What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried. That's you upwardly mobile middle aged demographic right there, who would have voted Thatcher in a heart beat.
Mm, quite so. Makes you wonder who they are relying on.
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried.
Their plan is to win over the not interested in details crowd. You are all interested in details, most of society is not.
I think a combination of incompetence and the economy (which mostly isnt particularly this lots fault, although they do cock up whatever they are involved in, but the bigger issues are global) will stop them winning a majority next time around, but expect them still to be competitive.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
So you have no interest in trying to win my vote....well that a view I suppose. I have a feeling not a winning one at the next GE.
You didn't even vote Tory in 2019 when the Tories won a majority of 80. Why would the Tories bother trying to win your vote when they don't need it to win?
I voted tactically "stop Corbyn" in 2017 and 2019 and was located in different seats so my vote changed...I thought it was the best use of my vote.
I have since moved again and you probably do need my vote.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Nooooooo. Second Rule of PB - always go for the wound, not the out right kill!
Protected the bottom income deciles Reduced VAT on fuel Taken measures to incentivise oil production Ditto home insulation. Scrapped stamp duty on house purchases Increased the NI threshold (as was done)
Forced pensioners to pay NI Levied a windfall tax on oil companies Levied a new tax on property @ 0.5% p.a.*
Left income tax alone.
*With a rebate against stamp duty paid for those who have purchased in the last seven years.
What about Hospitals and Education and other departments whose budgets about to be ravaged by inflation? Should there really be income tax cut after that?
I left income taxes alone.
Essentially my aim would be to fiscally neutral at this juncture, albeit shifting the burden from the poorest income earners to the wealthiest asset owners.
Yes but the former mainly vote Labour and the latter mainly vote Tory and we have a Tory government
So?
So the Tories are not going to hit their own supporters are they?
It would need a Labour government to tax wealthy asset owning Tories more and redistribute more to low earning Labour voters on benefits
Why don’t the Tories govern for the country at large?
Such an old fashioned view. It's all about acting punitively toward those who dared to not vote for you, that's how you win hearts and minds for the future.
I’m genuinely curious about HYUFD’s response.
As far as I can tell, although governments tend to prioritise their base (for ideological as much as psephological reasons), this is the first government that pretty much renounces “one nation” policies in both its rhetoric and its actions.
Kind of Republican-lite.
No it isn't, wealthy homeowners did even better under Thatcher and Cameron relative to those on benefits than this government.
Past Labour governments have imposed wealth taxes and increased income tax on the rich and spent more on the public sector and those on benefits ie their core vote, in return.
Tory and Labour governments always reward their people
Yes, but this is so naked and disgusting that you have natural, not short of a bob tories like me saying look, this is just wrong, why move people from poor to destitute when you could move a different set of people from reasonably well off to actually, still surviving pretty comfortably. This will cost you electorally.
The destitute don't vote, so HY has a point.
Neither do the destitute finance Lulu Lytle wallpaper. So HY has another point.
Protected the bottom income deciles Reduced VAT on fuel Taken measures to incentivise oil production Ditto home insulation. Scrapped stamp duty on house purchases Increased the NI threshold (as was done)
Forced pensioners to pay NI Levied a windfall tax on oil companies Levied a new tax on property @ 0.5% p.a.*
Left income tax alone.
*With a rebate against stamp duty paid for those who have purchased in the last seven years.
What about Hospitals and Education and other departments whose budgets about to be ravaged by inflation? Should there really be income tax cut after that?
I left income taxes alone.
Essentially my aim would be to fiscally neutral at this juncture, albeit shifting the burden from the poorest income earners to the wealthiest asset owners.
Yes but the former mainly vote Labour and the latter mainly vote Tory and we have a Tory government
So?
So the Tories are not going to hit their own supporters are they?
It would need a Labour government to tax wealthy asset owning Tories more and redistribute more to low earning Labour voters on benefits
Why don’t the Tories govern for the country at large?
Such an old fashioned view. It's all about acting punitively toward those who dared to not vote for you, that's how you win hearts and minds for the future.
I’m genuinely curious about HYUFD’s response.
As far as I can tell, although governments tend to prioritise their base (for ideological as much as psephological reasons), this is the first government that pretty much renounces “one nation” policies in both its rhetoric and its actions.
Kind of Republican-lite.
No it isn't, wealthy homeowners did even better under Thatcher and Cameron relative to those on benefits than this government.
Past Labour governments have imposed wealth taxes and increased income tax on the rich and spent more on the public sector and those on benefits ie their core vote, in return.
Tory and Labour governments always reward their people
That's a load of crap. Blair was comfortable with people like my parents benefiting from his policies, it's why Labour smashed the crap out of the Tories for 3 elections. It was only when miserly Brown took over and Labour turned back into the party of benefit scroungers that the Tories got a look in and Dave won a majority on the back of ensuring that everyone benefited from the economic boom, including younger people who tend to not vote Tory.
It's only this government that has taken rewarding "its" voters to the extreme of stealing from young people to hand tax cuts and benefit rises to retired people.
Blair and Brown increased public spending as a percentage of gdp from just under 40% in 1997 to almost 50% by 2010. They also launched a tax raid on private pensions and in the final New Labour years raised the top rate of income tax to 50%.
It was Cameron and Clegg who increased tuition fees hitting young graduates and Cameron who imposed more austerity than this government too. It was Osborne as well who raised the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million, hugely benefiting wealthy Tory voting property owners and their heirs. It was Cameron and Osborne who introduced the triple lock to increase pensions too
Anyways. I thought there was a significant constituency of voters who were less affluent middle aged and working in lower paid employment who went Tory last time? ISTR Tories were delighted. And declared Labour had abandoned the traditional working class? Must have been mistaken. Apparently it was pensioners and the affluent. There are plenty of the former. There'll be fewer of the latter soon. So. It doesn't even work as a cynical strategy.
Protected the bottom income deciles Reduced VAT on fuel Taken measures to incentivise oil production Ditto home insulation. Scrapped stamp duty on house purchases Increased the NI threshold (as was done)
Forced pensioners to pay NI Levied a windfall tax on oil companies Levied a new tax on property @ 0.5% p.a.*
Left income tax alone.
*With a rebate against stamp duty paid for those who have purchased in the last seven years.
What about Hospitals and Education and other departments whose budgets about to be ravaged by inflation? Should there really be income tax cut after that?
I left income taxes alone.
Essentially my aim would be to fiscally neutral at this juncture, albeit shifting the burden from the poorest income earners to the wealthiest asset owners.
Yes but the former mainly vote Labour and the latter mainly vote Tory and we have a Tory government
So?
So the Tories are not going to hit their own supporters are they?
It would need a Labour government to tax wealthy asset owning Tories more and redistribute more to low earning Labour voters on benefits
Why don’t the Tories govern for the country at large?
Such an old fashioned view. It's all about acting punitively toward those who dared to not vote for you, that's how you win hearts and minds for the future.
I’m genuinely curious about HYUFD’s response.
As far as I can tell, although governments tend to prioritise their base (for ideological as much as psephological reasons), this is the first government that pretty much renounces “one nation” policies in both its rhetoric and its actions.
Kind of Republican-lite.
On the contrary. It is a one nation, English nationalist party. Not a UK wide one.
Not true at all. It delights in dividing the people who don't vote for it in the big cities from the people who do vote for it in small towns. It pits young against old, worker against pensioner, graduate against apprentice.
There's nothing there that is unifying for England, and there are plenty of Scots willing to vote for it.
Disagree. One only needs to look at the history of Brexit, and the way in which HMG tore up the Sewel convention and threw NI to the wolves. It's not governing for anyone except its English majhority and a few idiots elsewhere (less than a quarter of voters in Scotland is not 'plenty', though not trivial).
Remember the Tory Party's reaction to the SNP is not to sort out the problem. It's to demonise it in England as a gang of thieves of the "English" voter's money. Remember the Salmond posters?
Entire "look how short Sunak is!" schtick is as funny as a rubber crutch, and sub-adolescent to boot.
EDIT - Fun fact (per wiki) average British soldier in WW1 was 5'7" same as Rishi Sunak
Agreed. I’m on the short side of six foot, but have never thought that mocking people for their height is funny or interesting. It’s just another form of prejudice. Sunak has just delivered a shite budget: mock him for that, it’s his fault. The height jibes are absolutely pathetic.
