It's all part of a brilliant plan. The Russians will retreat, to lure the Ukrainians into a decisive battle. On the outskirts of Moscow.
It's another one that the orthodoxy of the military analysts didn't see coming. The Russians were observed digging in and the assumption was that some of them would stay put to use artillery on Kyiv and hold Ukrainian forces in place to prevent them from reinforcing the Donbas.
RU moaning that the Ukr has had the effrontery to attack something inside Russian border seems a bit "they don't like it up 'em, sir" from Dad's Army.
Its odd that a town no near to the Ukrainain border at a time of war had no air defence
According to the Russians, they only got away with it because they flew below the radar and took them by surprise as people assumed they must have been Russian helicopters.
A caller in to Jeremy Vine now is asking whether it’s cheaper to boil a mug’s worth of water in a kettle or using one of those machines like a Breville One Cup that boil a cup worth at a time.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
On 2 June 1975, snow an inch thick covered the pitch at Buxton in a match between Derbyshire and Lancashire, and snow stopped play at several other county cricket matches. Snowflakes even briefly fell on the Lord’s cricket ground in London.
Raw Arctic winds swept across the UK that day with -3.3C (26F) recorded at Gleneagles, in Perthshire, more like the depths of winter than early summer. Sleet was even reported as far south as Portsmouth, and although the snow melted quickly across southern areas of Britain, it lingered on the ground for a few days in parts of Scotland.
A caller in to Jeremy Vine now is asking whether it’s cheaper to boil a mug’s worth of water in a kettle or using one of those machines like a Breville One Cup that boil a cup worth at a time.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
They are going big on culture war issues precisely because they are trying to distract.
They will never overcome the economy. Clinton realised that years ago.
On 2 June 1975, snow an inch thick covered the pitch at Buxton in a match between Derbyshire and Lancashire, and snow stopped play at several other county cricket matches. Snowflakes even briefly fell on the Lord’s cricket ground in London.
Raw Arctic winds swept across the UK that day with -3.3C (26F) recorded at Gleneagles, in Perthshire, more like the depths of winter than early summer. Sleet was even reported as far south as Portsmouth, and although the snow melted quickly across southern areas of Britain, it lingered on the ground for a few days in parts of Scotland.
Be grateful for global warming.
I seem to recall the Derby being run in snowstorm. Over the next couple of days the temperature rose 20 or deg (C).
A caller in to Jeremy Vine now is asking whether it’s cheaper to boil a mug’s worth of water in a kettle or using one of those machines like a Breville One Cup that boil a cup worth at a time.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
The problem is that energy prices are spiking globally and there's only limited amounts anyone can realistically do about it.
The best idea the Opposition seems to have is a populist tax on energy firms that would discourage the investment we need to bring energy costs back down.
Perhaps the Government will be blamed just because they're in office, that happens sometimes, but there's only so much that can realistically be done.
In Ukraine. Not sure what to make of this. Legitimate hunt for infiltrators, or a worrying bit of authoritarianism?
Zelenskyy fires 2 senior members of national security on the ground. Andriy Naumov- former head SBU main dept of internal security Serhiy Kryvoruchko-former head of SBU in Kherson Oblast "I do not have time to deal with all the traitors but they will gradually all be punished"
He also fired two ambassadors, to Georgia and Morocco.
They are fighting a defensive war. They are under siege and the enemy has made multiple attempts to kill him. No other country has seriously come to their rescue. They have been left alone to fight one of the worlds biggest armies.
There is pressure to concede to the enemy in 'peace' talks. Factionalism and paranoia is inevitable. It isn't even worth seriously questioning, in my view.
To suggest that Zelensky is an authoritarian is to peddle a Russian talking point.
So any criticism of Zelensky is playing the Russians game. Okay.
We are moving into the realms of North Korean levels of deference.
Not really. You can observe what is going on without playing in to the 'two sides' analysis.
Obviously one of the aims of Russian propoganda is to undermine Zelensky and western support for him.
The same can be said the other way.
Of course the Russians are the bad guys here and the Ukrainians on the side of right but that does not mean we should simply ignore any concerns we have with Zelenskyy and his govt.
Calling it out is not being a shill for Putin
Depends why he's sacked them, but even there some leeway should be given. Churchill fired Halifax for concluding Britain couldn't win the war and recommending peace talks, but he's not usually considered authoritarian for doing so.
Has he actually had them arrested, or just dismissed? If the latter, maybe again we should remember most of the senior officers of the Russian Army and intelligence service are currently mysteriously absent from their posts.
If of course he's arrested them for telling him facts about the current Russian position he doesn't like, that's altogether different.
