Leon to run round screaming in small circles at 16:01
Does anyone think that iSage will condemn the revocation of the vaccine mandate for the NHS - if it happens?
They aren’t going to benchmark a reinfection inclusive figure against a reinfection exclusive figure surely? That would be barmy (and useless). And the usual innumerate panickers will have a field day, as you say.
(In the real world the covid numbers have been looking really encouraging)
"That would be barmy (and useless)" - Ah, you have described the Pestonite journalists on the subject of anything involving Maths (hiss, boo, shudder etc) perfectly.....
They are not going to back date the data on the dashboard - the historical data is not available - there will be a step change.
So all the muppets will scream......
That’s absolutely stupid, in which case.
Why not simply separate reinfections out, if they want to include them?
They WILL be backdating the crucial data on the dashboard. From Meaghan Kall, who's one of those working on it:
"Historical back series (by specimen date) will be revised " It's one of the reasons the update is such a big one and taking so much time to carry out.
However, reporting date data will not be revised, but that's less useful in any case. It does take a few days for specimen date data to come through, but that's the reference we need to use (7-day averaged to overcome day-of-week issues) against hospitalisations (lagged) and deaths. And deaths will also be revised for reinfections.
I do get that the more innumerate journalists and commentators will go hysterical, but no-one should pay attention to those idiots.
Whose decision was it to change the methodology, the government or the NHS?
@Foxy , is the change to testing positive but still coming in an England thing?
My gf (Doctor) spams LFTs and is mildly depressed every time they come back negative. Off for another 13 hour shift this morning!
She's pretty settled on becoming a part time Highland GP... could be very lucrative if I can get paid my Edinburgh salary while living in Kinlochbervie.
Yes, it is England only as far as I know. Quite likely that some businesses such as hospitals, won't loosen guidance.
If your GF is getting down about work then she isn't alone. Indeed all the best doctors that I know have had their doubts about it as a career. Indeed I would go so far as to say that anyone without that questioning of their choices probably lacks the insight to be a good doctor. Work can be a drag, indeed that is why we have to be paid to do it.
Medicine though has a very wide range of options for a satisfying career to suit nearly all tastes. I have a friend who runs an ICU in a trauma centre. He is quite open about not liking conscious patients! Others that find in that human contact real job satisfaction.
Personally, I would find part time working difficult. I like to be at it hammer and tongs or not at all. The worst jobs that I had in my training were the quiet ones.
I think too that there is a malaise in General Practice, that I cannot quite put my finger on. GPS seem to burn out quite young, with fewer and fewer reaching normal retirement age. When I qualified 30 years ago, it was the opposite problem, with GPs staying on long past their sell by date. Maybe it is different in Scotland. Essential though to find a practice with partners on the same wavelength as good or bad colleagues are the makings and breaking of a contented career.
Is part of this still about early retirement encouraged by a tax rate hike when the max pension pot size is reached around 50?
(Not making a point; I can see it could be an issue).
Yes, that is part of it, but even part time GPs who therefore have much smaller pensions seem to burn out quite young and quit.
The solution to the NHS staffing issue is really about retention, which is not all about pay. It needs to be about restoring some degree of autonomy and control to staff, otherwise they exercise that autonomy and control by leaving.
When I talked to a doctor recently, his description of his working conditions was straight out of Taylorism. And not in a good way.
Why is a wealth tax 'socialist' when an income tax isn't? Why is it ok to tax the famous 'hard-woking families' whilst those sitting on their arses enjoying their silver spoon inherited millions are allowed to avoid taxes?
I imagine Boris would be all in favour of taxing the hard-woking :-)
@Foxy , is the change to testing positive but still coming in an England thing?
My gf (Doctor) spams LFTs and is mildly depressed every time they come back negative. Off for another 13 hour shift this morning!
She's pretty settled on becoming a part time Highland GP... could be very lucrative if I can get paid my Edinburgh salary while living in Kinlochbervie.
Yes, it is England only as far as I know. Quite likely that some businesses such as hospitals, won't loosen guidance.
If your GF is getting down about work then she isn't alone. Indeed all the best doctors that I know have had their doubts about it as a career. Indeed I would go so far as to say that anyone without that questioning of their choices probably lacks the insight to be a good doctor. Work can be a drag, indeed that is why we have to be paid to do it.
Medicine though has a very wide range of options for a satisfying career to suit nearly all tastes. I have a friend who runs an ICU in a trauma centre. He is quite open about not liking conscious patients! Others that find in that human contact real job satisfaction.