Height’s a real weird one. I’m 6’2”. I’m the second shortest out of my regular group of mates weirdly by quite a few inches. Not one is a rugby player just a freakishly large group of about ten chaps.
The shortest of our group is 6’ and he will admit feeling like a midget.
Anyway a female friend is getting married to a chap on the periphery of our group of friends. He shares a first name with one of our friends who is 6’6” and so he’s called “little xxxxxx” because he’s 5’10” to the point where it’s become a major issue as he’s really taken offence at being called “little xxxxx” and has a chip about being relatively short.
I’m sure Rishi loses no sleep about his height as he’s probably quite happy with his life but it can be a big issue for some.
I was told by my GP that I am tall.
I am 5ft 6
Well Bev, as a lady you are the perfect height for ironing boards and kitchen sinks so don’t complain.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Those chaps the (Later) Victorians also had central heating. But maybe BigG is working to the Roman imperial calendar, or the Japanese one.
I am going to Lanhydrock in Cornwall tomorrow to look at the magnolias. They put in central heating when rebuilding after a fire in the 1880s.
Interest rates. The dog that doesn't bark. I've had Sky News on since 19:00 and not once has the subject of monetary policy come up. Ultimately these fiscal changes are small fry. Want to tackle inflation? Put up interest rates.
I wonder what the % of homeowner would go underwater would be for every say 0.5% increase in interest rates?
There has to be a significant proportion of people with mortgages who have never experienced (or have budgeted for) interest rates anywhere near historical normal levels.
Interest rates have been at more-or-less 0.5% (as high as 0.75%, as low as 0.1%) since early 2009 - 13 year's ago. That is remarkably stable and we have reached the top of the range. I doubt anyone has been impacted too badly yet.
The next stage is market expectations that rates will more than double to around 2% by the end of the year. I think that will start to bite on people with high mortgages, but fixed terms mean it'll take time to be felt.
Beyond that point it's crystal ball time. The Bank of England thinks it'll be enough to bring inflation back to target in the years following. Some predict a recession from the combined squeeze in people's real income (which may in turn reduce inflation). Others that high inflation becomes embedded that forces interest rates higher still.
Threading the needle of bringing down inflation without inducing a recession won't be an easy one.
The idea this round of inflation is temporary is extraordinarily optimistic.
2022 wage demands and settlements will be all over the place. Losers from this will be insisting on big rises in 2023. Winners will be expecting big rises in 2023.
I agree. We are at close to full employment - if firms do not raise wages in most sectors then they'll soon finding themselves short of staff as they move to companies that will.
Or. A whole bunch of businesses reliant on discretionary spending.will go to the wall. Thus suppressing wages and enabling us all to be poorer.
People can't suddenly develop IT skills and experience, or pass bar exams, etc, so this will simply widen inequalities. Some people will be able to protect their standard of living and others won't.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Those chaps the (Later) Victorians also had central heating. But maybe BigG is working to the Roman imperial calendar, or the Japanese one.
I am going to Lanhydrock in Cornwall tomorrow to look at the magnolias. They put in central heating when rebuilding after a fire in the 1880s.
Gosh, they were very advanced and capable for magnolias.
Entire "look how short Sunak is!" schtick is as funny as a rubber crutch, and sub-adolescent to boot.
EDIT - Fun fact (per wiki) average British soldier in WW1 was 5'7" same as Rishi Sunak
Agreed. I’m on the short side of six foot, but have never thought that mocking people for their height is funny or interesting. It’s just another form of prejudice. Sunak has just delivered a shite budget: mock him for that, it’s his fault. The height jibes are absolutely pathetic.
Height’s a real weird one. I’m 6’2”. I’m the second shortest out of my regular group of mates weirdly by quite a few inches. Not one is a rugby player just a freakishly large group of about ten chaps.
The shortest of our group is 6’ and he will admit feeling like a midget.
Anyway a female friend is getting married to a chap on the periphery of our group of friends. He shares a first name with one of our friends who is 6’6” and so he’s called “little xxxxxx” because he’s 5’10” to the point where it’s become a major issue as he’s really taken offence at being called “little xxxxx” and has a chip about being relatively short.
I’m sure Rishi loses no sleep about his height as he’s probably quite happy with his life but it can be a big issue for some.
I was told by my GP that I am tall.
I am 5ft 6
Well Bev, as a lady you are the perfect height for ironing boards and kitchen sinks so don’t complain.
Men of all heights are still capable of using those things though
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Nope; hot air. Google hypocausts.
But not just rich Romans come to think of it. Public baths had them, ditto the bathhouses of military forts. Must have been very cosy in the north Britannian winter.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Those chaps the (Later) Victorians also had central heating. But maybe BigG is working to the Roman imperial calendar, or the Japanese one.
I am going to Lanhydrock in Cornwall tomorrow to look at the magnolias. They put in central heating when rebuilding after a fire in the 1880s.
Gosh, they were very advanced and capable for magnolias.
It was the first flowering of modern domestic engineering.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
Hiatus of more than a millennium though.
Those Saxons were quite chilled about it.
A frivolous response which fails to address the issue from all the relevant Angles.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
So you have no interest in trying to win my vote....well that a view I suppose. I have a feeling not a winning one at the next GE.
You didn't even vote Tory in 2019 when the Tories won a majority of 80. Why would the Tories bother trying to win your vote when they don't need it to win?
I have no idea how you are an official of the party with that utter claptrap
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
Hiatus of more than a millennium though.
Those Saxons were quite chilled about it.
A frivolous response which fails to address the issue from all the relevant Angles.
Entire "look how short Sunak is!" schtick is as funny as a rubber crutch, and sub-adolescent to boot.
EDIT - Fun fact (per wiki) average British soldier in WW1 was 5'7" same as Rishi Sunak
Agreed. I’m on the short side of six foot, but have never thought that mocking people for their height is funny or interesting. It’s just another form of prejudice. Sunak has just delivered a shite budget: mock him for that, it’s his fault. The height jibes are absolutely pathetic.
Height’s a real weird one. I’m 6’2”. I’m the second shortest out of my regular group of mates weirdly by quite a few inches. Not one is a rugby player just a freakishly large group of about ten chaps.
The shortest of our group is 6’ and he will admit feeling like a midget.
Anyway a female friend is getting married to a chap on the periphery of our group of friends. He shares a first name with one of our friends who is 6’6” and so he’s called “little xxxxxx” because he’s 5’10” to the point where it’s become a major issue as he’s really taken offence at being called “little xxxxx” and has a chip about being relatively short.
I’m sure Rishi loses no sleep about his height as he’s probably quite happy with his life but it can be a big issue for some.
I was told by my GP that I am tall.
I am 5ft 6
Well Bev, as a lady you are the perfect height for ironing boards and kitchen sinks so don’t complain.
Complain? I am not complaining. I would not want to be 6ft tall. It would be a nightmare!
The boss of Goldman Sachs is set to perform at the major US music festival Lollapalooza alongside the likes of Dua Lipa and Metallica in July. David Solomon, who is a dance music DJ outside his day job, was one of the acts organisers of announced on Tuesday. The 60-year-old, who is one of the last listed on the festival's line-up, said he was excited to play the event.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Those chaps the (Later) Victorians also had central heating. But maybe BigG is working to the Roman imperial calendar, or the Japanese one.
I am going to Lanhydrock in Cornwall tomorrow to look at the magnolias. They put in central heating when rebuilding after a fire in the 1880s.
Gosh, they were very advanced and capable for magnolias.
It was the first flowering of modern domestic engineering.
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried. That's you upwardly mobile middle aged demographic right there, who would have voted Thatcher in a heart beat.
Mm, quite so. Makes you wonder who they are relying on.
The voters who got the Tories a majority of 80 in 2019, many of whom are Leavers who voted UKIP or Labour in 2015 when Cameron got a majority of 12
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
Hiatus of more than a millennium though.
Those Saxons were quite chilled about it.
A frivolous response which fails to address the issue from all the relevant Angles.
