A north London council, responding to an issue with very large families, has started giving permission to extend upwards. Put another story on the house (not just a loft conversion).
Let's really go for it.
So every 2 bed cottage can become a 3/4 bed.
Get the Nimbies howling.
I posted about that at the time. The way they’ve done it is to publish strict design guidelines and then say, if you can stick to these guidelines - go for it!
And why the hell not?????
Why do we make it so hard on ourselves?
A destructive combination of love of bureaucracy clashing with our fetishisation of localised consent for building. So we end up trying to cover off everything in a complex process, and tell people they should be able to stop any development they do not personally like. Whilst still purporting to want to encourage it.
When that example shows how they can work well together
Councils should publish a detailed local plan and design guidelines.
If you meet the plan, consent should be near automatic.
Wasn't that the plan that got Jenrick fired? (or at least it was going to be closer to that).
The current Local Plan approach is a right pain the arse for officers, and despised by elected politicians, yet it their outcries that will keep that approach largely in place.
No.
Jenrick got fired for the mutant algorithm which basically said:
“House prices are high in Amersham, let’s concrete over Amersham”.
We do need an algorithm, but one that says:
“Houses very low rise in Zones 1-4 of London. Let’s increase those. And the same in the equivalent areas of Manchester et al.”
I was speaking part in jest, as there was much about the paper people didn't like, but they definitely didn't like the idea of consent being easier in some areas if they adhered to broad plans either.
That’s because - under the belief that people want semi-detached housing with a garden - they wanted the right to concrete over Amersham.
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
"Middlesbrough and other large towns.”
The word "other" has been incorrectly included there.
The 80 seat majority has made the tories complacent.
I think it’s downhill from here for Boris.
Even without him, I think it’s still a stretch for the tories to win another majority.
I'm not sure it has made them complacent - they've seem terrified to act sometimes. The NI increase was a pretty rare counter example of using the majority for something big.
Legally protected footpaths in Britain are a fantastic asset. Just get an ordnance survey map showing some countryside nearby and study it. They served the common people and glow with social history. Walking them is therapeutic. They get one away from the smell and clangor of city life.
Isn't it even better in Scotland as people can roam just about anywhere?
Swings and roundabouts. I’ve walked in Scottish hills and mountains and the lack of paths is liberating and more challenging. In the lakes some of the tracks are more like motorways. Generally in England the land is farmed, with much less in the way of open country, so roaming would be more challenging. The footpath network is fantastic, and also a great relic of past times, with many certainly having a centuries old pedigree. When I lived in NZ I was shocked at the lack of paths, outside of reserves which featured trails.
The Coastal Paths in Cornwall are awesome - and underused.
I have used them! The walk out to Rame from Tregonhawke cliffs is my favourite.
Par sands to Fowey is excellent. Polkerris makes a lovely place for a stop on the way....
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
Yeah, but the average voter on this site is wealthy, posh, and a Cameron/Osborne type. They think they are more liberal (and are rather enjoying playing at opposition to the evil Boris Tories) but actually they don’t give a shit about people less well off than them.
Boris won his majority by cutting through to the people those Cameron/Osborne voters despise. Now personally I think he and his Government has failed to follow through, and the PM has personally fallen short, but that’s still the constituency he’ll win his next majority from (and I think he will. It’s the average voter in the part of the country I grew up in. They voted Maggie. They voted Blair. They disliked Cameron and his sort.
Harsh. Also true of the left, mind - they find the UK poor distasteful and common, which is why they love to affect concern for faraway places like S Africa and Palestine, and microscopic issues like transgenderism. But moral revulsion is occasionally an electoral force in itself. See 1997.
I expressed concern on here today about how the poor in the UK would fare in the face of the cost of living squeeze and was told by one of our right leaning posters that I was being over-emotional. Now I am told that actually left wing people don't care about poverty in the UK. 🤦♂️
I didn't mean you, but I don't see what other conclusion to draw from the sheer unbridled wankerdom on the left about things which are none of their sodding business. Just think how good it would be if lefty twitter devoted to the UK poor one percent of the time it devotes to discussing whether chopping your willy off makes you a woman
I really think that right wing people need to stop basing their view of left wing people on what is trending on Twitter! The only people I ever hear talking about this kind of thing are PB Tories complaining about something they have read on Twitter. None of my left leaning friends cares about this stuff.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
I agree about the difficult choices. The tone was an issue, as you say - Sunak looking terribly pleased with himself, Johnson chortling randomly behind him (even when Sunak was talking about suffering in Ukraine, apparently). Reeves's straightforward "people are worried" struck the right note. If you're announcing difficult times, you should look concerned, serious and methodical, not as if you were having the time of your life.
That’s because - under the belief that people want semi-detached housing with a garden - they wanted the right to concrete over Amersham.
No (or rather not just that), it was a fundamental point of process that many in the shires in particular objected to. The government wants (or wanted) the planning system to make development easier. Councillors and most other people bar developers want the planning system to make development harder.
Yes, particular things the government was after, and algorithmic issues, were a big part of specific objections for this attempt, but at its heart the fundamental problem in selling anything, even better crafted, to planning authorities is that the government wants it to be simpler to say Yes, while planning authorities (or at least politicians acting on behalf of locals) want it to be simpler to say No.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
I agree about the difficult choices. The tone was an issue, as you say - Sunak looking terribly pleased with himself, Johnson chortling randomly behind him (even when Sunak was talking about suffering in Ukraine, apparently). Reeves's straightforward "people are worried" struck the right note. If you're announcing difficult times, you should look concerned, serious and methodical, not as if you were having the time of your life.
I saw Johnson laughing when Sunak began his speech with a dour description of the nightmare in Ukr.
But to be fair it seemed obvious to me Johnson was actually laughing about something the opposition bench had just said just as Sunak began. For once, I don't think this was Johnson being a total arse.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
I find the belief that pensioners have vast piles of gold they sleep on, in the style of Smaug, interesting. There are quite a few poor old people.
No doubt, but there is a class of rich pensioner that exists and pays very little tax with net rates well below the same earnings for working people. You only have to raise £5-7k per person in that bracket to make a huge difference for tax cuts for the working poor.
The problem always comes to the issue that there aren't enough rich people to soak. You need (if you are a government) to go after the middle class.
Most houses (and much of the value of the housing stock) are not owned by pensioners. If you want to start tapping into housing money, then you need to take on the middle.
Oh there's absolutely enough rich pensioners to soak, many of them with little to no chance of tax minimisation either. Either they sell up and downsize to reduce their tax (freeing up said property) or they pay the tax.
You own a house in a London street full of upper middle class cnts, so how are you part of the solution and not part of the problem?
There's a claim in a Michael Crichton novel that if you domesticate a chimpanzee and give it a stack of photos, some of chimpanzees and some of people, it will sort them correctly, with one exception: if one of the photos is of itself it will put it in the people stack. Aren't you doing the same?
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Then the Tories turn their core vote to RefUK or stay home or even Labour and LD at the next election if they lose the asset owning pensioner vote, turning a hung parliament on current polls into a 1997 style Labour landslide!
The Tories are not going to commit political suicide thankfully
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison. “The forgotten millions” yells the, EXPRESS? What? “The up yours budget” say the star.
“This is a strategy for inequality” whines the Guardian. I think it’s a bit over the top to be honest.
The Mail is largely supportive, merely fearing it won’t protect “squeeze on household budgets” because taxes have not been “slashed enough.” They seem to be speaking for just their readership than poorer households on brink of fuel poverty? And the Times seem to be taking exactly same line as the Mail, not enough taxes slashed to help.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
I agree with you but I assume you realise you will be in that "those with the most" group, as will I?
I'd specifically target retirees tbf, turn them into forced sellers of big houses.
Ah right, 'tax the other rich people, not me'. Got you.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison. “The forgotten millions” yells the, EXPRESS? What? “The up yours budget” say the star.
The spin Rishi was hoping for was the (relative) generosity of today's announcements.
The catch was all the tax increases that were already pencilled in to happen, some of which have become even more swingeing than he anticipated at the time. And everyone in the media has noticed.
Oh, and the inflation that's happening.
I'm not sure that there's much he could have done differently. (Well, there is one thing that would perk up GDP by several percent by improving international trade, but he's not going to do that). He's just the one holding the baby now it's filled its nappy.
Just think, in a parallel universe, he didn't become Chancellor in 2020, is a mid-ranking Cabinet Minister (Education maybe, or Levelling Up) and ready to take over from poor old discredited Saj. Funny old game, politics.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Then the Tories turn their core vote to RefUK or stay home or even Labour and LD at the next election if they lose the asset owning pensioner vote, turning a hung parliament on current polls into a 1997 style Labour landslide!
The Tories are not going to commit political suicide thankfully
So be nice to Big G more often then I guess that means from you going forward? 🙂
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.
If Putin can't do much with the money then he doesn't have much incentive to maintain supply. If we refuse to pay in rubles and he turns off the tap next week, how long will it be until the stored gas runs out?
Let's take a step back.
Europe depends on oil, gas, coal and renewables/nuclear.
Oil is a world market, and whether Europe buys a single barrel or Russian oil or not makes no difference. All it means is that oil tankers go to China and India, and oil that was going to go to China or India goes to Europe. More time is spent in transit, tanker day rates go up, but nothing fundamentally happens.
Coal - well, that's a relatively world market too. There are exports from South Africa, Australia, South America, the US and (believe it or not) even China.
Gas is the big one. Now, Europe gets piped gas from Russia, Norway, and North Africa and LNG from the US and the Gulf.
It is impossible to replace all Russian gas with LNG gas. And this isn't a question of world gas production capacity (although that would be an issue), or LNG terminals (less so, because Europe as a whole has ample import capacity), but simply the fact that the world does not have enough LNG vessels to carry gas.
Plus, there are only a limited number of spot cargoes. (Some LNG is sold on long-term contracts, some is sold in the spot market. We, the UK, are very unusual in that we have very little LNG on long-term contracts.)
If Russia turns off the taps (and they will), then three things will happen:
(1) Europe will bid on every LNG cargo out there, and even on some contracted ones (2) The price of LNG will go through the roof (3) LNG plants will attempt to create new spot cargoes (and some old inefficient ships will come out of storage)
There is literally not enough gas to go around. Basically the UK and the EU will be bidding on gas that will be insufficient for the two countries.
But there's good news.
The next six months is usually a period when pipelines have periodic maintenance stoppages and volumes are typically much lower than during the winter, storage facilities are typically refilled during this time, etc. Gas storage levels in Europe are also surprisingly high - a consequence of a windy spring.
So, if the Russians turn the gas taps off, then Europe (and the UK, because don't forget that we're hit just as much as Germany) will be broadly OK over the summer.
Come Autumn, though...