Personally, I would find part time working difficult. I like to be at it hammer and tongs or not at all. The worst jobs that I had in my training were the quiet ones.
I think too that there is a malaise in General Practice, that I cannot quite put my finger on. GPS seem to burn out quite young, with fewer and fewer reaching normal retirement age. When I qualified 30 years ago, it was the opposite problem, with GPs staying on long past their sell by date. Maybe it is different in Scotland. Essential though to find a practice with partners on the same wavelength as good or bad colleagues are the makings and breaking of a contented career.
Is part of this still about early retirement encouraged by a tax rate hike when the max pension pot size is reached around 50?
(Not making a point; I can see it could be an issue).
One trend I have noticed in General Practice is that the individual it is becoming more specialised, corporate and more 'salaried' as practice size has increased and practices go more into combined ownership.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
Haha. I look forward to the reverse-ferret when a Johnson introduces a stealth wealth tax next year.
Why is a wealth tax 'socialist' when an income tax isn't? Why is it ok to tax the famous 'hard-woking families' whilst those sitting on their arses enjoying their silver spoon inherited millions are allowed to avoid taxes?
Johnson would lose a VONC definitely after that. The Canadian Tories went from a landslide win in 1988 to landslide defeat in 1993 to the Liberals and just 2 seats after introducing an unpopular new tax which saw most of their core vote go to the populist rightwing Reform Party
Wealth is already taxed via council tax on property value and inheritance tax on all estates over a million a year and capital gains tax etc anyway
Since the FTPA was passed 2/3 General Elections have been held early.
Since the FTPA was passed 100% of new PMs have had an early election after they became PM.
The FPTA is a failure that should and likely will be repealed and can easily be circumvented.
Hypothetically if Boris goes and is replaced by Sunak who thinks that he could win a 40 seat majority after an early election he might go for that despite it being a reduced majority since it resets the clock and gives him five full years then, plus a legacy and mandate as an election winner. However if you're an MP facing a loss of your seat, the fact that Sunak gets a majority without you isn't much reassurance.
Any Tory leader who calls a snap general election before 2024 likely faces the fate of May 2017 except worse, not only loss of their majority and seats but loss of government too and deservedly so
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
You keep going on about people defecting to Re-fuk, but the truth is that even quite right wing conservatives consider them to be loonies and fascists. It is more credible to suggest people might chose not to vote.
RefUK went up significantly in the polls after the NI rise and may go up again when it comes in. They are only lower now as restrictions have ended
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
+1 - given that more tax revenue is (seemingly) required and there is nothing that isn't already taxed to the maximum I think a wealth tax is inevitable.
I am not sure. The Blair government did not go down this route because there is significant evidence to suggest it ends up hitting middle income people hardest (those with houses and investments) and simply drives the genuinely wealthy's money overseas and reduces investment. Those with land (landowning farmers) will not be able to cough up because (as anyone who has watched Clarkson's Farm will know), they make sod-all from their land anyway.
Wealth tax is one of those things that gets socialists all excited (because they don't like anyone else having more wealth than they do), but in practice it is just an envy tax and nothing else.
Which is the reasoning for a mansion tax - money can be moved easily but houses cannot.
And there's not many votes to lose by taxing the properties of foreign oligarchs and premiership footballers.
Possibly, but it depends where the threshold is set. It is also unlikely to raise a lot of money if it is just focussed on mega-properties, so it is still just an envy tax. For that reason alone, if Labour are sensible and want to break with Corbynism, they would do well to leave that one well alone too.
If it were up to me I would abolish Council Tax, Stamp Duty etc and implement a fixed percentage of house price tax to be paid by the owner of the property.
For single dwelling owner occupiers that should be relatively revenue neutral. For people with a property portfolio they can pay a fair share of what they should.
And Councils would cease to need to chase low income tenants and Courts can stop dealing with Council Tax backlogs, Attachment of Earnings orders etc as the landlord would be liable instead of the tenant.
It would also have the advantage of breaking the incentive that owners have of only ever seeing house prices go up, since if you're an owner occupier and your house price doesn't go up, your taxes don't, which is great for society as it means more can get their own home.
I presume data isn't going to be available - I haven't seen any notices on changes to metrics, to offer numbers on re-infections.
The dashboard people are trying to present the best data set they can. The problem is the fuckwits who mis-use it.