Short people got no reason Short people got no reason Short people got no reason To live
They got little hands And little eyes And they walk around Tellin' great big lies They got little noses And tiny little teeth They wear platform shoes On their nasty little feet
Well, I don't want no short people Don't want no short people Don't want no short people 'Round here
Short people are just the same As you and I (A fool such as I) All men are brothers Until the day they die (It's a wonderful world)
Short people got nobody Short people got nobody Short people got nobody To love
They got little baby legs And they stand so low You got to pick 'em up Just to say hello They got little cars That got beep, beep, beep They got little voices Goin' peep, peep, peep They got grubby little fingers And dirty little minds They're gonna get you every time
Well, I don't want no short people Don't want no short people Don't want no short people 'Round here
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
Neither my wife in the North of Scotland or our family in Berwick enjoyed any heating and used to get dressed under the bed clothes in cold weather
What I love about living in London is wearing less clothes all year round. It never feels cold even in winter months.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
And you will be the only conservative left
He will be the last True Conservative, bravely waving a copy of Monetarism is Not Enough as the ravening Corbynistas overwhelm the barricades he has erected in front of the last private buy to let in Epping, leaving the wreckage of tanks strewn in their wake.
The Corbynistas were beaten at the last election, the Starmeristas are less of a worry
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Steam via hypercausts heated the ground floor from below. Think of stacks of tiles as supports giving a suitable space under the floor for the steam. There was a series building a Roman house using roman methods a few years ago, and they tried to build such a system, but it wasn’t great.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
Anyways. I thought there was a significant constituency of voters who were less affluent middle aged and working in lower paid employment who went Tory last time? ISTR Tories were delighted. And declared Labour had abandoned the traditional working class? Must have been mistaken. Apparently it was pensioners and the affluent. There are plenty of the former. There'll be fewer of the latter soon. So. It doesn't even work as a cynical strategy.
I would mainly say was a tranche of working class/lower middle class 40-65 year old voters who dropped off for Labour last time and they will be hoping to win back a large chunk of those voters in northern marginals which is Labour's entire strategy.
That is surely the most electorally important demographic at the next election.
I can't really see pensioners in England abandoning the Tories whatever happens.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Steam via hypercausts heated the ground floor from below. Think of stacks of tiles as supports giving a suitable space under the floor for the steam. There was a series building a Roman house using roman methods a few years ago, and they tried to build such a system, but it wasn’t great.
Not steam, on a PB technicality; hot air from wood or sometimes coal flues.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Nope; hot air. Google hypocausts.
But not just rich Romans come to think of it. Public baths had them, ditto the bathhouses of military forts. Must have been very cosy in the north Britannian winter.
I was thinking more about in the home, and it’s always important to remember that the Roman villa experience was supported by a much more numerous lower class, and lots of good old slaves.
Surely the time for a proper budget is the spring, March or April, not just before Winter? Or is their financial logic which dictates otherwise?
The idea of doing it in the autumn is that it gave advance warning of the changes to be implemented at the start of the following tax year.
Sunak has played merry havoc with all of that with changes being implemented at all sorts of times - July for the NI threshold change being the latest one.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
Entire "look how short Sunak is!" schtick is as funny as a rubber crutch, and sub-adolescent to boot.
EDIT - Fun fact (per wiki) average British soldier in WW1 was 5'7" same as Rishi Sunak
Agreed. I’m on the short side of six foot, but have never thought that mocking people for their height is funny or interesting. It’s just another form of prejudice. Sunak has just delivered a shite budget: mock him for that, it’s his fault. The height jibes are absolutely pathetic.
Height’s a real weird one. I’m 6’2”. I’m the second shortest out of my regular group of mates weirdly by quite a few inches. Not one is a rugby player just a freakishly large group of about ten chaps.
The shortest of our group is 6’ and he will admit feeling like a midget.
Anyway a female friend is getting married to a chap on the periphery of our group of friends. He shares a first name with one of our friends who is 6’6” and so he’s called “little xxxxxx” because he’s 5’10” to the point where it’s become a major issue as he’s really taken offence at being called “little xxxxx” and has a chip about being relatively short.
I’m sure Rishi loses no sleep about his height as he’s probably quite happy with his life but it can be a big issue for some.
I was told by my GP that I am tall.
I am 5ft 6
Well Bev, as a lady you are the perfect height for ironing boards and kitchen sinks so don’t complain.
Complain? I am not complaining. I would not want to be 6ft tall. It would be a nightmare!
I am over 6 ft and have to be careful at my age I do not topple over when I bend !!
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
Neither my wife in the North of Scotland or our family in Berwick enjoyed any heating and used to get dressed under the bed clothes in cold weather
What I love about living in London is wearing less clothes all year round. It never feels cold even in winter months.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Nope; hot air. Google hypocausts.
But not just rich Romans come to think of it. Public baths had them, ditto the bathhouses of military forts. Must have been very cosy in the north Britannian winter.
I was thinking more about in the home, and it’s always important to remember that the Roman villa experience was supported by a much more numerous lower class, and lots of good old slaves.
Protected the bottom income deciles Reduced VAT on fuel Taken measures to incentivise oil production Ditto home insulation. Scrapped stamp duty on house purchases Increased the NI threshold (as was done)
Forced pensioners to pay NI Levied a windfall tax on oil companies Levied a new tax on property @ 0.5% p.a.*
Left income tax alone.
*With a rebate against stamp duty paid for those who have purchased in the last seven years.
What about Hospitals and Education and other departments whose budgets about to be ravaged by inflation? Should there really be income tax cut after that?
I left income taxes alone.
Essentially my aim would be to fiscally neutral at this juncture, albeit shifting the burden from the poorest income earners to the wealthiest asset owners.
Yes but the former mainly vote Labour and the latter mainly vote Tory and we have a Tory government
So?
So the Tories are not going to hit their own supporters are they?
It would need a Labour government to tax wealthy asset owning Tories more and redistribute more to low earning Labour voters on benefits
Why don’t the Tories govern for the country at large?
Such an old fashioned view. It's all about acting punitively toward those who dared to not vote for you, that's how you win hearts and minds for the future.
I’m genuinely curious about HYUFD’s response.
As far as I can tell, although governments tend to prioritise their base (for ideological as much as psephological reasons), this is the first government that pretty much renounces “one nation” policies in both its rhetoric and its actions.
Kind of Republican-lite.
On the contrary. It is a one nation, English nationalist party. Not a UK wide one.
Not true at all. It delights in dividing the people who don't vote for it in the big cities from the people who do vote for it in small towns. It pits young against old, worker against pensioner, graduate against apprentice.
There's nothing there that is unifying for England, and there are plenty of Scots willing to vote for it.
Disagree. One only needs to look at the history of Brexit, and the way in which HMG tore up the Sewel convention and threw NI to the wolves. It's not governing for anyone except its English majhority and a few idiots elsewhere (less than a quarter of voters in Scotland is not 'plenty', though not trivial).
Remember the Tory Party's reaction to the SNP is not to sort out the problem. It's to demonise it in England as a gang of thieves of the "English" voter's money. Remember the Salmond posters?
The Sewel convention? Is that the one about cocaine and hookers?
Entire "look how short Sunak is!" schtick is as funny as a rubber crutch, and sub-adolescent to boot.
EDIT - Fun fact (per wiki) average British soldier in WW1 was 5'7" same as Rishi Sunak
Agreed. I’m on the short side of six foot, but have never thought that mocking people for their height is funny or interesting. It’s just another form of prejudice. Sunak has just delivered a shite budget: mock him for that, it’s his fault. The height jibes are absolutely pathetic.
Height’s a real weird one. I’m 6’2”. I’m the second shortest out of my regular group of mates weirdly by quite a few inches. Not one is a rugby player just a freakishly large group of about ten chaps.
The shortest of our group is 6’ and he will admit feeling like a midget.
Anyway a female friend is getting married to a chap on the periphery of our group of friends. He shares a first name with one of our friends who is 6’6” and so he’s called “little xxxxxx” because he’s 5’10” to the point where it’s become a major issue as he’s really taken offence at being called “little xxxxx” and has a chip about being relatively short.
I’m sure Rishi loses no sleep about his height as he’s probably quite happy with his life but it can be a big issue for some.
I was told by my GP that I am tall.
I am 5ft 6
Well Bev, as a lady you are the perfect height for ironing boards and kitchen sinks so don’t complain.
Complain? I am not complaining. I would not want to be 6ft tall. It would be a nightmare!
I am over 6 ft and have to be careful at my age I do not topple over when I bend !!
You were warned about entering the wife carrying championships at your age.....