Well it depends on the weather: some time between late September and the 20th of October. I'd reckon probably the second week of October.
At that point storage is exhausted. Demand is rising. And there's no gas.
Basically, you need to overthrow the Russian regime and win the war in Ukraine before the end of September.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
Yeah, but the average voter on this site is wealthy, posh, and a Cameron/Osborne type. They think they are more liberal (and are rather enjoying playing at opposition to the evil Boris Tories) but actually they don’t give a shit about people less well off than them.
Boris won his majority by cutting through to the people those Cameron/Osborne voters despise. Now personally I think he and his Government has failed to follow through, and the PM has personally fallen short, but that’s still the constituency he’ll win his next majority from (and I think he will. It’s the average voter in the part of the country I grew up in. They voted Maggie. They voted Blair. They disliked Cameron and his sort.
Harsh. Also true of the left, mind - they find the UK poor distasteful and common, which is why they love to affect concern for faraway places like S Africa and Palestine, and microscopic issues like transgenderism. But moral revulsion is occasionally an electoral force in itself. See 1997.
I expressed concern on here today about how the poor in the UK would fare in the face of the cost of living squeeze and was told by one of our right leaning posters that I was being over-emotional. Now I am told that actually left wing people don't care about poverty in the UK. 🤦♂️
I didn't mean you, but I don't see what other conclusion to draw from the sheer unbridled wankerdom on the left about things which are none of their sodding business. Just think how good it would be if lefty twitter devoted to the UK poor one percent of the time it devotes to discussing whether chopping your willy off makes you a woman
I really think that right wing people need to stop basing their view of left wing people on what is trending on Twitter! The only people I ever hear talking about this kind of thing are PB Tories complaining about something they have read on Twitter. None of my left leaning friends cares about this stuff.
Um, no, I don't read much of twitter either, I just read news reports about cabinet level Labour and SNP bods boring on about bloody transphobia
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.
That's an assertion without evidence. It might be true. It might not be true. But we need to look at traded price per square foot over time to see the ratio.
Of course I have evidence to back it up. What particularly brought it home to me was when I was looking at prices in one London street compared to another close by. 25 years ago, which is as far back as the online records go, the three bedroom houses in one street were the same as the two bedroom flats in another. Now they are about 50%-75% more expensive. And neither street is out of whack with others around town as far as I can see.
Hang on: we're talking high rises, so that's a very far from exact comparison.
Let's look at the price of a Barbican flat compared to the price of a house in Muswell Hill.
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.
If Putin can't do much with the money then he doesn't have much incentive to maintain supply. If we refuse to pay in rubles and he turns off the tap next week, how long will it be until the stored gas runs out?
Let's take a step back.
Europe depends on oil, gas, coal and renewables/nuclear.
Oil is a world market, and whether Europe buys a single barrel or Russian oil or not makes no difference. All it means is that oil tankers go to China and India, and oil that was going to go to China or India goes to Europe. More time is spent in transit, tanker day rates go up, but nothing fundamentally happens.
Coal - well, that's a relatively world market too. There are exports from South Africa, Australia, South America, the US and (believe it or not) even China.
Gas is the big one. Now, Europe gets piped gas from Russia, Norway, and North Africa and LNG from the US and the Gulf.
It is impossible to replace all Russian gas with LNG gas. And this isn't a question of world gas production capacity (although that would be an issue), or LNG terminals (less so, because Europe as a whole has ample import capacity), but simply the fact that the world does not have enough LNG vessels to carry gas.
Plus, there are only a limited number of spot cargoes. (Some LNG is sold on long-term contracts, some is sold in the spot market. We, the UK, are very unusual in that we have very little LNG on long-term contracts.)
If Russia turns off the taps (and they will), then three things will happen:
(1) Europe will bid on every LNG cargo out there, and even on some contracted ones (2) The price of LNG will go through the roof (3) LNG plants will attempt to create new spot cargoes (and some old inefficient ships will come out of storage)
There is literally not enough gas to go around. Basically the UK and the EU will be bidding on gas that will be insufficient for the two countries.
But there's good news.
The next six months is usually a period when pipelines have periodic maintenance stoppages and volumes are typically much lower than during the winter, storage facilities are typically refilled during this time, etc. Gas storage levels in Europe are also surprisingly high - a consequence of a windy spring.
So, if the Russians turn the gas taps off, then Europe (and the UK, because don't forget that we're hit just as much as Germany) will be broadly OK over the summer.
Come Autumn, though...
Well it depends on the weather: some time between late September and the 20th of October. I'd reckon probably the second week of October.
At that point storage is exhausted. Demand is rising. And there's no gas.
Basically, you need to overthrow the Russian regime and win the war in Ukraine before the end of September.
Maybe we should play Putin at his own game?
"If you turn those taps off and we will consider it an act of war and nuke Moscow."
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.
Go figure.
Sure, but when it came to you getting a place, you didn't go for the high rise, you went for the big house with a garden in the suburbs. So did I, so did my sister. No one *wants* to live in a high rise, some people are trapped in social housing which happens to be in one.
I am amazed at your ability to talk for everyone.
And equally amazed that Manhattan even exists.
That's just circumstance though, if you offered people the same location with a nice big garden and a detached house for the same money I'd be shocked if most of them didn't take the offer.
Urban density is a scourge and high rises invariably result in squalor. Developers are notoriously bad at making apartments actually big enough for people to live in.
It's really not.
People value different things.
I don't value a private garden.
I do value being able to walk to shops, restaurants, theatres, etc. If I hadn't had children, I doubt I would ever have left my apartment in W1.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison. “The forgotten millions” yells the, EXPRESS? What? “The up yours budget” say the star.
Lovely typo/autocorrect in there. The Telegraph is now full of communists?
Well, QED. Sure, if you could flatten the entire City of London and build Barratt Homes with gardens, I guess that would be nice for kids or something
But the fact is some areas just don't have the space for houses with gardens - eg most of central London - and, moreover - the point you are ignoring - a lot of people (not families) actually LIKE the density and excitement of urban life, including apartments 1000 feet in the air (as long as they are maintained well - like the Barbican)
And it's not just the young. Quite a lot of older people move back in to central or central ish London when their kids grow up. They like being able to walk to great restaurants, galleries, museums. They don't want the hassle of a garden, they love London
Hence the popularity of the Barbican. If you go there you'd be surprised how old the denizens are. 60s and 70s, lots of them. Rich people who have chosen to live in the sky, in a Brutalist tower
Hear hear - that's what I'd like and have had in the past until my job pinned me down where I am now.
I'm also on the side of people who feel planning officers are too fanatical. Friends in a cottage in Moorgreen, outside Nottingham, were refused permission to have double-glazing in a rear window because it would change the appearance slightly if you looked at it from the disused field behind their house where nobody ever walked.
The area was interesting, incidentally, as it was DH Lawrence country and much of it (including said rented cottage) was owned by the family who featured, thinly anonymised, in Lady Chatterley's Lover. The family prohibited any celebration or commemoration of DHL, feeling he had built his reputation by spreading salacious gossip about their grandmother. I do see that it wasn't very neighbourly of him, especially as they were long-settled there and he actively disliked the area.
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.
If Putin can't do much with the money then he doesn't have much incentive to maintain supply. If we refuse to pay in rubles and he turns off the tap next week, how long will it be until the stored gas runs out?
Let's take a step back.
Europe depends on oil, gas, coal and renewables/nuclear.
Oil is a world market, and whether Europe buys a single barrel or Russian oil or not makes no difference. All it means is that oil tankers go to China and India, and oil that was going to go to China or India goes to Europe. More time is spent in transit, tanker day rates go up, but nothing fundamentally happens.
Coal - well, that's a relatively world market too. There are exports from South Africa, Australia, South America, the US and (believe it or not) even China.
Gas is the big one. Now, Europe gets piped gas from Russia, Norway, and North Africa and LNG from the US and the Gulf.
It is impossible to replace all Russian gas with LNG gas. And this isn't a question of world gas production capacity (although that would be an issue), or LNG terminals (less so, because Europe as a whole has ample import capacity), but simply the fact that the world does not have enough LNG vessels to carry gas.
Plus, there are only a limited number of spot cargoes. (Some LNG is sold on long-term contracts, some is sold in the spot market. We, the UK, are very unusual in that we have very little LNG on long-term contracts.)
If Russia turns off the taps (and they will), then three things will happen:
(1) Europe will bid on every LNG cargo out there, and even on some contracted ones (2) The price of LNG will go through the roof (3) LNG plants will attempt to create new spot cargoes (and some old inefficient ships will come out of storage)
There is literally not enough gas to go around. Basically the UK and the EU will be bidding on gas that will be insufficient for the two countries.
But there's good news.
The next six months is usually a period when pipelines have periodic maintenance stoppages and volumes are typically much lower than during the winter, storage facilities are typically refilled during this time, etc. Gas storage levels in Europe are also surprisingly high - a consequence of a windy spring.
So, if the Russians turn the gas taps off, then Europe (and the UK, because don't forget that we're hit just as much as Germany) will be broadly OK over the summer.
Come Autumn, though...
Well it depends on the weather: some time between late September and the 20th of October. I'd reckon probably the second week of October.
At that point storage is exhausted. Demand is rising. And there's no gas.
Basically, you need to overthrow the Russian regime and win the war in Ukraine before the end of September.
Can we not replace some gas with anything else in the short/medium term?
One thing that seems to be completely forgotten today, the massive NHS backlog, not only leaving people in pain and worry, but needlessly killing loved ones due to too long waiting for attention and help.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison. “The forgotten millions” yells the, EXPRESS? What? “The up yours budget” say the star.
Lovely typo/autocorrect in there. The Telegraph is now full of communists?
One thing that seems to be completely forgotten today, the massive NHS backlog, not only leaving people in pain and worry, but needlessly killing loved ones due to too long waiting for attention and help.
I thought Javid looked pretty sick during this statement. Presumably he has been told to deliver £12b worth of NHS waiting time delivery for the new figure of £6b.
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?
Like I said, the obvious knock on effect of it is to clam the Russian Generals up. That's a shame and seems counterproductive.
I dislike the whole business of propaganda. It's approved lying. As educated observers we're supposed to approve of our own skills in 'the information war' when we're the intended targets of such tripe. I genuinely feel that if a cause is just, people should be levelled with. I see no danger to unvarnished truth in politics, ever, on any issue. Just trust people.
In theory I agree with you but just imagine if some helpful British chap in 1941 was publishing charts of remaining food stocks co-related with U-boat sinkings? The great fried chicken shortage of 2018 would have nothing on it.
I always try to question why I think news is good and bad, no doubt with varying degrees of success.
Actually the government was remarkably open about the food situation - rationing was backed up by a lot of explanations about food imports and the costs of those. Including in lives.