I know you track this closer than I do so quite likely I'm misinterpreting the text, but their note about adding reinfections says "specimen date metrics will be revised back to the beginning of the pandemic", which I read as meaning that any of the specimen-date-based statistics and graphs will get historically-revised and won't have artificial jumps in them (whereas the by-reporting-date ones will). Is that right?
My impression is that by-specimen-date figures are more useful than by-reporting-date anyway, so if I'm also wrong about that do let me know :-)
The reporting day stuff is what the panic merchants will be running round screaming about....
The reporting day data I have never bothered with - and that is the one where revising it historically is not possible. My understanding is that the when it is compiled, the data does not contain linkages to the specimen date data and visa versa. So for a given day, we can't say what "days of specimen day data" the reporting data number consists of...
I look at the data as a series of "layers" away from The Truth. We can't get The Truth - reality isn't perfect. Reporting day adds another layer. Specimen date/day of data is that bit colder to what has actually happened.
I've downloaded the following to Google sheets - by nation and raw data which gives both accumulated and daily counts
Death by reported Death by specimen Death by Death cert Cases by reported Cases by specimen
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
You should vote Labour if you want a wealth tax, better for Conservatives to go into opposition than just become a government putting up more and more tax.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
I will either abstain or vote lib dem not labour but you miss the point that a wealth tax is inevitable and the conservative party has the opportunity to take the initiative
No it isn't, it is a socialist policy to take people's wealth.
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
You have no such problem on increasing taxation on workers though.
Do you believe that income from ownership is superior to income from work ?
Aside from he practical problems, the argument usually forwarded is that taxing wealth amounts to a tax on money that has already been taxed. The public are (puzzlingly) vehemently opposed to death duties for that reason and I can only imagine that this opposition would be enhanced by taxing wealth whilst folk are still alive.
So how is that any different to paying any other tax with money from employment which has already had income tax and national insurance deducted from it ?
Comments
Why not simply separate reinfections out, if they want to include them?
I had an email from Angel Wines, they say this is going to hit the small producers making authentic wines that just turn out at a certain ABV. While the big producers will benefit by being able to churn out huge volumes of low quality low-alcohol wine.
Basically, he had submitted an expenses claim for taxi journeys totaling several thousand pounds, and then 'on advice' he had withdrawn the claim. The media got wind of what had happened, and of course he lied and said that he hadn't submitted the claim in the first place.
And then I woke up!
The dashboard people are trying to present the best data set they can. The problem is the fuckwits who mis-use it.
He was shown the door and no health visitor was welcome in the home from that moment on - the midwives, OK, the health visitors, no.
But, the guilt trip was such that then Mrs Rata over compensated and often put on significant weight AFTER giving birth to ensure the milk was there.
And we were told that any mixed feeding was guaranteed to crash breast feeding. Nope, the one bottle feed a day, and whatever bulking agent is in bottle milk , did wonders for the long sleep and was stable for months.
I am told that the headline Scottish figures do not include reinfections, but that the data is there in the tables. I haven't found it in a digestible form though.
Still 2 lines on the LFT though, so no return to work just yet.
U-turn on NHS vax status, brexit red meat thrown out to its base, NI rise defence (which has the potential to be a bit of a poll tax moment), energy crisis looming, inflation, student loan freeze (punishing the young yet again…)
Has the feeling of a government in its final weeks and months tbh, let along one that had won an 80 seat majority two years ago.
The second one was very good.
This probably had something to with the fact the first one had no children. The second one introduced herself with "I've got x children and y grand children - all healthy"....
I guess I can't wish Mike luck in the circumstances, but I'd always wish him well.
Climate, the Environment and Agriculture – reforming our environmental regulation, 80% of which came from the EU, to deliver cleaner air, create new habitats, and reduce waste, while changing the rules on gene edited organisms, to enable more sustainable and efficient farming.
Changing the rules on gene editing (which unlike genetic modification is limited to the same species, so not quite as controversial) is still big in relation to farm animals. For example, factory farming of egg-laying hens involves shutting them in a cage with lots of others, preventing natural behaviour. This has serious health effects as well as welfare issues, and the trend is to phase it out as it's not efficient to have unhealthy birds. Gene editing could give it a new lease of life, by reducing the health impact, without doing anything for welfare. So it's more efficient, but also perpetuates suffering.
There are however areas where gene editing would be beneficial or harmless. What's needed is thorough legislative scrutiny with evidence from experts to get the balance right, and this Bill would remove that by (as I understand it) allowing the change to be made at a stroke by delegated legislation.