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Steam via hypercausts heated the ground floor from below. Think of stacks of tiles as supports giving a suitable space under the floor for the steam. There was a series building a Roman house using roman methods a few years ago, and they tried to build such a system, but it wasn’t great.
Not steam, on a PB technicality; hot air from wood or sometimes coal flues.
I sit corrected. Yes, not steam. Not sure where that got into my head!
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
Hiatus of more than a millennium though.
Those Saxons were quite chilled about it.
A frivolous response which fails to address the issue from all the relevant Angles.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Steam via hypercausts heated the ground floor from below. Think of stacks of tiles as supports giving a suitable space under the floor for the steam. There was a series building a Roman house using roman methods a few years ago, and they tried to build such a system, but it wasn’t great.
Hypocausts, hypercausts would be overhead.
Lots of medical negligence claims arising from hyper/hypo misunderstandings
Short people got no reason Short people got no reason Short people got no reason To live
They got little hands And little eyes And they walk around Tellin' great big lies They got little noses And tiny little teeth They wear platform shoes On their nasty little feet
Well, I don't want no short people Don't want no short people Don't want no short people 'Round here
Short people are just the same As you and I (A fool such as I) All men are brothers Until the day they die (It's a wonderful world)
Short people got nobody Short people got nobody Short people got nobody To love
They got little baby legs And they stand so low You got to pick 'em up Just to say hello They got little cars That got beep, beep, beep They got little voices Goin' peep, peep, peep They got grubby little fingers And dirty little minds They're gonna get you every time
Well, I don't want no short people Don't want no short people Don't want no short people 'Round here
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
Protected the bottom income deciles Reduced VAT on fuel Taken measures to incentivise oil production Ditto home insulation. Scrapped stamp duty on house purchases Increased the NI threshold (as was done)
Forced pensioners to pay NI Levied a windfall tax on oil companies Levied a new tax on property @ 0.5% p.a.*
Left income tax alone.
*With a rebate against stamp duty paid for those who have purchased in the last seven years.
What about Hospitals and Education and other departments whose budgets about to be ravaged by inflation? Should there really be income tax cut after that?
I left income taxes alone.
Essentially my aim would be to fiscally neutral at this juncture, albeit shifting the burden from the poorest income earners to the wealthiest asset owners.
Yes but the former mainly vote Labour and the latter mainly vote Tory and we have a Tory government
So?
So the Tories are not going to hit their own supporters are they?
It would need a Labour government to tax wealthy asset owning Tories more and redistribute more to low earning Labour voters on benefits
Why don’t the Tories govern for the country at large?
Such an old fashioned view. It's all about acting punitively toward those who dared to not vote for you, that's how you win hearts and minds for the future.
I’m genuinely curious about HYUFD’s response.
As far as I can tell, although governments tend to prioritise their base (for ideological as much as psephological reasons), this is the first government that pretty much renounces “one nation” policies in both its rhetoric and its actions.
Kind of Republican-lite.
On the contrary. It is a one nation, English nationalist party. Not a UK wide one.
Not true at all. It delights in dividing the people who don't vote for it in the big cities from the people who do vote for it in small towns. It pits young against old, worker against pensioner, graduate against apprentice.
There's nothing there that is unifying for England, and there are plenty of Scots willing to vote for it.
Disagree. One only needs to look at the history of Brexit, and the way in which HMG tore up the Sewel convention and threw NI to the wolves. It's not governing for anyone except its English majhority and a few idiots elsewhere (less than a quarter of voters in Scotland is not 'plenty', though not trivial).
Remember the Tory Party's reaction to the SNP is not to sort out the problem. It's to demonise it in England as a gang of thieves of the "English" voter's money. Remember the Salmond posters?
The Sewel convention? Is that the one about cocaine and hookers?
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Steam via hypercausts heated the ground floor from below. Think of stacks of tiles as supports giving a suitable space under the floor for the steam. There was a series building a Roman house using roman methods a few years ago, and they tried to build such a system, but it wasn’t great.
Not steam, on a PB technicality; hot air from wood or sometimes coal flues.
I sit corrected. Yes, not steam. Not sure where that got into my head!
Just thinking of the life of a hypocaust slave. Basically a combination of stoker and animated thermostat. Not fun.
AIUI more ordinary Romans tended to use charcoal braziers indoors when it was cold, so just as well their houses were draughty. I've read they designed houses as suntraps for even winter sun, though.
Edit: and a lot of Romano-British would have been plain old British anyway, in round huts with proper fires in the middle ...
Re: short politicos, note that in addition to James Madison, Napoleon Bonaparte & Rishi Sunak the was Engelbert Dollfuss of Austria, known to his countrymen as "Milimetternich".
Chancellor of the Austrian Republic 1932-34, Dollfuss was an "Austro-Fascist"modeled on Mussolini, famed for shelling the workers of Vienna before being assassinated (ironically) by Nazis.
Entire "look how short Sunak is!" schtick is as funny as a rubber crutch, and sub-adolescent to boot.
EDIT - Fun fact (per wiki) average British soldier in WW1 was 5'7" same as Rishi Sunak
Agreed. I’m on the short side of six foot, but have never thought that mocking people for their height is funny or interesting. It’s just another form of prejudice. Sunak has just delivered a shite budget: mock him for that, it’s his fault. The height jibes are absolutely pathetic.
Height’s a real weird one. I’m 6’2”. I’m the second shortest out of my regular group of mates weirdly by quite a few inches. Not one is a rugby player just a freakishly large group of about ten chaps.
The shortest of our group is 6’ and he will admit feeling like a midget.
Anyway a female friend is getting married to a chap on the periphery of our group of friends. He shares a first name with one of our friends who is 6’6” and so he’s called “little xxxxxx” because he’s 5’10” to the point where it’s become a major issue as he’s really taken offence at being called “little xxxxx” and has a chip about being relatively short.
I’m sure Rishi loses no sleep about his height as he’s probably quite happy with his life but it can be a big issue for some.
I was told by my GP that I am tall.
I am 5ft 6
Well Bev, as a lady you are the perfect height for ironing boards and kitchen sinks so don’t complain.
Complain? I am not complaining. I would not want to be 6ft tall. It would be a nightmare!
On a vaguely serious point it is a bit of a nightmare - kitchen worktops, ironing boards and hoovers are really not made for people over 6’ and it’s just the wrong angle for your back weirdly so not pleasant.
Also old country pubs with beamed ceilings can be less than amusing!!
Such meetings - military to military are quite common and usually kept very quiet. The reason for them is to humanise the "other guys" making decisions, that you may be facing. The US does this with some surprising "other guys" - even North Korea, some say.
The idea came out of Cold War strategy - a common theme in the studies of conflicts is poor decision making and escalation due to not understanding the opponents.
Publicising the contents of such a meeting - I'm not sure if I've heard of this before. Normally they are kept very, very quiet - so that people can feel free to talk to each other. Which is th point.
The decision to give this information to CNN must have been deliberate - is this part of the "open information" strategy that the Biden Administration (and UK) seem to be using in this crisis? Certainly, they have been giving information to the press that normally would have been the sort of thing that was kept secret.
Anyways. I thought there was a significant constituency of voters who were less affluent middle aged and working in lower paid employment who went Tory last time? ISTR Tories were delighted. And declared Labour had abandoned the traditional working class? Must have been mistaken. Apparently it was pensioners and the affluent. There are plenty of the former. There'll be fewer of the latter soon. So. It doesn't even work as a cynical strategy.
I would mainly say was a tranche of working class/lower middle class 40-65 year old voters who dropped off for Labour last time and they will be hoping to win back a large chunk of those voters in northern marginals which is Labour's entire strategy.
That is surely the most electorally important demographic at the next election.
I can't really see pensioners in England abandoning the Tories whatever happens.
Yes. Although marginal turnout is under appreciated. Plenty weren't enamoured with the choice last time. And many didn't bother. The flip side of pandering to your base is twofold. Firstly. In a cost of living crisis of this magnitude they won't be satisfied. Cos they'll be getting poorer too. Secondly. You greatly increase the determination of your opponents to turnout
Such meetings - military to military are quite common and usually kept very quiet. The reason for them is to humanise the "other guys" making decisions, that you may be facing. The US does this with some surprising "other guys" - even North Korea, some say.