Though the petrol rationing was a farce. The UK was swimming in petroleum throughout the war.
I guess it was a balancing act, keep people conscious of why everyone was making sacrifices while keeping panic at bay.
The greatest act of propaganda during WWII, in Britain at least, was persuading the public that Stalin and the Soviet Union were our worthy allies.
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
Well at lets call it way over a million real infections a day, it isn't going to take long to get through most of the population. I presume the reason is the very high population density in somewhere like Seoul, where all the 24/7 state spying, the mask wearing, etc is totally ineffective against the mighty big O.
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.
Without the sunshine, ocean and mountains, then it would be hell. Low rise monotony stretched over 80 miles, with horrendous traffic and bugger all public transport.
London, with its mix of low-rise, high-rise, of suburbs and garden squares, with its buses and tube, is near perfect.
If you want to live in a high rise in a dense urban area, you can. If you want to live in a terraced house in Islington or Hackney, you can. If you want to live in a detached house on the outskirts, that's possible too.
One thing that seems to be completely forgotten today, the massive NHS backlog, not only leaving people in pain and worry, but needlessly killing loved ones due to too long waiting for attention and help.
I thought Javid looked pretty sick during this statement. Presumably he has been told to deliver £12b worth of NHS waiting time delivery for the new figure of £6b.
He’s gonna have to find money for pay rises, with no extra funding to pay for it.
One thing that seems to be completely forgotten today, the massive NHS backlog, not only leaving people in pain and worry, but needlessly killing loved ones due to too long waiting for attention and help.
I thought Javid looked pretty sick during this statement. Presumably he has been told to deliver £12b worth of NHS waiting time delivery for the new figure of £6b.
It’s important because waiting backlogs is a killer. No one knows just how many die due to slow reduction, but you imagine along the line there is political flak to be taken best mitigated today, not least inflation will hit NHS, you would rather acknowledge that yourself whilst doing something about it rather than your opponents mention you said and did nothing?
A north London council, responding to an issue with very large families, has started giving permission to extend upwards. Put another story on the house (not just a loft conversion).
Let's really go for it.
So every 2 bed cottage can become a 3/4 bed.
Get the Nimbies howling.
I posted about that at the time. The way they’ve done it is to publish strict design guidelines and then say, if you can stick to these guidelines - go for it!
And why the hell not?????
Why do we make it so hard on ourselves?
Because it offended people with clipboards. Who will be first against the wall when the Malmesbury revolution comes. Actually not against the wall - more providing shade on Appian Way.....
Seriously, I had a "discusion" with a planner. Who was upset that people were "spoiling the essential character" of a row of Edwardian cottages. By extending them at the back.
They were 2 bed cottages - how dare people want bathrooms. Or a third bedroom.
I find most planners are pretty live and let live, unless you are in an AONB or open countryside.
You'd be surprised at the extent of amorphous blandness of some areas which people will object to a particular design spoiling its character though.
My sister had struggles with an arse of a planner who objected to a style of roof as being out of character with the area. This, despite there being multiple examples within half a mile of the same style.
Usually a sign a corrupt planner wants a handout.
Has been that way for decades. And for decades, people have been paying them off. My stepfather encountered one in the 1970's. Went to his MP about it. But Ken Clarke couldn't be arsed to do anything about it.
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
I wouldn't be surprised to find that the vaccination program in South Korea, while it had good overall coverage, left out quite a few older people.
Because of the much higher risks to unvaccinated older people - 30% CFR has occurred - a hundred thousand wrinkles unvaccinated is a receipt for disaster.
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
I wouldn't be surprised to find that the vaccination program in South Korea, while it had good overall coverage, left out quite a few older people.
Because of the much higher risks to unvaccinated older people - 30% CFR has occurred - a hundred thousand wrinkles unvaccinated is a receipt for disaster.
What is your reasoning behind thinking oldies in South Korea won't be vaccinated? I don't know much about South Korea, is there is prior vaccine scandal that means they are likely very hesitant?
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
Yeah, but the average voter on this site is wealthy, posh, and a Cameron/Osborne type. They think they are more liberal (and are rather enjoying playing at opposition to the evil Boris Tories) but actually they don’t give a shit about people less well off than them.
Boris won his majority by cutting through to the people those Cameron/Osborne voters despise. Now personally I think he and his Government has failed to follow through, and the PM has personally fallen short, but that’s still the constituency he’ll win his next majority from (and I think he will. It’s the average voter in the part of the country I grew up in. They voted Maggie. They voted Blair. They disliked Cameron and his sort.
Harsh. Also true of the left, mind - they find the UK poor distasteful and common, which is why they love to affect concern for faraway places like S Africa and Palestine, and microscopic issues like transgenderism. But moral revulsion is occasionally an electoral force in itself. See 1997.
I expressed concern on here today about how the poor in the UK would fare in the face of the cost of living squeeze and was told by one of our right leaning posters that I was being over-emotional. Now I am told that actually left wing people don't care about poverty in the UK. 🤦♂️
I didn't mean you, but I don't see what other conclusion to draw from the sheer unbridled wankerdom on the left about things which are none of their sodding business. Just think how good it would be if lefty twitter devoted to the UK poor one percent of the time it devotes to discussing whether chopping your willy off makes you a woman
I really think that right wing people need to stop basing their view of left wing people on what is trending on Twitter! The only people I ever hear talking about this kind of thing are PB Tories complaining about something they have read on Twitter. None of my left leaning friends cares about this stuff.
Same here. Everybody I know on the left shares the same concerns - reducing inequality, tackling poverty, improving public transport, improving public services, and so on. The minority issues such as transgender stuff are only of interest to a small, albeit vocal, minority.
Well, QED. Sure, if you could flatten the entire City of London and build Barratt Homes with gardens, I guess that would be nice for kids or something
But the fact is some areas just don't have the space for houses with gardens - eg most of central London - and, moreover - the point you are ignoring - a lot of people (not families) actually LIKE the density and excitement of urban life, including apartments 1000 feet in the air (as long as they are maintained well - like the Barbican)
And it's not just the young. Quite a lot of older people move back in to central or central ish London when their kids grow up. They like being able to walk to great restaurants, galleries, museums. They don't want the hassle of a garden, they love London
Hence the popularity of the Barbican. If you go there you'd be surprised how old the denizens are. 60s and 70s, lots of them. Rich people who have chosen to live in the sky, in a Brutalist tower
Hear hear - that's what I'd like and have had in the past until my job pinned me down where I am now.
I'm also on the side of people who feel planning officers are too fanatical. Friends in a cottage in Moorgreen, outside Nottingham, were refused permission to have double-glazing in a rear window because it would change the appearance slightly if you looked at it from the disused field behind their house where nobody ever walked.
The area was interesting, incidentally, as it was DH Lawrence country and much of it (including said rented cottage) was owned by the family who featured, thinly anonymised, in Lady Chatterley's Lover. The family prohibited any celebration or commemoration of DHL, feeling he had built his reputation by spreading salacious gossip about their grandmother. I do see that it wasn't very neighbourly of him, especially as they were long-settled there and he actively disliked the area.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Sunak has been captured by the Treasury orthodox who hate debt, so that's not going to happen.
Pensioners are the Tory core vote. So that's not going to happen.
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
I wouldn't be surprised to find that the vaccination program in South Korea, while it had good overall coverage, left out quite a few older people.
Because of the much higher risks to unvaccinated older people - 30% CFR has occurred - a hundred thousand wrinkles unvaccinated is a receipt for disaster.
What is your reasoning behind thinking oldies in South Korea won't be vaccinated?
The death toll is very high. And going up fast.
It doesn't mean all the elderly are unvaccinated - just that even 5-10% is a big big gap to have. Now that everyone will get Omicron, eventually.
Well, QED. Sure, if you could flatten the entire City of London and build Barratt Homes with gardens, I guess that would be nice for kids or something
But the fact is some areas just don't have the space for houses with gardens - eg most of central London - and, moreover - the point you are ignoring - a lot of people (not families) actually LIKE the density and excitement of urban life, including apartments 1000 feet in the air (as long as they are maintained well - like the Barbican)
And it's not just the young. Quite a lot of older people move back in to central or central ish London when their kids grow up. They like being able to walk to great restaurants, galleries, museums. They don't want the hassle of a garden, they love London
Hence the popularity of the Barbican. If you go there you'd be surprised how old the denizens are. 60s and 70s, lots of them. Rich people who have chosen to live in the sky, in a Brutalist tower
Hear hear - that's what I'd like and have had in the past until my job pinned me down where I am now.
I'm also on the side of people who feel planning officers are too fanatical. Friends in a cottage in Moorgreen, outside Nottingham, were refused permission to have double-glazing in a rear window because it would change the appearance slightly if you looked at it from the disused field behind their house where nobody ever walked.
The area was interesting, incidentally, as it was DH Lawrence country and much of it (including said rented cottage) was owned by the family who featured, thinly anonymised, in Lady Chatterley's Lover. The family prohibited any celebration or commemoration of DHL, feeling he had built his reputation by spreading salacious gossip about their grandmother. I do see that it wasn't very neighbourly of him, especially as they were long-settled there and he actively disliked the area.
Likewise. I'd happily end my days in a 30 storey apartment in the Barbican. It's a fabulous place to live, and you can walk everywhere. And the Arboretum is amazing, and you have an orchestra, a theatre, two concert halls, an art gallery, a massive beautiful green space, a Roman wall, a medieval church, and all of the City and Islington and Farringdon and Holborn literally at your feet. Wonderful
I love gardens but do I want the expense and hassle of caring for one? Probably not. Each to their own. I prefer the city, as long as there is greenery nearby. I would have a few pot plants on my splendid balcony, and spend hours looking at the magnificent views over the Smoke
Incidentally, if you want to sample acute familial embarrassment about literature, go visit the lordly inhabitants of St Michael's Mount, who are very very closely relayed to the St Aubyns, as portrayed in Edward St Aubyn's novels
OMFG. It's not an elephant in the room, it's an elephant in the room that just did a big poo
I took tea with them in the castle, and felt rather sorry for them. The pain is significant. Nice people, too
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
I wouldn't be surprised to find that the vaccination program in South Korea, while it had good overall coverage, left out quite a few older people.
Because of the much higher risks to unvaccinated older people - 30% CFR has occurred - a hundred thousand wrinkles unvaccinated is a receipt for disaster.
What is your reasoning behind thinking oldies in South Korea won't be vaccinated?
The death toll is very high. And going up fast.
It doesn't mean all the elderly are unvaccinated - just that even 5-10% is a big big gap to have. Now that everyone will get Omicron, eventually.
Oh sorry, I see you mean based on the data. I thought you meant there was some social norms or prior scandals which meant that South Korea oldies would have been left out of getting jabbed e.g. I do know there is a known issue with suicides among oldies, a cultural issue of when you get to feeling being a drag on the family it brings shame, so there is a history of oldies killing themselves (I believe in particular there is a bridge in Seoul that is happens every day).