A more accurate name for the legislation would be the Blank Cheque Bill.
Daring to get pregnant a couple of years into your 40s outside the prescribed nappy valley bits of London. Good lord, she was treated like she was an evil person for daring to do so. No happiness for us, just wall to wall doom, risk and outright lectures. Tracy Neville raised this one a while back, and she was spot on.
I notice a poll at the weekend showed just 18% consider Brexit an important issue, so the vast majority have much more pressing concerns and heading that is the cost of living crisis
Boris is so discredited that his mps need to do the best for themselves and the nation and force a vonc
Rishi endorsing the 1.25% NI increase indicates that he knows more is needed for the NHS and social care, and of course next year it becomes a hypothecated NHS and social tax separate to NI on pay slips
I continue to support Rishi but I am content for any of the leading candidates to become PM asap
It is suggested the cost of living relief package is to be delayed until the march budget but that is unacceptable and dreadful politics
There does seem to a move to the left in countries holding elections and it not really surprising in view of how people throughout the pandemic have been willing to accept the imposition of restrictions on their lives
To me I believe now is the time for a wealth tax, and if the conservatives want to change the narrative they do need to change their attitude to assets and away from taxing income
I do wonder if I am changing my views as it may come as a surprise, but I actually congratulate Drakeford for his review of holiday homes and second homes in Wales with increased taxes and restrictions on planning consents
I know @HYUFD will say I should vote labour/lib dem but if he and the conservative party took notice of my comments, maybe they could win GE24 but right now the tide is ebbing on that proposition
My gf (Doctor) spams LFTs and is mildly depressed every time they come back negative. Off for another 13 hour shift this morning!
She's pretty settled on becoming a part time Highland GP... could be very lucrative if I can get paid my Edinburgh salary while living in Kinlochbervie.
Bit of a misrepresentation to only talk about wine (or perhaps whine is better as the default activity of the Food Trade Federation), as it is across the board. And a lot of anomalies are being ironed out.
The British sparkling wine miracle will continue because tax per bottle is 87p less, the special extra tax on bubbles having been removed.
I'd say it is setting up a gentle pressure towards less alcoholic drinks. Agree that there seem to be too many bands - somebody should have given the Treasury a spreadsheet set to one digit so they could only have 10 bands.
What is the impact on Scotch sales in the UK, since the boom in Whisky exports is one of the more obvious Brexit successes (up 30-40% 2020 to 2021)?
200% seems a minimal mark up for a restaurant on wine. I thought the usual was 200% over the retail price, and the retail price already has a typical mark up of 1.4x (double plus VAT). I'd expect about 3-5x over a vineyard price.
Amazing how much is foreshadowed here
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7230155/Boris-Johnsons-girlfriend-Carrie-Symonds-quit-job-Conservative-Party-expenses-claims.html
There has been a drift upward in wine strength over the decades. It is an easy way to give the impression of body and depth to a wine, a bit like adding salt or fat to food. It takes more skill to add it in other ways.
I do buy from Naked Wines, but there is a tendency to a homogenised taste to their wines, reflecting the modern palate for fruity high alcohol single varietal wines. A sort of modern Leibfraumilch of Shiraz, Merlot or Sauvignion Blanc, that is very drinkable but also rather uniform across countries and regions.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1028702/20211026_Alcohol_Duty_Review_Consultation_and_CFE_response.pdf
On Any Questions it was the hapless Michelle Donnelly. God knows what the poor woman's post bag looks like today. "Do you believe the Prime Minister?" "Yes" she said. The Gloucester audience couldn't contain themselves. They were in stitches.
It's a very odd situation, which I assume he expects will be solved by sitting on the roof of a tank in all-weather gear and ear muffs.
The Portugese result is interesting - the Socialists got a huge "stop messing about" vote, notably from former supporters of their left-wing allies who voted with the right to bring the Government down. If we ever had PR with a left-wing party on 10-15% (perfectly plausible) they would run into precisely that problem - they'd always have to support a Labour government in a crunch of get squeezed.
Sometimes in the West there is a shift eg the shift to the right in the 1980s, to the left in the 1990s, to the right in the 2010s and now maybe to the left again with a few exceptions. That is just the electoral cycle and circumstance eg too high tax and union power in the late 1970s, the need to cut deficits in the 2010s and the post pandemic impact now.