The idea came out of Cold War strategy - a common theme in the studies of conflicts is poor decision making and escalation due to not understanding the opponents.
Publicising the contents of such a meeting - I'm not sure if I've heard of this before. Normally they are kept very, very quiet - so that people can feel free to talk to each other. Which is th point.
The decision to give this information to CNN must have been deliberate - is this part of the "open information" strategy that the Biden Administration (and UK) seem to be using in this crisis? Certainly, they have been giving information to the press that normally would have been the sort of thing that was kept secret.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Seems rather more intended to end the practise doesn't it?
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Nope; hot air. Google hypocausts.
But not just rich Romans come to think of it. Public baths had them, ditto the bathhouses of military forts. Must have been very cosy in the north Britannian winter.
I was thinking more about in the home, and it’s always important to remember that the Roman villa experience was supported by a much more numerous lower class, and lots of good old slaves.
Hypocausts were also extremely inefficient. Which is why they were rapidly abandoned with the passing of the Roman Period - at least in the colder parts of the world, where to really heat a house with them demanded huge amounts of fuel.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Steam via hypercausts heated the ground floor from below. Think of stacks of tiles as supports giving a suitable space under the floor for the steam. There was a series building a Roman house using roman methods a few years ago, and they tried to build such a system, but it wasn’t great.
Not steam, on a PB technicality; hot air from wood or sometimes coal flues.
I sit corrected. Yes, not steam. Not sure where that got into my head!
Hot air.
So a raised floor with a fire underneath, and hot air also through hollow bricks.
Entire "look how short Sunak is!" schtick is as funny as a rubber crutch, and sub-adolescent to boot.
EDIT - Fun fact (per wiki) average British soldier in WW1 was 5'7" same as Rishi Sunak
Agreed. I’m on the short side of six foot, but have never thought that mocking people for their height is funny or interesting. It’s just another form of prejudice. Sunak has just delivered a shite budget: mock him for that, it’s his fault. The height jibes are absolutely pathetic.
Height’s a real weird one. I’m 6’2”. I’m the second shortest out of my regular group of mates weirdly by quite a few inches. Not one is a rugby player just a freakishly large group of about ten chaps.
The shortest of our group is 6’ and he will admit feeling like a midget.
Anyway a female friend is getting married to a chap on the periphery of our group of friends. He shares a first name with one of our friends who is 6’6” and so he’s called “little xxxxxx” because he’s 5’10” to the point where it’s become a major issue as he’s really taken offence at being called “little xxxxx” and has a chip about being relatively short.
I’m sure Rishi loses no sleep about his height as he’s probably quite happy with his life but it can be a big issue for some.
I was told by my GP that I am tall.
I am 5ft 6
Well Bev, as a lady you are the perfect height for ironing boards and kitchen sinks so don’t complain.
Complain? I am not complaining. I would not want to be 6ft tall. It would be a nightmare!
I am over 6 ft and have to be careful at my age I do not topple over when I bend !!
Have experienced the sensation, if not its actualization.
However, have reached stage where I definitely need to plan ahead on how I'm gonna get back up.
Surely the time for a proper budget is the spring, March or April, not just before Winter? Or is their financial logic which dictates otherwise?
The idea of doing it in the autumn is that it gave advance warning of the changes to be implemented at the start of the following tax year.
Sunak has played merry havoc with all of that with changes being implemented at all sorts of times - July for the NI threshold change being the latest one.
Yeah, it's a complete shambles. So much for the reputation for competence which he was carefully cultivating.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Such meetings - military to military are quite common and usually kept very quiet. The reason for them is to humanise the "other guys" making decisions, that you may be facing. The US does this with some surprising "other guys" - even North Korea, some say.
The idea came out of Cold War strategy - a common theme in the studies of conflicts is poor decision making and escalation due to not understanding the opponents.
Publicising the contents of such a meeting - I'm not sure if I've heard of this before. Normally they are kept very, very quiet - so that people can feel free to talk to each other. Which is th point.
The decision to give this information to CNN must have been deliberate - is this part of the "open information" strategy that the Biden Administration (and UK) seem to be using in this crisis? Certainly, they have been giving information to the press that normally would have been the sort of thing that was kept secret.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Seems rather more intended to end the practise doesn't it?
I don't think so - I think it was about an "open information" strategy which seems to be a deliberate counter to the whole Russian-troll-farm idea.
I think that some people have been thinking very hard about how to fight back against the disinformation social media thing. That we are seeing a form of information warfare. After all, haven't we all noticed a these events -
- Troll farms and bot accounts hammered. Huge swathes of Twitter et al wiped out. - Openly presenting intelligence, publicly, to the press.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has warned that a ban on Russian energy imports would mean a European recession. He must urgently wake up to the fact that the alternative is a European genocide.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
To be equally picky only very rich romans had it, but yes the idea does go way back, even in the Roman Britain.
Wasn’t it just underfloor heating from hot water?
Floor and walls, and hot air.
Ah, I see I should have read on! You had got there already.
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
Neither my wife in the North of Scotland or our family in Berwick enjoyed any heating and used to get dressed under the bed clothes in cold weather
What I love about living in London is wearing less clothes all year round. It never feels cold even in winter months.
Oh, you must be a member of the same club as me.
Unlikely. 😯
It was a general point about extent of continental weather patterns…
Anyways. I thought there was a significant constituency of voters who were less affluent middle aged and working in lower paid employment who went Tory last time? ISTR Tories were delighted. And declared Labour had abandoned the traditional working class? Must have been mistaken. Apparently it was pensioners and the affluent. There are plenty of the former. There'll be fewer of the latter soon. So. It doesn't even work as a cynical strategy.
I would mainly say was a tranche of working class/lower middle class 40-65 year old voters who dropped off for Labour last time and they will be hoping to win back a large chunk of those voters in northern marginals which is Labour's entire strategy.
That is surely the most electorally important demographic at the next election.
I can't really see pensioners in England abandoning the Tories whatever happens.
Not overall, but but reducing the imbalance in the pensioner vote back a couple of elections would help Labour noticeably.
Perhaps some pensioners might start to care more about their grandchildrens prospects, housing and education. Probably a forlorn hope, but might twinge a few oldie consciences.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried. That's you upwardly mobile middle aged demographic right there, who would have voted Thatcher in a heart beat.
I would probably vote for Thatcher right now. She may have been eminently dis likeable but at least she was intelligent, decisive and determined. Even if she did things were wrong, at least she did them because she thought they might improve things in the end.
This lot, however...
She was certainly head and shoulders above all her successors and most of her predecessors.
And she didn't need quotas or any of the "it's time" crap to get there either.
Such meetings - military to military are quite common and usually kept very quiet. The reason for them is to humanise the "other guys" making decisions, that you may be facing. The US does this with some surprising "other guys" - even North Korea, some say.
The idea came out of Cold War strategy - a common theme in the studies of conflicts is poor decision making and escalation due to not understanding the opponents.
Publicising the contents of such a meeting - I'm not sure if I've heard of this before. Normally they are kept very, very quiet - so that people can feel free to talk to each other. Which is th point.
The decision to give this information to CNN must have been deliberate - is this part of the "open information" strategy that the Biden Administration (and UK) seem to be using in this crisis? Certainly, they have been giving information to the press that normally would have been the sort of thing that was kept secret.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Seems rather more intended to end the practise doesn't it?
I don't think so - I think it was about an "open information" strategy which seems to be a deliberate counter to the whole Russian-troll-farm idea.
I think that some people have been thinking very hard about how to fight back against the disinformation social media thing. That we are seeing a form of information warfare. After all, haven't we all noticed a these events -
- Troll farms and bot accounts hammered. Huge swathes of Twitter et al wiped out. - Openly presenting intelligence, publicly, to the press.
I'm not on Twitter personally, so I haven't noticed (1). (2), I've noticed people noticing it. There always seems to be quite a lot of intelligence info released during conflicts like Syria, but I suppose in this conflict the releases have been given greater prominence by coming from Boris/Biden etc.
Sounds like the government's energy strategy isn't going to mention tidal at all. Massive missed opportunity.
They're also going to need to do some thinking ahead about storage, provide some incentives to boost development, but no news about that at this stage either.
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried. That's you upwardly mobile middle aged demographic right there, who would have voted Thatcher in a heart beat.