For those arguing Sunak should go after the property owning older generation - remember Theresa May? She tried doing something along those lines. I remember chatting with my 30 year old Corbynite friend who was quite positive about the idea. It sank her election campaign though.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Sunak has been captured by the Treasury orthodox who hate debt, so that's not going to happen.
Pensioners are the Tory core vote. So that's not going to happen.
Guess its austerity redux.
Rishi hasn’t been captured, it was stamped on him from the beginning. Same as Javid and Kwasi. Maybe Truss too.
Ironically Boris is about the only one who isn’t, but he’s too lazy to see through his own policy preferences.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
Nb. Economically, Biden and the Democrats have blown it. Recession in US in next two years guarantees a Republican President. And we all know who that will be…
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.
If Putin can't do much with the money then he doesn't have much incentive to maintain supply. If we refuse to pay in rubles and he turns off the tap next week, how long will it be until the stored gas runs out?
Let's take a step back.
Europe depends on oil, gas, coal and renewables/nuclear.
Oil is a world market, and whether Europe buys a single barrel or Russian oil or not makes no difference. All it means is that oil tankers go to China and India, and oil that was going to go to China or India goes to Europe. More time is spent in transit, tanker day rates go up, but nothing fundamentally happens.
Coal - well, that's a relatively world market too. There are exports from South Africa, Australia, South America, the US and (believe it or not) even China.
Gas is the big one. Now, Europe gets piped gas from Russia, Norway, and North Africa and LNG from the US and the Gulf.
It is impossible to replace all Russian gas with LNG gas. And this isn't a question of world gas production capacity (although that would be an issue), or LNG terminals (less so, because Europe as a whole has ample import capacity), but simply the fact that the world does not have enough LNG vessels to carry gas.
Plus, there are only a limited number of spot cargoes. (Some LNG is sold on long-term contracts, some is sold in the spot market. We, the UK, are very unusual in that we have very little LNG on long-term contracts.)
If Russia turns off the taps (and they will), then three things will happen:
(1) Europe will bid on every LNG cargo out there, and even on some contracted ones (2) The price of LNG will go through the roof (3) LNG plants will attempt to create new spot cargoes (and some old inefficient ships will come out of storage)
There is literally not enough gas to go around. Basically the UK and the EU will be bidding on gas that will be insufficient for the two countries.
But there's good news.
The next six months is usually a period when pipelines have periodic maintenance stoppages and volumes are typically much lower than during the winter, storage facilities are typically refilled during this time, etc. Gas storage levels in Europe are also surprisingly high - a consequence of a windy spring.
So, if the Russians turn the gas taps off, then Europe (and the UK, because don't forget that we're hit just as much as Germany) will be broadly OK over the summer.
Come Autumn, though...
Well it depends on the weather: some time between late September and the 20th of October. I'd reckon probably the second week of October.
At that point storage is exhausted. Demand is rising. And there's no gas.
Basically, you need to overthrow the Russian regime and win the war in Ukraine before the end of September.
I would certainly disagree with your claim that We are hit as much as Germany.
80% of UK gas comes either from our own fields or via pipelines from European sources. So the LNG issue only affects 20% of our supply. Now obviously that is still too much but it is not the case to say we are as exposed to the LNG shipped supply as Germany or other central European countries.
A north London council, responding to an issue with very large families, has started giving permission to extend upwards. Put another story on the house (not just a loft conversion).
Let's really go for it.
So every 2 bed cottage can become a 3/4 bed.
Get the Nimbies howling.
I posted about that at the time. The way they’ve done it is to publish strict design guidelines and then say, if you can stick to these guidelines - go for it!
And why the hell not?????
Why do we make it so hard on ourselves?
Because it offended people with clipboards. Who will be first against the wall when the Malmesbury revolution comes. Actually not against the wall - more providing shade on Appian Way.....
Seriously, I had a "discusion" with a planner. Who was upset that people were "spoiling the essential character" of a row of Edwardian cottages. By extending them at the back.
They were 2 bed cottages - how dare people want bathrooms. Or a third bedroom.
I find most planners are pretty live and let live, unless you are in an AONB or open countryside.
You'd be surprised at the extent of amorphous blandness of some areas which people will object to a particular design spoiling its character though.
My sister had struggles with an arse of a planner who objected to a style of roof as being out of character with the area. This, despite there being multiple examples within half a mile of the same style.
Usually a sign a corrupt planner wants a handout.
Has been that way for decades. And for decades, people have been paying them off. My stepfather encountered one in the 1970's. Went to his MP about it. But Ken Clarke couldn't be arsed to do anything about it.
That planner eventually went down for 5 years.
I am told it is still rife in the SW.
I find that very hard to believe. The way planning authorities work you'd need to bribe quite a few people, including quite senior people, to get away with it. People throw out accusations of corruption and brown envelopes at both planning officers and planning committees at the drop of a hat, and it is not really acceptable - they do it even for cases where it is a very straightforward situation of the rules being followed appropriately in every way, and it really annoys them. And if you refuse for a bullshit reason because you want a bribe to say yes applicants will win on appeal easily, and they appeal frequently even on small applications. So the con would be exposed unless everyone gives in and bribes them, and even then you'd need seniors to be in on it, requiring much more money to make it worth their while. And on the really big stuff they are far too complicated and legally scrutinised to get away with it often enough for it to be 'rife'. When you'd win so easily on appeal so many people would give in to the corrupt official? Not plausible.
As such, the idea there is rampant corruption in the ranks does not hold water for me.
For those arguing Sunak should go after the property owning older generation - remember Theresa May? She tried doing something along those lines. I remember chatting with my 30 year old Corbynite friend who was quite positive about the idea. It sank her election campaign though.
It was a bold move, only done with the assurance a win was in the offing. Problems could have been worked out. Shame really, it was at least an attempt.
One thing that seems to be completely forgotten today, the massive NHS backlog, not only leaving people in pain and worry, but needlessly killing loved ones due to too long waiting for attention and help.
I thought Javid looked pretty sick during this statement. Presumably he has been told to deliver £12b worth of NHS waiting time delivery for the new figure of £6b.
He’s gonna have to find money for pay rises, with no extra funding to pay for it.
Austerity is back, right across government.
Having seen the plan for teachers over the next couple of years, the plan looks like continuing to pretend that the Great Inflation isn't happening.
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
Well at lets call it way over a million real infections a day, it isn't going to take long to get through most of the population. I presume the reason is the very high population density in somewhere like Seoul, where all the 24/7 state spying, the mask wearing, etc is totally ineffective against the mighty big O.
It is all ineffective, for sure. We know that now. Omicron Plus is one of the most infectious viruses mankind has ever encountered, no mitigations work
What is worrying experts on the Twittah is the possibility that Omicron Plus can reinfect victims, not just those who had Covid Classic or even Omicron Classic, but people who had... Omicron Plus a few weeks ago
To me this seems nuts. Surely you must gain some immunity? But what if you don't?
It means we will all get Covid again and again and again, for the rest of time, and each time it will slightly deplete us, and our immune systems, and our IQs, and our brain cells, and we will all get Long Covid and slowly we will be turned into zombies with strawberry pulp for brains, and then that is the end of us
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
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.
If Putin can't do much with the money then he doesn't have much incentive to maintain supply. If we refuse to pay in rubles and he turns off the tap next week, how long will it be until the stored gas runs out?
Let's take a step back.
Europe depends on oil, gas, coal and renewables/nuclear.
Oil is a world market, and whether Europe buys a single barrel or Russian oil or not makes no difference. All it means is that oil tankers go to China and India, and oil that was going to go to China or India goes to Europe. More time is spent in transit, tanker day rates go up, but nothing fundamentally happens.
Coal - well, that's a relatively world market too. There are exports from South Africa, Australia, South America, the US and (believe it or not) even China.
Gas is the big one. Now, Europe gets piped gas from Russia, Norway, and North Africa and LNG from the US and the Gulf.
It is impossible to replace all Russian gas with LNG gas. And this isn't a question of world gas production capacity (although that would be an issue), or LNG terminals (less so, because Europe as a whole has ample import capacity), but simply the fact that the world does not have enough LNG vessels to carry gas.
Plus, there are only a limited number of spot cargoes. (Some LNG is sold on long-term contracts, some is sold in the spot market. We, the UK, are very unusual in that we have very little LNG on long-term contracts.)
If Russia turns off the taps (and they will), then three things will happen:
(1) Europe will bid on every LNG cargo out there, and even on some contracted ones (2) The price of LNG will go through the roof (3) LNG plants will attempt to create new spot cargoes (and some old inefficient ships will come out of storage)
There is literally not enough gas to go around. Basically the UK and the EU will be bidding on gas that will be insufficient for the two countries.
But there's good news.
The next six months is usually a period when pipelines have periodic maintenance stoppages and volumes are typically much lower than during the winter, storage facilities are typically refilled during this time, etc. Gas storage levels in Europe are also surprisingly high - a consequence of a windy spring.
So, if the Russians turn the gas taps off, then Europe (and the UK, because don't forget that we're hit just as much as Germany) will be broadly OK over the summer.
Come Autumn, though...
Well it depends on the weather: some time between late September and the 20th of October. I'd reckon probably the second week of October.
At that point storage is exhausted. Demand is rising. And there's no gas.
Basically, you need to overthrow the Russian regime and win the war in Ukraine before the end of September.
Can we not replace some gas with anything else in the short/medium term?
There's no shortage of gas in the world.
There is, however, a lack of ships to take it from places with gas to places without.
One can, of course, replace gas with coal to some extent. Of course, coal prices have gone through the roof in the last week or so, but there's a lot of available coal in the world, and quite a few mothballed power stations.
I would like to thank Rishi for continuing to deliver
a Labour Government
I admire your optimism.
I'm unpersuaded.
Yes. The midlands are now Tory and Labour have barely over two hundred seats. The seat calcs don’t pick up that variation. For Starmer, like Milliband, close to a PM via coalition, but no cigar.
Well, QED. Sure, if you could flatten the entire City of London and build Barratt Homes with gardens, I guess that would be nice for kids or something
But the fact is some areas just don't have the space for houses with gardens - eg most of central London - and, moreover - the point you are ignoring - a lot of people (not families) actually LIKE the density and excitement of urban life, including apartments 1000 feet in the air (as long as they are maintained well - like the Barbican)
And it's not just the young. Quite a lot of older people move back in to central or central ish London when their kids grow up. They like being able to walk to great restaurants, galleries, museums. They don't want the hassle of a garden, they love London
Hence the popularity of the Barbican. If you go there you'd be surprised how old the denizens are. 60s and 70s, lots of them. Rich people who have chosen to live in the sky, in a Brutalist tower
Hear hear - that's what I'd like and have had in the past until my job pinned me down where I am now.