I don't think we'll know much more until they face trial - or don't. Zelensky appears to have happily devolved the management of fighting to the defence ministry and the armed forces, so doesn't thus far appear to be a nascent autocrat - and has referred several times to the responsibility of his successors - so I'm inclined for now to give him the benefit of the doubt. And I don't think Ukraine would tolerate an autocrat anyway.
But it is an entirely legitimate concern.
Rather it could be a legitimate concern one day. I've read this argument this morning and was a bit baffled at the idea a couple of guys being sacked or even arrested is prima facie a concerning development. I'd think a bit more of a trend or pattern, or at least reporting it was not justified, would be needed before it was presumed to be a sign of authoritarianism.
As someone mentioned Ukraine was and is not perfect, it and Zelensky might and probably will do things we consider not ok, hes not Jesus. But going 'oooh, is this a sign of authoritarianism?' seems like it requires a bit more than a couple of sackings and arrests during a war. Macron's just sacked an intelligence head is that a sign of authoritarianism or is there a non sinister explanation?
Maybe we pause the hunt until there's more to it.
Alternatively all governments involved in existential wars are essentially authoritarian. The UK banged people up for selling frothy coffee after all.
Quite right too. Black is the only way to take coffee.
I wonder if Italian cafes were one of the few sources for really good coffee (of whatever composition) pre war? My paternal gran and grandad who were newly minted Edinburgh middle class in the 30s would make journeys to Crolla’s at the top of Leith Walk for coffee beans to grind their own coffee and other delicacies no doubt. I assume that all came to a shuddering halt in 1939, but sadly no one left alive to ask.
1940 to be pedantic; yes, when Mr Churchill had the menfolk thrown into internment camps, like our local small burgh cafe - these last died in the Arandora Star (as I have mentioned here before) and so too did one of the Crollas. Though there were traditional non-Italian grocers which also roasted beans and ground coffee on demand - the smell of the coffee when going shopping with my parents is a (very early) childhood memory.
The apology-trolling for the sinking of the Arandora Star (taking internees to Oz in 1940) is a bit much. That looks like a PR stunt.
Who is expected to apologise?
The Italian Govt for Mussolini declaring war on the UK in 1940? The Glaswegian hate-mob who smashed up the coffee-shop? The UK Govt the for precautionary internment of some Italians, after Italy allied with Germany, and Mussolini declared war? The German Govt for Hitler's policy of unrestricted submarine warfare in violation of International Treaties (to which I am not totally clear whether Germany was a signatory - Italy was but had previously violated), which led to the deportation passenger liner being sunk? The Kriegsmarine for sinking it? Person or persons unknown?
I don't think even Sturgeon will dive into that one.
Not that it matters much but Paolozzi was an Edinburgher and the Arandora Star was actually going to Canada.
An interesting snippet is that an interned German merchant captain, Otto Burfeind, stayed aboard the Star trying to organise the extremely disorganised evacuation and went down with it; a small act of heroic decency that shouldn’t be forgotten.
Illia Ponomarenko 🇺🇦 @IAPonomarenko Yes, the Ukrainian military are just kicking anti-tank landmines. It’s called the Ukrainian curling on the Warsaw Highway close to Kyiv.
Nice one. It has that momentary touch of being just in the realm of the possible but ridiculous - very like the one that should be an April Fool - Clegg being the propaganda tool of Facebook.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
It's good to see everyone of influence now is on the same page on the important stuff, even as they can (and should) still disagree on so many other policy matters.
David Lammy: "For too long, parts of the left, even some members of my own party, falsely divided the world into two camps. America and the West on one side, and their victims on the other. This has never been right, but this view has now been exposed for all to see as a farce."
It's good to see everyone of influence now is on the same page on the important stuff, even as they can (and should) still disagree on so many other policy matters.
David Lammy: "For too long, parts of the left, even some members of my own party, falsely divided the world into two camps. America and the West on one side, and their victims on the other. This has never been right, but this view has now been exposed for all to see as a farce."
It's all part of a brilliant plan. The Russians will retreat, to lure the Ukrainians into a decisive battle. On the outskirts of Moscow.
It's another one that the orthodoxy of the military analysts didn't see coming. The Russians were observed digging in and the assumption was that some of them would stay put to use artillery on Kyiv and hold Ukrainian forces in place to prevent them from reinforcing the Donbas.
But they appear to have given it up completely.