I would probably vote for Thatcher right now. She may have been eminently dis likeable but at least she was intelligent, decisive and determined. Even if she did things were wrong, at least she did them because she thought they might improve things in the end.
This lot, however...
She was certainly head and shoulders above all her successors and most of her predecessors.
And she didn't need quotas or any of the "it's time" crap to get there either.
She went bonkers in the end with big headed arrogance, convinced of her own rectitude.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
Enjoyed Opinium's tweet on their post-statement findings: "They only train the Conservative’s on best party to “bring down the national debt and deceit"'
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried. That's you upwardly mobile middle aged demographic right there, who would have voted Thatcher in a heart beat.
I would probably vote for Thatcher right now. She may have been eminently dis likeable but at least she was intelligent, decisive and determined. Even if she did things were wrong, at least she did them because she thought they might improve things in the end.
This lot, however...
She was certainly head and shoulders above all her successors and most of her predecessors.
And she didn't need quotas or any of the "it's time" crap to get there either.
She came from a less cynical generation though. There were plenty of cynics around her in politics (and always have been), but she was a true believer. There are a lot less people like that in politics today.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has warned that a ban on Russian energy imports would mean a European recession. He must urgently wake up to the fact that the alternative is a European genocide.
The overall piece is excellent, but on that point I don't think the author is correct.
Right now, the Europeans receive Russian energy, and Russia receives European dollars/rubles/Euros.
But the Russians have limited ways to spend that money. Sanctions have cut off imported components that are essential for them to run their economy: once you disallow ARM, Intel, etc. semiconductors, there's not a lot you can make that contains electronics.
The Russians have no shortage of money. What they have is a limited ability to spend that money on things their economy needs.
And there's another thing. It's spring right now, and summer is around the corner. Europe would be well advised to fill gas storage to capacity, because that minimises Putin's leverage next Winter.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
And yet 6-floor terraces in Knightsbridge are about as desirable as you can get.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Also that immigration led growth needs to be outside London. It is a key part of levelling up to do so. The Green belt forces people to look for prospects further afield, and that is a good thing.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
Ah hem - prices of apartments tells you there is a substantial subset of people who want exactly that.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
Young people do, especially if there is a park nearby anyway
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried. That's you upwardly mobile middle aged demographic right there, who would have voted Thatcher in a heart beat.
I would probably vote for Thatcher right now. She may have been eminently dis likeable but at least she was intelligent, decisive and determined. Even if she did things were wrong, at least she did them because she thought they might improve things in the end.
This lot, however...
She was certainly head and shoulders above all her successors and most of her predecessors.
And she didn't need quotas or any of the "it's time" crap to get there either.
She went bonkers in the end with big headed arrogance, convinced of her own rectitude.
That is why her own party deposed her.
Bonkers like thinking the ERM was a terrible idea or speaking against EU power grabs?
In many things she was right long before her time.
Curious that Opinium doesn't publish its party preference scores - they certainly asked, with the usual turnout filter. Perhaps we'll see them tomorrow.
Overall the conclusion seems to be that people like the inidividual measures but think the overall impression is pretty grim and Labour might do better.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
Ah hem - prices of apartments tells you there is a substantial subset of people who want exactly that.
Not really, prices of apartments in central London are inflated by foreign buyers using them as quasi bank accounts for dirty money. No one lives in them.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
British people want a house with a garden as their family home. I'm all for building more flats, but it can never solve the housing problem alone.
We should be building on the green belt. Not the national parks and areas of significance, but everywhere else there is strong demand.
Such meetings - military to military are quite common and usually kept very quiet. The reason for them is to humanise the "other guys" making decisions, that you may be facing. The US does this with some surprising "other guys" - even North Korea, some say.
The idea came out of Cold War strategy - a common theme in the studies of conflicts is poor decision making and escalation due to not understanding the opponents.
Publicising the contents of such a meeting - I'm not sure if I've heard of this before. Normally they are kept very, very quiet - so that people can feel free to talk to each other. Which is th point.
The decision to give this information to CNN must have been deliberate - is this part of the "open information" strategy that the Biden Administration (and UK) seem to be using in this crisis? Certainly, they have been giving information to the press that normally would have been the sort of thing that was kept secret.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Seems rather more intended to end the practise doesn't it?
I don't think so - I think it was about an "open information" strategy which seems to be a deliberate counter to the whole Russian-troll-farm idea.
I think that some people have been thinking very hard about how to fight back against the disinformation social media thing. That we are seeing a form of information warfare. After all, haven't we all noticed a these events -
- Troll farms and bot accounts hammered. Huge swathes of Twitter et al wiped out. - Openly presenting intelligence, publicly, to the press.
I'm not on Twitter personally, so I haven't noticed (1). (2), I've noticed people noticing it. There always seems to be quite a lot of intelligence info released during conflicts like Syria, but I suppose in this conflict the releases have been given greater prominence by coming from Boris/Biden etc.
And the fact remains, that divulging the contents of such a private briefing will surely either make the Russian Generals stop having them, or mean that they just trot out propaganda messages during them in case it all gets out.
Anyways. I thought there was a significant constituency of voters who were less affluent middle aged and working in lower paid employment who went Tory last time? ISTR Tories were delighted. And declared Labour had abandoned the traditional working class? Must have been mistaken. Apparently it was pensioners and the affluent. There are plenty of the former. There'll be fewer of the latter soon. So. It doesn't even work as a cynical strategy.
I would mainly say was a tranche of working class/lower middle class 40-65 year old voters who dropped off for Labour last time and they will be hoping to win back a large chunk of those voters in northern marginals which is Labour's entire strategy.
That is surely the most electorally important demographic at the next election.
I can't really see pensioners in England abandoning the Tories whatever happens.
Not overall, but but reducing the imbalance in the pensioner vote back a couple of elections would help Labour noticeably.
Perhaps some pensioners might start to care more about their grandchildrens prospects, housing and education. Probably a forlorn hope, but might twinge a few oldie consciences.
They do, hence they want to transfer their family homes to their children
Just listening to the Goodfellows vodcast. I was intrigued by a comment from former general HR McMaster in response to what would happen if Putin used a tactical nuclear weapon. He said 'he has to know that's the end for him.' But does he? Would he have been given a clear message on it? McMaster also suggested that it would be a conventional (i. non-nuclear?) response. So what would that look like? He said earlier in the video that we could sink the entire black sea fleet if we wanted to. Bomb all the Russian positions in Ukraine? Hit their air bases with missiles?
They are the sorts of questions I'm not entirely comfortable asking. But if this is where we are now, what would it be?
Such meetings - military to military are quite common and usually kept very quiet. The reason for them is to humanise the "other guys" making decisions, that you may be facing. The US does this with some surprising "other guys" - even North Korea, some say.
The idea came out of Cold War strategy - a common theme in the studies of conflicts is poor decision making and escalation due to not understanding the opponents.
Publicising the contents of such a meeting - I'm not sure if I've heard of this before. Normally they are kept very, very quiet - so that people can feel free to talk to each other. Which is th point.
The decision to give this information to CNN must have been deliberate - is this part of the "open information" strategy that the Biden Administration (and UK) seem to be using in this crisis? Certainly, they have been giving information to the press that normally would have been the sort of thing that was kept secret.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Seems rather more intended to end the practise doesn't it?
I don't think so - I think it was about an "open information" strategy which seems to be a deliberate counter to the whole Russian-troll-farm idea.
I think that some people have been thinking very hard about how to fight back against the disinformation social media thing. That we are seeing a form of information warfare. After all, haven't we all noticed a these events -
- Troll farms and bot accounts hammered. Huge swathes of Twitter et al wiped out. - Openly presenting intelligence, publicly, to the press.
I'm not on Twitter personally, so I haven't noticed (1). (2), I've noticed people noticing it. There always seems to be quite a lot of intelligence info released during conflicts like Syria, but I suppose in this conflict the releases have been given greater prominence by coming from Boris/Biden etc.
There's been a lot of briefing, publican of information that would previously have been COBRA stuff. It's seems like a definite policy.
I'm not a social media type - but those that are tell me there has been a massive change. The trolls are coming alive again, but they've taken a massive hit. It's hard to think that this wasn't played for.
Back to the question of the meeting being publicised - even giving the name of the Russian general. Why? To emphasise the Russians are now the ones with a problem?