I'm also on the side of people who feel planning officers are too fanatical. Friends in a cottage in Moorgreen, outside Nottingham, were refused permission to have double-glazing in a rear window because it would change the appearance slightly if you looked at it from the disused field behind their house where nobody ever walked.
The area was interesting, incidentally, as it was DH Lawrence country and much of it (including said rented cottage) was owned by the family who featured, thinly anonymised, in Lady Chatterley's Lover. The family prohibited any celebration or commemoration of DHL, feeling he had built his reputation by spreading salacious gossip about their grandmother. I do see that it wasn't very neighbourly of him, especially as they were long-settled there and he actively disliked the area.
Likewise. I'd happily end my days in a 30 storey apartment in the Barbican. It's a fabulous place to live, and you can walk everywhere. And the Arboretum is amazing, and you have an orchestra, a theatre, two concert halls, an art gallery, a massive beautiful green space, a Roman wall, a medieval church, and all of the City and Islington and Farringdon and Holborn literally at your feet. Wonderful
I love gardens but do I want the expense and hassle of caring for one? Probably not. Each to their own. I prefer the city, as long as there is greenery nearby. I would have a few pot plants on my splendid balcony, and spend hours looking at the magnificent views over the Smoke
Incidentally, if you want to sample acute familial embarrassment about literature, go visit the lordly inhabitants of St Michael's Mount, who are very very closely relayed to the St Aubyns, as portrayed in Edward St Aubyn's novels
OMFG. It's not an elephant in the room, it's an elephant in the room that just did a big poo
I took tea with them in the castle, and felt rather sorry for them. The pain is significant. Nice people, too
30 storey apartment? Bloody hell how many bedrooms in that?!
Well, QED. Sure, if you could flatten the entire City of London and build Barratt Homes with gardens, I guess that would be nice for kids or something
But the fact is some areas just don't have the space for houses with gardens - eg most of central London - and, moreover - the point you are ignoring - a lot of people (not families) actually LIKE the density and excitement of urban life, including apartments 1000 feet in the air (as long as they are maintained well - like the Barbican)
And it's not just the young. Quite a lot of older people move back in to central or central ish London when their kids grow up. They like being able to walk to great restaurants, galleries, museums. They don't want the hassle of a garden, they love London
Hence the popularity of the Barbican. If you go there you'd be surprised how old the denizens are. 60s and 70s, lots of them. Rich people who have chosen to live in the sky, in a Brutalist tower
Hear hear - that's what I'd like and have had in the past until my job pinned me down where I am now.
I'm also on the side of people who feel planning officers are too fanatical. Friends in a cottage in Moorgreen, outside Nottingham, were refused permission to have double-glazing in a rear window because it would change the appearance slightly if you looked at it from the disused field behind their house where nobody ever walked.
The area was interesting, incidentally, as it was DH Lawrence country and much of it (including said rented cottage) was owned by the family who featured, thinly anonymised, in Lady Chatterley's Lover. The family prohibited any celebration or commemoration of DHL, feeling he had built his reputation by spreading salacious gossip about their grandmother. I do see that it wasn't very neighbourly of him, especially as they were long-settled there and he actively disliked the area.
Likewise. I'd happily end my days in a 30 storey apartment in the Barbican. It's a fabulous place to live, and you can walk everywhere. And the Arboretum is amazing, and you have an orchestra, a theatre, two concert halls, an art gallery, a massive beautiful green space, a Roman wall, a medieval church, and all of the City and Islington and Farringdon and Holborn literally at your feet. Wonderful
I love gardens but do I want the expense and hassle of caring for one? Probably not. Each to their own. I prefer the city, as long as there is greenery nearby. I would have a few pot plants on my splendid balcony, and spend hours looking at the magnificent views over the Smoke
Incidentally, if you want to sample acute familial embarrassment about literature, go visit the lordly inhabitants of St Michael's Mount, who are very very closely relayed to the St Aubyns, as portrayed in Edward St Aubyn's novels
OMFG. It's not an elephant in the room, it's an elephant in the room that just did a big poo
I took tea with them in the castle, and felt rather sorry for them. The pain is significant. Nice people, too
30 storey apartment? Bloody hell how many bedrooms in that?!
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
I think we should fiscally tighten to avoid recession. The Times and Mail financially and economically illiterate to call for bigger tax slashing right now. The idiots at the Times and Mail this evening need to go down on the beach and stop the tide coming in.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
Well, QED. Sure, if you could flatten the entire City of London and build Barratt Homes with gardens, I guess that would be nice for kids or something
But the fact is some areas just don't have the space for houses with gardens - eg most of central London - and, moreover - the point you are ignoring - a lot of people (not families) actually LIKE the density and excitement of urban life, including apartments 1000 feet in the air (as long as they are maintained well - like the Barbican)
And it's not just the young. Quite a lot of older people move back in to central or central ish London when their kids grow up. They like being able to walk to great restaurants, galleries, museums. They don't want the hassle of a garden, they love London
Hence the popularity of the Barbican. If you go there you'd be surprised how old the denizens are. 60s and 70s, lots of them. Rich people who have chosen to live in the sky, in a Brutalist tower
Hear hear - that's what I'd like and have had in the past until my job pinned me down where I am now.
I'm also on the side of people who feel planning officers are too fanatical. Friends in a cottage in Moorgreen, outside Nottingham, were refused permission to have double-glazing in a rear window because it would change the appearance slightly if you looked at it from the disused field behind their house where nobody ever walked.
The area was interesting, incidentally, as it was DH Lawrence country and much of it (including said rented cottage) was owned by the family who featured, thinly anonymised, in Lady Chatterley's Lover. The family prohibited any celebration or commemoration of DHL, feeling he had built his reputation by spreading salacious gossip about their grandmother. I do see that it wasn't very neighbourly of him, especially as they were long-settled there and he actively disliked the area.
Likewise. I'd happily end my days in a 30 storey apartment in the Barbican. It's a fabulous place to live, and you can walk everywhere. And the Arboretum is amazing, and you have an orchestra, a theatre, two concert halls, an art gallery, a massive beautiful green space, a Roman wall, a medieval church, and all of the City and Islington and Farringdon and Holborn literally at your feet. Wonderful
I love gardens but do I want the expense and hassle of caring for one? Probably not. Each to their own. I prefer the city, as long as there is greenery nearby. I would have a few pot plants on my splendid balcony, and spend hours looking at the magnificent views over the Smoke
Incidentally, if you want to sample acute familial embarrassment about literature, go visit the lordly inhabitants of St Michael's Mount, who are very very closely relayed to the St Aubyns, as portrayed in Edward St Aubyn's novels
OMFG. It's not an elephant in the room, it's an elephant in the room that just did a big poo
I took tea with them in the castle, and felt rather sorry for them. The pain is significant. Nice people, too
30 storey apartment? Bloody hell how many bedrooms in that?!
Have to knap a hella quantity of flints to afford that.
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.
If Putin can't do much with the money then he doesn't have much incentive to maintain supply. If we refuse to pay in rubles and he turns off the tap next week, how long will it be until the stored gas runs out?
Let's take a step back.
Europe depends on oil, gas, coal and renewables/nuclear.
Oil is a world market, and whether Europe buys a single barrel or Russian oil or not makes no difference. All it means is that oil tankers go to China and India, and oil that was going to go to China or India goes to Europe. More time is spent in transit, tanker day rates go up, but nothing fundamentally happens.
Coal - well, that's a relatively world market too. There are exports from South Africa, Australia, South America, the US and (believe it or not) even China.
Gas is the big one. Now, Europe gets piped gas from Russia, Norway, and North Africa and LNG from the US and the Gulf.
It is impossible to replace all Russian gas with LNG gas. And this isn't a question of world gas production capacity (although that would be an issue), or LNG terminals (less so, because Europe as a whole has ample import capacity), but simply the fact that the world does not have enough LNG vessels to carry gas.
Plus, there are only a limited number of spot cargoes. (Some LNG is sold on long-term contracts, some is sold in the spot market. We, the UK, are very unusual in that we have very little LNG on long-term contracts.)
If Russia turns off the taps (and they will), then three things will happen:
(1) Europe will bid on every LNG cargo out there, and even on some contracted ones (2) The price of LNG will go through the roof (3) LNG plants will attempt to create new spot cargoes (and some old inefficient ships will come out of storage)
There is literally not enough gas to go around. Basically the UK and the EU will be bidding on gas that will be insufficient for the two countries.
But there's good news.
The next six months is usually a period when pipelines have periodic maintenance stoppages and volumes are typically much lower than during the winter, storage facilities are typically refilled during this time, etc. Gas storage levels in Europe are also surprisingly high - a consequence of a windy spring.
So, if the Russians turn the gas taps off, then Europe (and the UK, because don't forget that we're hit just as much as Germany) will be broadly OK over the summer.
Come Autumn, though...
Well it depends on the weather: some time between late September and the 20th of October. I'd reckon probably the second week of October.
At that point storage is exhausted. Demand is rising. And there's no gas.
Basically, you need to overthrow the Russian regime and win the war in Ukraine before the end of September.
I would certainly disagree with your claim that We are hit as much as Germany.
80% of UK gas comes either from our own fields or via pipelines from European sources. So the LNG issue only affects 20% of our supply. Now obviously that is still too much but it is not the case to say we are as exposed to the LNG shipped supply as Germany or other central European countries.
The gap is closer than you think, for a couple of reasons.
Firstly, the piped gas from Norway is not on long-term fixed price contracts. So the rising price of energy affects what we pay Statoil. Maybe not as much as switching from all Russian piped gas to LNG, but it certainly has a big impact.
Secondly, we use a lot more gas in powergen than Germany does, because they have both lots of dirty brown coal, and more renewables. Gas is usually the biggest part of UK powergen, often accounting for more than half the total. That compares to less than a quarter in Germany.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
I think we should fiscally tighten to avoid recession. The Times and Mail financially and economically illiterate to call for bigger tax slashing right now. The idiots at the Times and Mail this evening need to go down on the beach and stop the tide coming in.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
Ask Japan.
Not that I’m advocating borrowing.
Personally, I’m a soak-the-rich-to-balance-the-budget kind of guy…
For those arguing Sunak should go after the property owning older generation - remember Theresa May? She tried doing something along those lines. I remember chatting with my 30 year old Corbynite friend who was quite positive about the idea. It sank her election campaign though.