If you're making a proposition the evidence needs to be made for it, never the other way around unless the other way around has already been proven.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-60188577
My impression is that by-specimen-date figures are more useful than by-reporting-date anyway, so if I'm also wrong about that do let me know :-)
The positive evidence in that case would be long-established procedures apparently being ignored for some extraneous reason, or at least so they seem to imply.
The government got where they were by playing the first tune, and they still like to wheel it out (see today's papers). If people are getting bored of it, and wouldn't mind tentative steps towards Brapprochment (especially if it's done on the quiet and cuts prices in the shops), the government are in a bit of a pickle.
One problem with Social media is that you need a really thick skin to be an MP in this day and age - and a lot of people don't have a thick enough one.
"At the moment, this appears to be the predominant view and the intervention by the police appears to have helped him in that sense. But, to step back from this for a moment, the fact that the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police has concluded that there is evidence of a “flagrant and serious breach” of the lockdown restrictions by people who knew or should have known that this was the case is not encouraging for the Prime Minister. So no, the Met Police have not saved him. His fate is still in the balance."
As I said better for the Conservatives to go into opposition than become a socialist party introducing a new wealth tax hitting its core vote.
It would of course go into opposition anyway as many of its core vote would go RefUK and socialists would still vote Labour anyway
There seem to be a significant number of people (primarily the iSAGE followers I imagine) who are totally preoccupied with case numbers to the exclusion of any other metrics.
I have one Facebook contact who has yet to have Covid and is getting themselves worked up into a frenzy on the "madness" of schools removing masks. The son now has Covid (flu like symptoms I believe) and has been locked up in his room for a week. I had previously said I was against masks in schools (and I still am) due to the work science has done on mitigating the big risks of Covid and longer term harmful side effects of masks (e.g. mental health).
I am now extremely unpopular because "look more kids have got Covid". It doesn't matter if they are all sitting at home locked in their room feeling fine and playing computer games. It doesn't matter that hospitalisations, patients on ventilators and deaths are all falling. I could get into a Facebook argument on it but it is pointless when so much is based on emotion rather than data.
But looking at who votes Conservative these days, it would be electoral suicide. And whilst this government is uniquely awful for cynical clientism, it's hard to think of any PM who would bite the hand that feeds it to that degree.
From Meaghan Kall, who's one of those working on it:
"Historical back series (by specimen date) will be revised "
It's one of the reasons the update is such a big one and taking so much time to carry out.
However, reporting date data will not be revised, but that's less useful in any case. It does take a few days for specimen date data to come through, but that's the reference we need to use (7-day averaged to overcome day-of-week issues) against hospitalisations (lagged) and deaths. And deaths will also be revised for reinfections.
I do get that the more innumerate journalists and commentators will go hysterical, but no-one should pay attention to those idiots.
Second time around we basically had enough confidence to tell certain types to leave us alone and move on.
I'm not surprised there's a core in the NHS opposed to medicine. If it were up to me I'd sack the lot of them and rebuild the NHS with people who actually understand how medicine works.
Frostie sounding not too concerned if this is the end of Boris
Do you believe that income from ownership is superior to income from work ?
The conservative party has an opportunity to lead on a subject that is inevitable and to show they care about fairness
The idea that it's a stitch up to escalate a story and make it even more serious and potentially criminal is ... Odd.
Lawmakers can not be lawbreakers. The fact evidence of lawbreaking has been found means that this is extremely serious. If it hadn't been found, then it wouldn't be.
I noticed JRM arguing that democracy required a General Election should the Tories go for a new leader.
Bonus: quite an interesting conversation amongst LibDems of the pros and cons of BJ leaving or staying in office.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/the-pros-and-cons-for-liberal-democrats-of-boris-johnson-remaining-in-office-69724.html
If your GF is getting down about work then she isn't alone. Indeed all the best doctors that I know have had their doubts about it as a career. Indeed I would go so far as to say that anyone without that questioning of their choices probably lacks the insight to be a good doctor. Work can be a drag, indeed that is why we have to be paid to do it.
Medicine though has a very wide range of options for a satisfying career to suit nearly all tastes. I have a friend who runs an ICU in a trauma centre. He is quite open about not liking conscious patients! Others that find in that human contact real job satisfaction.
Personally, I would find part time working difficult. I like to be at it hammer and tongs or not at all. The worst jobs that I had in my training were the quiet ones.