What we're finding out at the moment is that economies don't run on policy, trade deals or investment breaks: they run on energy.
There’s a real crunch point coming very soon with Putin asking for payment in rubles. It looks like the West basically has a choice between breaking our own sanctions or having the gas turned off.
The gas is going to be turned off, because Putin is going to need every tool in his arsenal to try and get the West to back off sanctions, and this is the only lever he has left.
But March is also a bloody awful time for the Russians to turn the gas off. European countries are warming up, use of gas for domestic heating is declining, and we're heading into the period during which storage facilites are filled up. Europe could survive (admittedly at the cost of more expensive energy imports) until September/October without Russian gas.
But can Russia survive without being connected to the world economy? Can they survive the shuttering of plants due to a lack of imported components? Yes, there'll be food in the shops, but there will probably be little else.
Although 63% of our electricity is currently from coal or gas.
We could do with lots of nice sunny days with strong winds for two months,
We have had lovely sunny weather this week and with our heating off and the solar panels performing well our daily energy use has dropped from near £5 a day to around £1.20
You will need it all on next week.
Great British Spring.
Brrrrrrrrr.
Extra Jersey as we did in the 1940s and 1950s long before central heating
At risk of being picky, that seems unlikely given the Romans had central heating.
Neither my wife in the North of Scotland or our family in Berwick enjoyed any heating and used to get dressed under the bed clothes in cold weather
What I love about living in London is wearing less clothes all year round. It never feels cold even in winter months.
Oh, you must be a member of the same club as me.
Unlikely. 😯
It was a general point about extent of continental weather patterns…
Rapidly moving conversation from London to News from another region.
Smoggies stealing Farndale Daffs! But Col Duncombe been called in. 😌
“IT has hitherto been the custom, both of the owner and the tenants, to allow tourists and others freely to visit the valley when the daffodils are in bloom and enjoy one of the most beautiful spring effects to be seen in Yorkshire,” said Colonel Charles William Duncombe, of Duncombe Park in Helmsley, in the D&S Times’ letters column. “Last year this privilege was most grossly abused." The Farndale daffodils are one of the great sights of spring, visited by an estimated 40,000 people between mid-March and mid-April. Some people reckon the daffs were planted by monks from Rievaulx Abbey, but it is more likely that these narcissus pseudonarcissus – “wild daffodils” – are naturally occurring, enjoying the damp meadows and open woodland of Farndale, with their bulbs spread by the River Dove.
problem not the odd person wandering lonely as a cloud to view the scene. Tis the “industrial harvesting of the daffs, with fences being broken down in the process – an “outrage”, according to Col Duncombe.
“Motor cars by the hundred from all parts of the county directly the flowers began to show," he thundered. "In a few days, the dale was ruthlessly stripped and thousands of blooms were carried off to be sold at Middlesbrough and other large towns.” For the forthcoming season, he warned, police and gamekeepers be on duty, guarding the blooms. “No flowers will be allowed to be gathered except by express permission of the farmer on whose land they are grown, and this permission will have to be shown at any time that it may be asked for,”
From the Darlington & Stockton Times of March 11, 1922
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
Ah hem - prices of apartments tells you there is a substantial subset of people who want exactly that.
Not really, prices of apartments in central London are inflated by foreign buyers using them as quasi bank accounts for dirty money. No one lives in them.
There should be a penal tax on unoccupied flats. Something like 5% of value per annum.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
Ah hem - prices of apartments tells you there is a substantial subset of people who want exactly that.
Not really, prices of apartments in central London are inflated by foreign buyers using them as quasi bank accounts for dirty money. No one lives in them.
People say that - but I think that isn't true. It's an excuse for housing shortages.
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried. That's you upwardly mobile middle aged demographic right there, who would have voted Thatcher in a heart beat.
I would probably vote for Thatcher right now. She may have been eminently dis likeable but at least she was intelligent, decisive and determined. Even if she did things were wrong, at least she did them because she thought they might improve things in the end.
This lot, however...
She was certainly head and shoulders above all her successors and most of her predecessors.
And she didn't need quotas or any of the "it's time" crap to get there either.
She went bonkers in the end with big headed arrogance, convinced of her own rectitude.
That is why her own party deposed her.
In retrospect perhaps it would have been better for the country if Labour had won in 1992 instead of 1997. It would have spared us debasement of our politics with Alistair Campbell's style of opposition/government as well as the succession of poor Conservative opposition leaders.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
Ah hem - prices of apartments tells you there is a substantial subset of people who want exactly that.
Not really, prices of apartments in central London are inflated by foreign buyers using them as quasi bank accounts for dirty money. No one lives in them.
I'd be quite happy to live 500 foot in the air with a big balcony if it was central. I haven't got a garden now and it's fine
And I WOULD actually live there: lofty apartments have marvellous views
But I think it is rather telling that TSE, MaxPB, etc, all big Call Me Dave Fans can't get on here fast enough to criticise many of the current government decisions.
If I was a Tory strategist, that would have me rather worried. That's you upwardly mobile middle aged demographic right there, who would have voted Thatcher in a heart beat.
I would probably vote for Thatcher right now. She may have been eminently dis likeable but at least she was intelligent, decisive and determined. Even if she did things were wrong, at least she did them because she thought they might improve things in the end.
This lot, however...
She was certainly head and shoulders above all her successors and most of her predecessors.
And she didn't need quotas or any of the "it's time" crap to get there either.
She went bonkers in the end with big headed arrogance, convinced of her own rectitude.
That is why her own party deposed her.
Bonkers like thinking the ERM was a terrible idea or speaking against EU power grabs?
In many things she was right long before her time.
Bonkers about forcing through the highly regressive Poll Tax.
I always thought at the core of political parties (I don't necessarily mean the greasy pole climbing shysters) that those people believed in trying to make the country a better place for everybody. Now their methods of doing so, you might disagree with, but that was the core principle.
Not, well its not for us to do right, you need to vote us out if you want that.
It’s the ideology of a bully, or a street-gang.
In all seriousness, I would have thought I am key demographic for the Tories. Highly educated (that isn't supposed to be a humble brag), relatively well off from a working class background, have entrepreneurial background. Voted Remain, but not an FBPE, more we need to just get on with this. Have voted for all the main parties at some point.
Now this is just a niche internet forum, but HYUFD has stated that he posts on here to get his debating / campaigning skills up to scratch and be able to win arguments. He seems a man on a mission to ensure I think the worst of them.
You are a graduate who voted Remain, statistically you would almost certainly be a Labour or LD voter. Sorry
Ummm - aren't you a graduate who voted remain?
Yes statistically as a 40 year old graduate Remain voter I would probably be Starmer Labour or LD or at most a swing voter as I own a property in part with a mortgage.
Obviously there are exceptions, I was talking generally. The average Tory voter is over 50, a home owner, a non graduate and voted Leave.
The Tories doing little to ensure the next generation gets on the housing ladder will, ultimately, be their demise.
Building too much in the greenbelt would also be their demise, see Chesham and Amersham. The problem is developers land banking if anything
Developers land bank to manage risk in the planning process.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
The green belt is just a subsidy to people who live in the outskirts of cities.
I prefer to think of it as preserving an asset for the nation.
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
You're also in favour of immigration-led population growth?
Yes.
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
Horrible. No one wants to live in a high rise with no access to private outdoor space.
You can already see that because the prices of houses are soaring relative to flats.
I think the solution is to build half a dozen garden cities on farmland around London along railway lines into the city. At least that way you concentrate and limit opposition.
The Brits “invented” the garden square. It’s a great typology, typically surrounded by five or six floor terraced housing. Sometimes by Victorian apartment blocks. The districts in London that specialise in it are highly desirable.
Yet move much outside of Zone 1 and you’re in a world of two-storey Edwardian semis.
I don’t want dystopian HK style blocks everywhere. I just think we should encourage densification of our urban cores.
Comments
I think a combination of incompetence and the economy (which mostly isnt particularly this lots fault, although they do cock up whatever they are involved in, but the bigger issues are global) will stop them winning a majority next time around, but expect them still to be competitive.
I have since moved again and you probably do need my vote.
Neither do the destitute finance Lulu Lytle wallpaper. So HY has another point.