Indeed and it was the biggest act of political suicide of any party leader in decades. That single policy cost May her majority in 2017 when early polls had had her heading for a Tory landslide similar to what Boris actually won in 2019 when he delivered a manifesto for his home owning core vote and for working class Leavers who wanted Brexit done
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
I think we should fiscally tighten to avoid recession. The Times and Mail financially and economically illiterate to call for bigger tax slashing right now. The idiots at the Times and Mail this evening need to go down on the beach and stop the tide coming in.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
I’d prefer to rely on interest rates rather than fiscal contraction, I think.
Regarding tipping points, I don’t think there is one.
Obviously there’s a point though at which debt repayment crowd out government spend. It also depends on demography and growth rates. High debt is fine if you think you’ll grow out of it.
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?
Like I said, the obvious knock on effect of it is to clam the Russian Generals up. That's a shame and seems counterproductive.
I dislike the whole business of propaganda. It's approved lying. As educated observers we're supposed to approve of our own skills in 'the information war' when we're the intended targets of such tripe. I genuinely feel that if a cause is just, people should be levelled with. I see no danger to unvarnished truth in politics, ever, on any issue. Just trust people.
In theory I agree with you but just imagine if some helpful British chap in 1941 was publishing charts of remaining food stocks co-related with U-boat sinkings? The great fried chicken shortage of 2018 would have nothing on it.
I always try to question why I think news is good and bad, no doubt with varying degrees of success.
Actually the government was remarkably open about the food situation - rationing was backed up by a lot of explanations about food imports and the costs of those. Including in lives.
Though the petrol rationing was a farce. The UK was swimming in petroleum throughout the war.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
I think we should fiscally tighten to avoid recession. The Times and Mail financially and economically illiterate to call for bigger tax slashing right now. The idiots at the Times and Mail this evening need to go down on the beach and stop the tide coming in.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
I’d prefer to rely on interest rates rather than fiscal contraction, I think.
Regarding tipping points, I don’t think there is one.
Obviously there’s a point though at which debt repayment crowd out government spend. It also depends on demography and growth rates. High debt is fine if you think you’ll grow out of it.
You mean babies plus immigrants you can carry high debt, lack of babies and immigration high debt becomes a problem?
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
Well at lets call it way over a million real infections a day, it isn't going to take long to get through most of the population. I presume the reason is the very high population density in somewhere like Seoul, where all the 24/7 state spying, the mask wearing, etc is totally ineffective against the mighty big O.
It is all ineffective, for sure. We know that now. Omicron Plus is one of the most infectious viruses mankind has ever encountered, no mitigations work
What is worrying experts on the Twittah is the possibility that Omicron Plus can reinfect victims, not just those who had Covid Classic or even Omicron Classic, but people who had... Omicron Plus a few weeks ago
To me this seems nuts. Surely you must gain some immunity? But what if you don't?
It means we will all get Covid again and again and again, for the rest of time, and each time it will slightly deplete us, and our immune systems, and our IQs, and our brain cells, and we will all get Long Covid and slowly we will be turned into zombies with strawberry pulp for brains, and then that is the end of us
Oh well
So what, we regularly catch flu again but we almost all don't die from it as we don't die from Covid either post vaccination
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
I think we should fiscally tighten to avoid recession. The Times and Mail financially and economically illiterate to call for bigger tax slashing right now. The idiots at the Times and Mail this evening need to go down on the beach and stop the tide coming in.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
I’d prefer to rely on interest rates rather than fiscal contraction, I think.
Regarding tipping points, I don’t think there is one.
Obviously there’s a point though at which debt repayment crowd out government spend. It also depends on demography and growth rates. High debt is fine if you think you’ll grow out of it.
You mean babies plus immigrants you can carry high debt, lack of babies and immigration high debt becomes a problem?
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
Well at lets call it way over a million real infections a day, it isn't going to take long to get through most of the population. I presume the reason is the very high population density in somewhere like Seoul, where all the 24/7 state spying, the mask wearing, etc is totally ineffective against the mighty big O.
It is all ineffective, for sure. We know that now. Omicron Plus is one of the most infectious viruses mankind has ever encountered, no mitigations work
What is worrying experts on the Twittah is the possibility that Omicron Plus can reinfect victims, not just those who had Covid Classic or even Omicron Classic, but people who had... Omicron Plus a few weeks ago
To me this seems nuts. Surely you must gain some immunity? But what if you don't?
It means we will all get Covid again and again and again, for the rest of time, and each time it will slightly deplete us, and our immune systems, and our IQs, and our brain cells, and we will all get Long Covid and slowly we will be turned into zombies with strawberry pulp for brains, and then that is the end of us
Oh well
The answer is to have robust health, rather than to try to avoid catching anything.
The greatest mystery of the modern age after art experts falling for van Meegeren’s Vermeer knock offs is that Linehan wrote one of the funniest comedies of the last 30 years.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
I think we should fiscally tighten to avoid recession. The Times and Mail financially and economically illiterate to call for bigger tax slashing right now. The idiots at the Times and Mail this evening need to go down on the beach and stop the tide coming in.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
I’d prefer to rely on interest rates rather than fiscal contraction, I think.
Regarding tipping points, I don’t think there is one.
Obviously there’s a point though at which debt repayment crowd out government spend. It also depends on demography and growth rates. High debt is fine if you think you’ll grow out of it.
You mean babies plus immigrants you can carry high debt, lack of babies and immigration high debt becomes a problem?
Indeed.
But voters vote against immigration because they don’t like our country being in debt? Voters equate immigration to how poor they are and don’t have enough money spent on them?
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
I think we should fiscally tighten to avoid recession. The Times and Mail financially and economically illiterate to call for bigger tax slashing right now. The idiots at the Times and Mail this evening need to go down on the beach and stop the tide coming in.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
I’d prefer to rely on interest rates rather than fiscal contraction, I think.
Regarding tipping points, I don’t think there is one.
Obviously there’s a point though at which debt repayment crowd out government spend. It also depends on demography and growth rates. High debt is fine if you think you’ll grow out of it.
You mean babies plus immigrants you can carry high debt, lack of babies and immigration high debt becomes a problem?
Indeed.
But voters vote against immigration because they don’t like our country being in debt? Voters equate immigration to how poor they are and don’t have enough money spent on them?
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Isn't that down from like a daily figure of 600k?
It seems to be bouncing around. It peaks, then it dips, then it peaks all over again. And they are fully vaxxed
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
Well at lets call it way over a million real infections a day, it isn't going to take long to get through most of the population. I presume the reason is the very high population density in somewhere like Seoul, where all the 24/7 state spying, the mask wearing, etc is totally ineffective against the mighty big O.
It is all ineffective, for sure. We know that now. Omicron Plus is one of the most infectious viruses mankind has ever encountered, no mitigations work
What is worrying experts on the Twittah is the possibility that Omicron Plus can reinfect victims, not just those who had Covid Classic or even Omicron Classic, but people who had... Omicron Plus a few weeks ago
To me this seems nuts. Surely you must gain some immunity? But what if you don't?
It means we will all get Covid again and again and again, for the rest of time, and each time it will slightly deplete us, and our immune systems, and our IQs, and our brain cells, and we will all get Long Covid and slowly we will be turned into zombies with strawberry pulp for brains, and then that is the end of us
Oh well
So what, we regularly catch flu again but we almost all don't die from it as we don't die from Covid either post vaccination
Covid-19 is a NOVEL Coronavirus. We simply don't know what it can do, or how it will evolve. It was *probably* engineered to be nasty in a lab, and unfortunately escaped (tho this is contended, of course)
Quite possibly - probably? - it will evolve to be less virulent, and all will be well. But lots of viruses don't evolve to become milder - smallpox, rabies - and maybe this one will throw up new variants which are even worse, and they will wipe out 1/20 or 1/3 of humanity
As things stands, Covid-19 has surprised on the downside at least as often as it has surprised on the happyside
Well, QED. Sure, if you could flatten the entire City of London and build Barratt Homes with gardens, I guess that would be nice for kids or something
But the fact is some areas just don't have the space for houses with gardens - eg most of central London - and, moreover - the point you are ignoring - a lot of people (not families) actually LIKE the density and excitement of urban life, including apartments 1000 feet in the air (as long as they are maintained well - like the Barbican)
And it's not just the young. Quite a lot of older people move back in to central or central ish London when their kids grow up. They like being able to walk to great restaurants, galleries, museums. They don't want the hassle of a garden, they love London
Hence the popularity of the Barbican. If you go there you'd be surprised how old the denizens are. 60s and 70s, lots of them. Rich people who have chosen to live in the sky, in a Brutalist tower
Hear hear - that's what I'd like and have had in the past until my job pinned me down where I am now.
I'm also on the side of people who feel planning officers are too fanatical. Friends in a cottage in Moorgreen, outside Nottingham, were refused permission to have double-glazing in a rear window because it would change the appearance slightly if you looked at it from the disused field behind their house where nobody ever walked.
The area was interesting, incidentally, as it was DH Lawrence country and much of it (including said rented cottage) was owned by the family who featured, thinly anonymised, in Lady Chatterley's Lover. The family prohibited any celebration or commemoration of DHL, feeling he had built his reputation by spreading salacious gossip about their grandmother. I do see that it wasn't very neighbourly of him, especially as they were long-settled there and he actively disliked the area.
Likewise. I'd happily end my days in a 30 storey apartment in the Barbican. It's a fabulous place to live, and you can walk everywhere. And the Arboretum is amazing, and you have an orchestra, a theatre, two concert halls, an art gallery, a massive beautiful green space, a Roman wall, a medieval church, and all of the City and Islington and Farringdon and Holborn literally at your feet. Wonderful
I love gardens but do I want the expense and hassle of caring for one? Probably not. Each to their own. I prefer the city, as long as there is greenery nearby. I would have a few pot plants on my splendid balcony, and spend hours looking at the magnificent views over the Smoke
Incidentally, if you want to sample acute familial embarrassment about literature, go visit the lordly inhabitants of St Michael's Mount, who are very very closely relayed to the St Aubyns, as portrayed in Edward St Aubyn's novels
OMFG. It's not an elephant in the room, it's an elephant in the room that just did a big poo
I took tea with them in the castle, and felt rather sorry for them. The pain is significant. Nice people, too
1) I like and am fascinated by the Barbican. But I wouldn't want to live there; certainly not to grow old there. There is something otherworldly about it: it is so defiantly inorganic, so utterly rejecting of how humans have lived until that point. And the arts stuff: yes, great to have that on your doorstep if you like that sort of thing, but it all feels rather institutional.
2) I sort of knew a St. Aubyn at one point. Nick St. Aubyn was the MP, I think: I played rugby with his son when I lived in Nottinghamshire. He was the poshest person I had met up to that point in my life (possibly he still is) - I have known one or two other ex-public schoolboys, but generally the sort who get in by non-traditional means; the sort who poshness sort of rubs off on rather than who started out that way. Seemed a nice enough fella though. He played flyhalf. As a happy illustration of the social ubiquity of rugby in the Midlands, the scrumhalf who played for the same team lived in a caravan by the canal.