Historically Kiev's claim to run Moscow is slightly more plausible than the reverse.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
A caller in to Jeremy Vine now is asking whether it’s cheaper to boil a mug’s worth of water in a kettle or using one of those machines like a Breville One Cup that boil a cup worth at a time.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
The answer if they must is to use a trad kettle on the gas stove, as gas is still 1/4 to 1/3 of the cost of electricity per kWh.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
A caller in to Jeremy Vine now is asking whether it’s cheaper to boil a mug’s worth of water in a kettle or using one of those machines like a Breville One Cup that boil a cup worth at a time.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
The culture warriors from both 'sides' of the 'debate' are a small proportion of the UK public. They should be given a homeland on the Isle of Wight or somewhere (Rockall?) where they can indulge their petty obsessions while the rest of us worry about important stuff like spiralling prices.
Regarding the trans stuff, my sense was that Rachel Reeves pretty much buried this as a hot topic with a very sensible statement on Sky News yesterday. You can't please all of the people all of the time, so why try? Her position struck me as eminently sensible.
That’s not good. Alas similar stories in England. My wife having to wait 12 months for just the booking appointment to get on the waitlist for a critical, life changing surgical procedure.
Officially not waiting in the stats.
I waited just over 36 months for a bi lateral hernia operation and before covid
Not good. I fear this will be at least as long, 12-15 months just to get on the waiting list is not a good sign. Unfortunately the problem is nasty and she already is nearly broken by it.
I am so sorry to hear that and hope your wife gets treated soon
Thanks. Looks like I will have spend our savings and extend the mortgage a bit to conjure up a plan B.
She can't go on living like this, which sounds like a throw away phrase - but I fear she really can't.
Waiting lists are very lumpy at the moment as they are coming rapidly down as just a few stragglers waiting over a year now, and with outpatients reduced for much of last year due to redeployment, not many went on. There are a lot of referrals to be seen, but what the conversion rate for surgical specialities to surgical waiting list will be, we don't know yet.
No one really knows whether 100% or 20% of the missing referrals from the last 2 years will materialise as there are few precedents. So waiting lists are a bit of a guessing game.
Anything requiring an anaesthetist, theatre staff or a surgical bed is not going to be quick. These are all in short supply, with staff vacancies and burnout, and beds still occupied by covid patients.
I’m due to have a biopsy under GA in two weeks time, about six weeks after a previous test where the doctor said I would need it: presumably the possibility that it is cancer (which would not be my first or even third) is putting me towards the front of the queue.
V interesting thread on what ordinary folks in Moscow are thinking. Seems there is a general attitude that things will be back to normal in 3 months and all the closed shops and businesses will return.
But worryingly, folk seem to be normalising the idea that nukes are the answer.
Greg Yudin @YudinGreg I am constantly asked about atmosphere in Russia. I am making a THREAD🧵to give an impression of how it feels in Moscow but also to explain how what I call “A few months theory” reigns supreme 1/19
Greg Yudin @YudinGreg · 6h For many Russians, Putin is testing, once again, the ingrained belief that might makes right. Hubris is unlimited: one simply has to be impudent enough to become the master of the universe. The West is often said to be weak because it is not ready to risk a nuclear war 16/x
If Putin's war effort is indeed folding up in ignominious defeat then those of us (like me) who called for a tougher stance from NATO and the EU were wrong.
Right now the forces ranged against Putin seem to actually have got their tactics pretty spot on and that includes Britain and Boris Johnson.
A caller in to Jeremy Vine now is asking whether it’s cheaper to boil a mug’s worth of water in a kettle or using one of those machines like a Breville One Cup that boil a cup worth at a time.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
The problem is that energy prices are spiking globally and there's only limited amounts anyone can realistically do about it.
The best idea the Opposition seems to have is a populist tax on energy firms that would discourage the investment we need to bring energy costs back down.
Perhaps the Government will be blamed just because they're in office, that happens sometimes, but there's only so much that can realistically be done.
Yes, your post seems to echo the mood music coming from government. Essentially, a collective shrug of the shoulders. Nothing we can do. Free market innit?
It's a very brave attitude to take by the government. Rope-a-dope. How long can they take it?
Is 'populist' back to being pejorative again now it's something that is popular with the great unwashed and comes from the left?
Macron spent nearly €1 bn on Management Consultants last year. Including McKinsey. And they keep recommending reform of the public services. He is getting some stick.
On 2 June 1975, snow an inch thick covered the pitch at Buxton in a match between Derbyshire and Lancashire, and snow stopped play at several other county cricket matches. Snowflakes even briefly fell on the Lord’s cricket ground in London.
Raw Arctic winds swept across the UK that day with -3.3C (26F) recorded at Gleneagles, in Perthshire, more like the depths of winter than early summer. Sleet was even reported as far south as Portsmouth, and although the snow melted quickly across southern areas of Britain, it lingered on the ground for a few days in parts of Scotland.
Be grateful for global warming.
And the summer to come was very good. 1975 gets forgotten because of the legendary summer the following year –– but it was an excellent summer in its own right despite the snow in June!