It was Cameron and Clegg who increased tuition fees hitting young graduates and Cameron who imposed more austerity than this government too. It was Osborne as well who raised the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million, hugely benefiting wealthy Tory voting property owners and their heirs. It was Cameron and Osborne who introduced the triple lock to increase pensions too
ISTR Tories were delighted. And declared Labour had abandoned the traditional working class?
Must have been mistaken.
Apparently it was pensioners and the affluent.
There are plenty of the former. There'll be fewer of the latter soon.
So. It doesn't even work as a cynical strategy.
Remember the Tory Party's reaction to the SNP is not to sort out the problem. It's to demonise it in England as a gang of thieves of the "English" voter's money. Remember the Salmond posters?
In theory
But not just rich Romans come to think of it. Public baths had them, ditto the bathhouses of military forts. Must have been very cosy in the north Britannian winter.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-party-property-developer-boris-johnson-conservative-donors-a9588381.html
Good night.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-60854153
Short people got no reason
Short people got no reason
Short people got no reason
To live
They got little hands
And little eyes
And they walk around
Tellin' great big lies
They got little noses
And tiny little teeth
They wear platform shoes
On their nasty little feet
Well, I don't want no short people
Don't want no short people
Don't want no short people
'Round here
Short people are just the same
As you and I
(A fool such as I)
All men are brothers
Until the day they die
(It's a wonderful world)
Short people got nobody
Short people got nobody
Short people got nobody
To love
They got little baby legs
And they stand so low
You got to pick 'em up
Just to say hello
They got little cars
That got beep, beep, beep
They got little voices
Goin' peep, peep, peep
They got grubby little fingers
And dirty little minds
They're gonna get you every time
Well, I don't want no short people
Don't want no short people
Don't want no short people
'Round here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T3W4ZOlA08g
There was a series building a Roman house using roman methods a few years ago, and they tried to build such a system, but it wasn’t great.
We need to change the planning process (though not, I agree, in order to favour the destruction of the green belt).
That is surely the most electorally important demographic at the next election.
I can't really see pensioners in England abandoning the Tories whatever happens.
Sunak has played merry havoc with all of that with changes being implemented at all sorts of times - July for the NI threshold change being the latest one.
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/vladimir-putins-ukraine-war-can-end-in-only-two-ways-genocide-or-defeat/
Lots of medical negligence claims arising from hyper/hypo misunderstandings
I mean, I tend to live very centrally, but I’d hate to think of England without its green belts.
Obviously there is a cost in terms of house prices, though it is not, in my view, the main driver.
AIUI more ordinary Romans tended to use charcoal braziers indoors when it was cold, so just as well their houses were draughty. I've read they designed houses as suntraps for even winter sun, though.
Edit: and a lot of Romano-British would have been plain old British anyway, in round huts with proper fires in the middle ...
Chancellor of the Austrian Republic 1932-34, Dollfuss was an "Austro-Fascist"modeled on Mussolini, famed for shelling the workers of Vienna before being assassinated (ironically) by Nazis.
FWIW Queen Victoria was 5'0"
Also old country pubs with beamed ceilings can be less than amusing!!
Hmmm...
Such meetings - military to military are quite common and usually kept very quiet. The reason for them is to humanise the "other guys" making decisions, that you may be facing. The US does this with some surprising "other guys" - even North Korea, some say.
The idea came out of Cold War strategy - a common theme in the studies of conflicts is poor decision making and escalation due to not understanding the opponents.
Publicising the contents of such a meeting - I'm not sure if I've heard of this before. Normally they are kept very, very quiet - so that people can feel free to talk to each other. Which is th point.
The decision to give this information to CNN must have been deliberate - is this part of the "open information" strategy that the Biden Administration (and UK) seem to be using in this crisis? Certainly, they have been giving information to the press that normally would have been the sort of thing that was kept secret.
Hmmmmmmm.....
Although marginal turnout is under appreciated. Plenty weren't enamoured with the choice last time. And many didn't bother.
The flip side of pandering to your base is twofold.
Firstly. In a cost of living crisis of this magnitude they won't be satisfied. Cos they'll be getting poorer too.
Secondly. You greatly increase the determination of your opponents to turnout
So a raised floor with a fire underneath, and hot air also through hollow bricks.
🥵
However, have reached stage where I definitely need to plan ahead on how I'm gonna get back up.
I think that some people have been thinking very hard about how to fight back against the disinformation social media thing. That we are seeing a form of information warfare. After all, haven't we all noticed a these events -
- Troll farms and bot accounts hammered. Huge swathes of Twitter et al wiped out.
- Openly presenting intelligence, publicly, to the press.
It was a general point about extent of continental weather patterns…
Perhaps some pensioners might start to care more about their grandchildrens prospects, housing and education. Probably a forlorn hope, but might twinge a few oldie consciences.
Can anybody explain why the short Putin seems so keen to display his "man breasts"? Or is it possible to give too much information in a query?
Essentially I believe the UK needs to go “up”, similar to European cities and indeed a handful of wealthier US ones.
I believe the job of the planning process is to encourage that.
And she didn't need quotas or any of the "it's time" crap to get there either.
They're also going to need to do some thinking ahead about storage, provide some incentives to boost development, but no news about that at this stage either.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/mar/23/johnson-to-defy-cabinet-fears-and-push-for-onshore-wind-expansion
That is why her own party deposed her.
Right now, the Europeans receive Russian energy, and Russia receives European dollars/rubles/Euros.
But the Russians have limited ways to spend that money. Sanctions have cut off imported components that are essential for them to run their economy: once you disallow ARM, Intel, etc. semiconductors, there's not a lot you can make that contains electronics.
The Russians have no shortage of money. What they have is a limited ability to spend that money on things their economy needs.
And there's another thing. It's spring right now, and summer is around the corner. Europe would be well advised to fill gas storage to capacity, because that minimises Putin's leverage next Winter.
Go figure.
In many things she was right long before her time.
Overall the conclusion seems to be that people like the inidividual measures but think the overall impression is pretty grim and Labour might do better.
We should be building on the green belt. Not the national parks and areas of significance, but everywhere else there is strong demand.
They are the sorts of questions I'm not entirely comfortable asking. But if this is where we are now, what would it be?
I'm not a social media type - but those that are tell me there has been a massive change. The trolls are coming alive again, but they've taken a massive hit. It's hard to think that this wasn't played for.
Back to the question of the meeting being publicised - even giving the name of the Russian general. Why? To emphasise the Russians are now the ones with a problem?
Smoggies stealing Farndale Daffs! But Col Duncombe been called in. 😌
“IT has hitherto been the custom, both of the owner and the tenants, to allow tourists and others freely to visit the valley when the daffodils are in bloom and enjoy one of the most beautiful spring effects to be seen in Yorkshire,” said Colonel Charles William Duncombe, of Duncombe Park in Helmsley, in the D&S Times’ letters column. “Last year this privilege was most grossly abused."
The Farndale daffodils are one of the great sights of spring, visited by an estimated 40,000 people between mid-March and mid-April. Some people reckon the daffs were planted by monks from Rievaulx Abbey, but it is more likely that these narcissus pseudonarcissus – “wild daffodils” – are naturally occurring, enjoying the damp meadows and open woodland of Farndale, with their bulbs spread by the River Dove.
problem not the odd person wandering lonely as a cloud to view the scene. Tis the “industrial harvesting of the daffs, with fences being broken down in the process – an “outrage”, according to Col Duncombe.
“Motor cars by the hundred from all parts of the county directly the flowers began to show," he thundered. "In a few days, the dale was ruthlessly stripped and thousands of blooms were carried off to be sold at Middlesbrough and other large towns.”
For the forthcoming season, he warned, police and gamekeepers be on duty, guarding the blooms.
“No flowers will be allowed to be gathered except by express permission of the farmer on whose land they are grown, and this permission will have to be shown at any time that it may be asked for,”
From the Darlington & Stockton Times of March 11, 1922
And I WOULD actually live there: lofty apartments have marvellous views
She was the architect of the Single Market.
I think the solution is to build half a dozen garden cities on farmland around London along railway lines into the city. At least that way you concentrate and limit opposition.
It’s a great typology, typically surrounded by five or six floor terraced housing. Sometimes by Victorian apartment blocks. The districts in London that specialise in it are highly desirable.
Yet move much outside of Zone 1 and you’re in a world of two-storey Edwardian semis.
I don’t want dystopian HK style blocks everywhere. I just think we should encourage densification of our urban cores.