Aaron Bastani of Momentum is having a fascinating conversion to the period beauties of old British cities - before their ruination by Germans and developers - and he's meanwhile realising that this is all politicised
"Apparently if i think this is aesthetically inferior to what Derby is today that makes me…right wing? Go to Derby and you’ll see why that’s ridiculous."
For those arguing Sunak should go after the property owning older generation - remember Theresa May? She tried doing something along those lines. I remember chatting with my 30 year old Corbynite friend who was quite positive about the idea. It sank her election campaign though.
Indeed and it was the biggest act of political suicide of any party leader in decades. That single policy cost May her majority in 2017 when early polls had had her heading for a Tory landslide similar to what Boris actually won in 2019 when he delivered a manifesto for his home owning core vote and for working class Leavers who wanted Brexit done
One of the more dispiriting aspects of modern democracy, that was. TMay and her team attempted to use an apparently unassailable position as an opportunity to grasp an unpleasant nettle that nevertheless needed to be grasped, and got properly stung. My view is that democracy works and gets to the right answer. But sometimes, unfortunately, it takes quite a long time to do it and only does so when there is no alternative.
Will this budget make the weekend before it is shot down and declared one of the worst in living memory?
Everyone here and everyone I have heard on various radio programs seems to have got there already.
I don’t think it all bad. £12,570 a year without paying a single penny of income tax or national insurance a £6bn ish giveaway to 30 million ish people. Raising NI and income tax cut announced in same statement a bit odd. Cut in fuel tax, not very green except it is time limited 1yr and not for ever. Maybe not much obvious help overall with poorer households faced with energy bill problems. But nothing stands out as worst budget ever as yet does it
Now I’ve read newspaper front pages, is it possible to have this previous post deleted? It makes me look completely out of touch 🤦♀️
Sunak seems to be forced to carry a cross to his execution, not for what he announced, but everything he failed to do.
“No help with rising energy bills” declares the FT. “Reality behind mini budget? No heat to eat!” The Metro yells at us. “Sunak squeezes poorest “ yells guardian in big black ink. Telegraph chooses to show disdain and disgust here by having every reporter and communist sneer at it in unison.
The thing I didn't like about the budget was the triumphalist tone and Brownite slight of hand but where do the papers expect Sunak to have got the money from? We have shelled out billions for the last 2 years on the pandemic. We shelled out further billions little over a decade back on the financial crisis. Sorry, there is no money left.
Easy, fucking tax rich pensioners and their vast property wealth and rent seeking. You know, actually target those with the most so that those with the least can be protected from the oncoming storm of inflation.
Taxes are going up and the tax burden is at the highest level since the 1950s Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Actually if you look at public services, they’re already hollowed out after years of austerity.
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Debt burden already over 100% of GDP? I read something that for a country like ours 140% GDP has a tipping point impact. So yes, there is room to add to debt. However should we not save that leeway in case the recession comes in the coming years? I’m sure the post covid growth and inflation spike, cost of energy, and lack of monetary tightening means a recession already inevitable. It’s now baked in, if you point to where I can bet on recession in next two years and I’ll stick a oner on. The Mail tonight talks up 2p off income tax before the election, that makes them idiots of forecasting if we are in economic depression with little room for that two years today rather than sunlit uplands.
All that tipping point stuff is mostly bollocks. There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
I think we should fiscally tighten to avoid recession. The Times and Mail financially and economically illiterate to call for bigger tax slashing right now. The idiots at the Times and Mail this evening need to go down on the beach and stop the tide coming in.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
I’d prefer to rely on interest rates rather than fiscal contraction, I think.
Regarding tipping points, I don’t think there is one.
Obviously there’s a point though at which debt repayment crowd out government spend. It also depends on demography and growth rates. High debt is fine if you think you’ll grow out of it.
You mean babies plus immigrants you can carry high debt, lack of babies and immigration high debt becomes a problem?
Indeed.
But voters vote against immigration because they don’t like our country being in debt? Voters equate immigration to how poor they are and don’t have enough money spent on them?
People have no idea how rich or poor they are. There are people who are in the top 10% of earners who will complain about only having just enough to get by. They voted against immigration too.
Equivalised household income after housing costs is probably best.
It understates poverty in rural areas though (as excludes essential transport costs) and doesn't take into account more subjective stuff like how nice your neighbourhood is. Combine with SIMD (or equivalent) to get a general feel.
Aaron Bastani of Momentum is having a fascinating conversion to the period beauties of old British cities - before their ruination by Germans and developers - and he's meanwhile realising that this is all politicised
"Apparently if i think this is aesthetically inferior to what Derby is today that makes me…right wing? Go to Derby and you’ll see why that’s ridiculous."
I very much get the feeling that the lousy initial reception of this budget will only get even worse with the passage of time. And the inadequacy of the mitigating measures will continue to be remembered as the squeeze takes full effect.
I very much get the feeling that the lousy initial reception of this budget will only get even worse with the passage of time. And the inadequacy of the mitigating measures will continue to be remembered as the squeeze takes full effect.
I’m surprised in a way at the outright hostility. But I feel like even the Tory hardcore can’t summon much enthusiasm for what is, in the end, biting tax rises against a context of runaway energy prices.
I think Rishi’s fucked his leadership bid. People look at those instagram pics with contempt now.
Aaron Bastani of Momentum is having a fascinating conversion to the period beauties of old British cities - before their ruination by Germans and developers - and he's meanwhile realising that this is all politicised
"Apparently if i think this is aesthetically inferior to what Derby is today that makes me…right wing? Go to Derby and you’ll see why that’s ridiculous."
Anecdote from 1980s Derby: Following some twinning arrangement with a city in Germany, German burghers came to visit the city. Shocked and appalled, they expressed great contrition for the fate which had evidently befallen Derby in the war, empathising that many German towns had met a similar fate too. The bigwigs from Derby had to concede that actually Derby had escaped the war very lightly indeed, and what they saw before them was them had been entirely self-inflicted by 1960s architects and urban designers.
I actually quite like Derby, and - following the conversation with @Anabobazina yesterday I mused to myself that if I were to start a new life in an East Midlands city, it would probably be Derby. The city centre has some splendid pubs, there are some pleasant suburbs and you are almost on the edges of the Peak District: Derby is next to better countryside than either Nottingham or Leicester. But what it could have been if only it had been left alone...
Apparently Renault got targeted by Anonymous, as well as Zelenskyy in the French Parliament
It worked
I imagine the reality of inability of being able to parts is as much of an issue. Perhaps the bosses have been informed how the hell are we supposed to make modern cars without any computer chips.
I’ve just realised who should play Zelenskyy in the inevitable biopic, has to be James McAvoy: passing resemblance, similar stature and edgy fuck you attitude.
Fascinating claimed intercepted call from Russian officer near Mykolaiv to superiors in Russia. He says: - This is worse than Chechnya - 50% of troops have frostbite - They can’t evacuate the dead - Don’t have enough tents - RU plane dropped a bomb on their own position 🧵
Aaron Bastani of Momentum is having a fascinating conversion to the period beauties of old British cities - before their ruination by Germans and developers - and he's meanwhile realising that this is all politicised
"Apparently if i think this is aesthetically inferior to what Derby is today that makes me…right wing? Go to Derby and you’ll see why that’s ridiculous."
Aaron Bastani of Momentum is having a fascinating conversion to the period beauties of old British cities - before their ruination by Germans and developers - and he's meanwhile realising that this is all politicised
"Apparently if i think this is aesthetically inferior to what Derby is today that makes me…right wing? Go to Derby and you’ll see why that’s ridiculous."
Anecdote from 1980s Derby: Following some twinning arrangement with a city in Germany, German burghers came to visit the city. Shocked and appalled, they expressed great contrition for the fate which had evidently befallen Derby in the war, empathising that many German towns had met a similar fate too. The bigwigs from Derby had to concede that actually Derby had escaped the war very lightly indeed, and what they saw before them was them had been entirely self-inflicted by 1960s architects and urban designers.
I actually quite like Derby, and - following the conversation with @Anabobazina yesterday I mused to myself that if I were to start a new life in an East Midlands city, it would probably be Derby. The city centre has some splendid pubs, there are some pleasant suburbs and you are almost on the edges of the Peak District: Derby is next to better countryside than either Nottingham or Leicester. But what it could have been if only it had been left alone...
THIS is what it could have been. From that thread.
Comments
The word "other" has been incorrectly included there.
Yes, particular things the government was after, and algorithmic issues, were a big part of specific objections for this attempt, but at its heart the fundamental problem in selling anything, even better crafted, to planning authorities is that the government wants it to be simpler to say Yes, while planning authorities (or at least politicians acting on behalf of locals) want it to be simpler to say No.
But to be fair it seemed obvious to me Johnson was actually laughing about something the opposition bench had just said just as Sunak began. For once, I don't think this was Johnson being a total arse.
There's a claim in a Michael Crichton novel that if you domesticate a chimpanzee and give it a stack of photos, some of chimpanzees and some of people, it will sort them correctly, with one exception: if one of the photos is of itself it will put it in the people stack. Aren't you doing the same?
The Tories are not going to commit political suicide thankfully
And the Times seem to be taking exactly same line as the Mail, not enough taxes slashed to help.
The catch was all the tax increases that were already pencilled in to happen, some of which have become even more swingeing than he anticipated at the time. And everyone in the media has noticed.
Oh, and the inflation that's happening.
I'm not sure that there's much he could have done differently. (Well, there is one thing that would perk up GDP by several percent by improving international trade, but he's not going to do that). He's just the one holding the baby now it's filled its nappy.
Just think, in a parallel universe, he didn't become Chancellor in 2020, is a mid-ranking Cabinet Minister (Education maybe, or Levelling Up) and ready to take over from poor old discredited Saj. Funny old game, politics.
Europe depends on oil, gas, coal and renewables/nuclear.
Oil is a world market, and whether Europe buys a single barrel or Russian oil or not makes no difference. All it means is that oil tankers go to China and India, and oil that was going to go to China or India goes to Europe. More time is spent in transit, tanker day rates go up, but nothing fundamentally happens.
Coal - well, that's a relatively world market too. There are exports from South Africa, Australia, South America, the US and (believe it or not) even China.
Gas is the big one. Now, Europe gets piped gas from Russia, Norway, and North Africa and LNG from the US and the Gulf.
It is impossible to replace all Russian gas with LNG gas. And this isn't a question of world gas production capacity (although that would be an issue), or LNG terminals (less so, because Europe as a whole has ample import capacity), but simply the fact that the world does not have enough LNG vessels to carry gas.
Plus, there are only a limited number of spot cargoes. (Some LNG is sold on long-term contracts, some is sold in the spot market. We, the UK, are very unusual in that we have very little LNG on long-term contracts.)