I think too that there is a malaise in General Practice, that I cannot quite put my finger on. GPS seem to burn out quite young, with fewer and fewer reaching normal retirement age. When I qualified 30 years ago, it was the opposite problem, with GPs staying on long past their sell by date. Maybe it is different in Scotland. Essential though to find a practice with partners on the same wavelength as good or bad colleagues are the makings and breaking of a contented career.
The reporting day data I have never bothered with - and that is the one where revising it historically is not possible. My understanding is that the when it is compiled, the data does not contain linkages to the specimen date data and visa versa. So for a given day, we can't say what "days of specimen day data" the reporting data number consists of...
I look at the data as a series of "layers" away from The Truth. We can't get The Truth - reality isn't perfect. Reporting day adds another layer. Specimen date/day of data is that bit colder to what has actually happened.
Wealth tax is one of those things that gets socialists all excited (because they don't like anyone else having more wealth than they do), but in practice it is just an envy tax and nothing else.
(Not making a point; I can see it could be an issue).
One trend I have noticed in General Practice is that the individual it is becoming more specialised, corporate and more 'salaried' as practice size has increased and practices go more into combined ownership.
It isn't entirely trans rights issues that are the problem, though that is clearly so for some of her critics
She is stating that she has received a great deal of personal harassment.
Dig a bit deeper and the complainers seem to be linked to er.... enthusiasm for Corbyn.
Not from me, that said, far from it - but we have definitely got our "but what harm do masks do" contingent.
Since the FTPA was passed 2/3 General Elections have been held early.
Since the FTPA was passed 100% of new PMs have had an early election after they became PM.
The FPTA is a failure that should and likely will be repealed and can easily be circumvented.
Hypothetically if Boris goes and is replaced by Sunak who thinks that he could win a 40 seat majority after an early election he might go for that despite it being a reduced majority since it resets the clock and gives him five full years then, plus a legacy and mandate as an election winner. However if you're an MP facing a loss of your seat, the fact that Sunak gets a majority without you isn't much reassurance.
I think if he had thought there was going to be an imminent leadership election he wouldn’t have gone all in on the NI rise as he knows it’s contentious in the party and would potentially hole his chances.
As a guess I reckon that he is thinking that if Boris was to be dethroned after the May locals then the NI raise has time to work through the system and become old news and it can be tethered to Boris as much as to Sunak.
If it’s something Sunak really believes is necessary to impose then he gets it done but also it doesn’t have such a strong effect on his leadership chances later down the line.
It’s probably in his interests to leave as much shit at Boris’ doorstep as possible if he takes over so now would not be the optimal time for him to take over.
As we've covered it fairly often here may I suggest we avoid the trans rabbit hole if at all possible.
Why is a wealth tax 'socialist' when an income tax isn't? Why is it ok to tax the famous 'hard-woking families' whilst those sitting on their arses enjoying their silver spoon inherited millions are allowed to avoid taxes?
The solution to the NHS staffing issue is really about retention, which is not all about pay. It needs to be about restoring some degree of autonomy and control to staff, otherwise they exercise that autonomy and control by leaving.
That said, it's implaisible that the new leader would go to the country before the much-delayed boundary changes come in.
And there's not many votes to lose by taxing the properties of foreign oligarchs and premiership footballers.
I stopped supporting the party when they increased National Insurance because that's not what I voted for them for. You supported that.
You're the socialist. If Tories embrace socialism, so do you.
Residential property is not taxed like anything to the maximum, or on an appropriate balance, including overseas ownership of UK property.
The differential Stamp Duty based on energy efficiency looks encouraging, though it's only the 3rd or 4th best way to do it and they want it to be revenue neutral.
Further, his description of the way that he and his colleagues responded to the way they were treated, closely matched https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_management#Soldiering to an extraordinary degree.
So the NHS is mis-managing to practices that were obsolete. 100 years ago.
Wealth is already taxed via council tax on property value and inheritance tax on all estates over a million a year and capital gains tax etc anyway
For single dwelling owner occupiers that should be relatively revenue neutral. For people with a property portfolio they can pay a fair share of what they should.
And Councils would cease to need to chase low income tenants and Courts can stop dealing with Council Tax backlogs, Attachment of Earnings orders etc as the landlord would be liable instead of the tenant.
It would also have the advantage of breaking the incentive that owners have of only ever seeing house prices go up, since if you're an owner occupier and your house price doesn't go up, your taxes don't, which is great for society as it means more can get their own home.
Death by reported
Death by specimen
Death by Death cert
Cases by reported
Cases by specimen
I assume hospitalisations won't change ?