If Russia turns off the taps (and they will), then three things will happen:
(1) Europe will bid on every LNG cargo out there, and even on some contracted ones
(2) The price of LNG will go through the roof
(3) LNG plants will attempt to create new spot cargoes (and some old inefficient ships will come out of storage)
There is literally not enough gas to go around. Basically the UK and the EU will be bidding on gas that will be insufficient for the two countries.
But there's good news.
The next six months is usually a period when pipelines have periodic maintenance stoppages and volumes are typically much lower than during the winter, storage facilities are typically refilled during this time, etc. Gas storage levels in Europe are also surprisingly high - a consequence of a windy spring.
So, if the Russians turn the gas taps off, then Europe (and the UK, because don't forget that we're hit just as much as Germany) will be broadly OK over the summer.
Come Autumn, though...
Well it depends on the weather: some time between late September and the 20th of October. I'd reckon probably the second week of October.
At that point storage is exhausted. Demand is rising. And there's no gas.
Basically, you need to overthrow the Russian regime and win the war in Ukraine before the end of September.
About 1% of the population, in a day. And this has been raging for WEEKS
Jeez
Debt is over 100% of GDP
I would argue if you want to spend more then something else has to go.
I'm afraid I would start with foreign aid as charity begins at home. Then you have all the quangos. Can we live without the NHS, no? Can we live without Ofcom, yes.
Let's look at the price of a Barbican flat compared to the price of a house in Muswell Hill.
"If you turn those taps off and we will consider it an act of war and nuke Moscow."
Your move Vlad.
Semi
People value different things.
I don't value a private garden.
I do value being able to walk to shops, restaurants, theatres, etc. If I hadn't had children, I doubt I would ever have left my apartment in W1.
Wes Streeting put up by Lab for the Newsnight budget response.
Not a member of the shadow treasury team.
I'm also on the side of people who feel planning officers are too fanatical. Friends in a cottage in Moorgreen, outside Nottingham, were refused permission to have double-glazing in a rear window because it would change the appearance slightly if you looked at it from the disused field behind their house where nobody ever walked.
The area was interesting, incidentally, as it was DH Lawrence country and much of it (including said rented cottage) was owned by the family who featured, thinly anonymised, in Lady Chatterley's Lover. The family prohibited any celebration or commemoration of DHL, feeling he had built his reputation by spreading salacious gossip about their grandmother. I do see that it wasn't very neighbourly of him, especially as they were long-settled there and he actively disliked the area.
a Labour Government
The idea there is money to be saved by axing Ofcom is risible.
Wealth - largely in the hands of pensioners - is the only place to go. And/or, we countenance a higher debt burden.
Quite a frightening wave, fuelled by various sub-variants of Omicron
It's not good
"SEOUL, March 23 (Reuters) – South Korea’s total coronavirus infections topped 10 million, or nearly 20% of its population, authorities said on Wednesday, as surging severe cases and deaths increasingly put a strain on crematories and funeral homes nationwide."
https://twitter.com/CDNewsDispatch/status/1506652072095195141?s=20&t=Cvh6mm6C0Lo5qKbslmPdtQ
The greatest act of propaganda during WWII, in Britain at least, was persuading the public that Stalin and the Soviet Union were our worthy allies.
Government strategy since 1016 - only one Cnut at a time.
You are absolutely right about LA.
Without the sunshine, ocean and mountains, then it would be hell. Low rise monotony stretched over 80 miles, with horrendous traffic and bugger all public transport.
London, with its mix of low-rise, high-rise, of suburbs and garden squares, with its buses and tube, is near perfect.
If you want to live in a high rise in a dense urban area, you can. If you want to live in a terraced house in Islington or Hackney, you can. If you want to live in a detached house on the outskirts, that's possible too.
Austerity is back, right across government.
Has been that way for decades. And for decades, people have been paying them off. My stepfather encountered one in the 1970's. Went to his MP about it. But Ken Clarke couldn't be arsed to do anything about it.
That planner eventually went down for 5 years.
I am told it is still rife in the SW.
Because of the much higher risks to unvaccinated older people - 30% CFR has occurred - a hundred thousand wrinkles unvaccinated is a receipt for disaster.
Pensioners are the Tory core vote. So that's not going to happen.
Guess its austerity redux.
It doesn't mean all the elderly are unvaccinated - just that even 5-10% is a big big gap to have. Now that everyone will get Omicron, eventually.
I'm unpersuaded.
I love gardens but do I want the expense and hassle of caring for one? Probably not. Each to their own. I prefer the city, as long as there is greenery nearby. I would have a few pot plants on my splendid balcony, and spend hours looking at the magnificent views over the Smoke
Incidentally, if you want to sample acute familial embarrassment about literature, go visit the lordly inhabitants of St Michael's Mount, who are very very closely relayed to the St Aubyns, as portrayed in Edward St Aubyn's novels
OMFG. It's not an elephant in the room, it's an elephant in the room that just did a big poo
I took tea with them in the castle, and felt rather sorry for them. The pain is significant. Nice people, too
Ironically Boris is about the only one who isn’t, but he’s too lazy to see through his own policy preferences.
Nb. Economically, Biden and the Democrats have blown it. Recession in US in next two years guarantees a Republican President. And we all know who that will be…
80% of UK gas comes either from our own fields or via pipelines from European sources. So the LNG issue only affects 20% of our supply. Now obviously that is still too much but it is not the case to say we are as exposed to the LNG shipped supply as Germany or other central European countries.
As such, the idea there is rampant corruption in the ranks does not hold water for me.
Good luck recruiting in that case.
What is worrying experts on the Twittah is the possibility that Omicron Plus can reinfect victims, not just those who had Covid Classic or even Omicron Classic, but people who had... Omicron Plus a few weeks ago
To me this seems nuts. Surely you must gain some immunity? But what if you don't?
It means we will all get Covid again and again and again, for the rest of time, and each time it will slightly deplete us, and our immune systems, and our IQs, and our brain cells, and we will all get Long Covid and slowly we will be turned into zombies with strawberry pulp for brains, and then that is the end of us
Oh well
There’s certainly leeway to borrow more.
But as you say, is it right to do so during a bout of inflation?
I’d suggest not, which is why my proposals upthread aimed to be fiscally neutral.
There is, however, a lack of ships to take it from places with gas to places without.
One can, of course, replace gas with coal to some extent. Of course, coal prices have gone through the roof in the last week or so, but there's a lot of available coal in the world, and quite a few mothballed power stations.
For Starmer, like Milliband, close to a PM via coalition, but no cigar.
Why is that % of GDP as debt stuff bollocks? Surely there is a tipping point somewhere, if not 140 then where?
Firstly, the piped gas from Norway is not on long-term fixed price contracts. So the rising price of energy affects what we pay Statoil. Maybe not as much as switching from all Russian piped gas to LNG, but it certainly has a big impact.
Secondly, we use a lot more gas in powergen than Germany does, because they have both lots of dirty brown coal, and more renewables. Gas is usually the biggest part of UK powergen, often accounting for more than half the total. That compares to less than a quarter in Germany.
Not that I’m advocating borrowing.
Personally, I’m a soak-the-rich-to-balance-the-budget kind of guy…
Regarding tipping points, I don’t think there is one.
Obviously there’s a point though at which debt repayment crowd out government spend. It also depends on demography and growth rates. High debt is fine if you think you’ll grow out of it.
https://twitter.com/setoacnna/status/1506588713035382794?s=21
Quite possibly - probably? - it will evolve to be less virulent, and all will be well. But lots of viruses don't evolve to become milder - smallpox, rabies - and maybe this one will throw up new variants which are even worse, and they will wipe out 1/20 or 1/3 of humanity
As things stands, Covid-19 has surprised on the downside at least as often as it has surprised on the happyside
2) I sort of knew a St. Aubyn at one point. Nick St. Aubyn was the MP, I think: I played rugby with his son when I lived in Nottinghamshire. He was the poshest person I had met up to that point in my life (possibly he still is) - I have known one or two other ex-public schoolboys, but generally the sort who get in by non-traditional means; the sort who poshness sort of rubs off on rather than who started out that way. Seemed a nice enough fella though. He played flyhalf. As a happy illustration of the social ubiquity of rugby in the Midlands, the scrumhalf who played for the same team lived in a caravan by the canal.
"Apparently if i think this is aesthetically inferior to what Derby is today that makes me…right wing? Go to Derby and you’ll see why that’s ridiculous."
https://twitter.com/AaronBastani/status/1506779154661978112?s=20&t=8a_86C6Zv297xu2SZTtRxQ
My view is that democracy works and gets to the right answer. But sometimes, unfortunately, it takes quite a long time to do it and only does so when there is no alternative.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/03/23/business/stocks-oil-inflation-ukraine#renault-russia
It understates poverty in rural areas though (as excludes essential transport costs) and doesn't take into account more subjective stuff like how nice your neighbourhood is. Combine with SIMD (or equivalent) to get a general feel.
Of course, aesthetics are ideological, and thereby political. All the modernists were raving Marxists.
I’m a big fan of modernist architecture, but I recognise that a lot of their ideas about landscaping and town planning were utter bunk.
But the same is true of “neo-liberal” architecture.
But I feel like even the Tory hardcore can’t summon much enthusiasm for what is, in the end, biting tax rises against a context of runaway energy prices.
I think Rishi’s fucked his leadership bid.
People look at those instagram pics with contempt now.
I actually quite like Derby, and - following the conversation with @Anabobazina yesterday I mused to myself that if I were to start a new life in an East Midlands city, it would probably be Derby. The city centre has some splendid pubs, there are some pleasant suburbs and you are almost on the edges of the Peak District: Derby is next to better countryside than either Nottingham or Leicester. But what it could have been if only it had been left alone...
It worked
Fascinating claimed intercepted call from Russian officer near Mykolaiv to superiors in Russia. He says:
- This is worse than Chechnya
- 50% of troops have frostbite
- They can’t evacuate the dead
- Don’t have enough tents
- RU plane dropped a bomb on their own position 🧵
https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1506453063267241994?s=20&t=cesHadPKUwsgJbgZQWEQAA
https://twitter.com/cusackandrew/status/1506584008397885441/photo/1
captioned 'Derby was practically Vicenza'.
It's worth a look. I'd embed the photo but it takes me about ten minutes and my bed awaits.
As someone says, it is like an English Vicenza
https://twitter.com/cusackandrew/status/1506584008397885441?s=20&t=r6YDZzF8Sp-Mbg-Uv_hM1w
https://twitter.com/colorize_bot/status/1506679168301477889?s=20&t=r6YDZzF8Sp-Mbg-Uv_hM1w
We did a terrible, terrible thing to our cities. We must repair and rebuild, exactly as they were