Macron spent nearly €1 bn on Management Consultants last year. Including McKinsey. And they keep recommending reform of the public services. he is getting some stick.
In Ukraine. Not sure what to make of this. Legitimate hunt for infiltrators, or a worrying bit of authoritarianism?
Zelenskyy fires 2 senior members of national security on the ground. Andriy Naumov- former head SBU main dept of internal security Serhiy Kryvoruchko-former head of SBU in Kherson Oblast "I do not have time to deal with all the traitors but they will gradually all be punished"
He also fired two ambassadors, to Georgia and Morocco.
They are fighting a defensive war. They are under siege and the enemy has made multiple attempts to kill him. No other country has seriously come to their rescue. They have been left alone to fight one of the worlds biggest armies.
There is pressure to concede to the enemy in 'peace' talks. Factionalism and paranoia is inevitable. It isn't even worth seriously questioning, in my view.
To suggest that Zelensky is an authoritarian is to peddle a Russian talking point.
So any criticism of Zelensky is playing the Russians game. Okay.
We are moving into the realms of North Korean levels of deference.
Not really. You can observe what is going on without playing in to the 'two sides' analysis.
Obviously one of the aims of Russian propoganda is to undermine Zelensky and western support for him.
The same can be said the other way.
Of course the Russians are the bad guys here and the Ukrainians on the side of right but that does not mean we should simply ignore any concerns we have with Zelenskyy and his govt.
Calling it out is not being a shill for Putin
Depends why he's sacked them, but even there some leeway should be given. Churchill fired Halifax for concluding Britain couldn't win the war and recommending peace talks, but he's not usually considered authoritarian for doing so.
Has he actually had them arrested, or just dismissed? If the latter, maybe again we should remember most of the senior officers of the Russian Army and intelligence service are currently mysteriously absent from their posts.
If of course he's arrested them for telling him facts about the current Russian position he doesn't like, that's altogether different.
I don't think we'll know much more until they face trial - or don't. Zelensky appears to have happily devolved the management of fighting to the defence ministry and the armed forces, so doesn't thus far appear to be a nascent autocrat - and has referred several times to the responsibility of his successors - so I'm inclined for now to give him the benefit of the doubt. And I don't think Ukraine would tolerate an autocrat anyway.
But it is an entirely legitimate concern.
Rather it could be a legitimate concern one day. I've read this argument this morning and was a bit baffled at the idea a couple of guys being sacked or even arrested is prima facie a concerning development. I'd think a bit more of a trend or pattern, or at least reporting it was not justified, would be needed before it was presumed to be a sign of authoritarianism.
As someone mentioned Ukraine was and is not perfect, it and Zelensky might and probably will do things we consider not ok, hes not Jesus. But going 'oooh, is this a sign of authoritarianism?' seems like it requires a bit more than a couple of sackings and arrests during a war. Macron's just sacked an intelligence head is that a sign of authoritarianism or is there a non sinister explanation?
Maybe we pause the hunt until there's more to it.
Alternatively all governments involved in existential wars are essentially authoritarian. The UK banged people up for selling frothy coffee after all.
Quite right too. Black is the only way to take coffee.
I wonder if Italian cafes were one of the few sources for really good coffee (of whatever composition) pre war? My paternal gran and grandad who were newly minted Edinburgh middle class in the 30s would make journeys to Crolla’s at the top of Leith Walk for coffee beans to grind their own coffee and other delicacies no doubt. I assume that all came to a shuddering halt in 1939, but sadly no one left alive to ask.
1940 to be pedantic; yes, when Mr Churchill had the menfolk thrown into internment camps, like our local small burgh cafe - these last died in the Arandora Star (as I have mentioned here before) and so too did one of the Crollas. Though there were traditional non-Italian grocers which also roasted beans and ground coffee on demand - the smell of the coffee when going shopping with my parents is a (very early) childhood memory.
The apology-trolling for the sinking of the Arandora Star (taking internees to Oz in 1940) is a bit much. That looks like a PR stunt.
Who is expected to apologise?
The Italian Govt for Mussolini declaring war on the UK in 1940? The Glaswegian hate-mob who smashed up the coffee-shop? The UK Govt the for precautionary internment of some Italians, after Italy allied with Germany, and Mussolini declared war? The German Govt for Hitler's policy of unrestricted submarine warfare in violation of International Treaties (to which I am not totally clear whether Germany was a signatory - Italy was but had previously violated), which led to the deportation passenger liner being sunk? The Kriegsmarine for sinking it? Person or persons unknown?
I don't think even Sturgeon will dive into that one.
Not that it matters much but Paolozzi was an Edinburgher and the Arandora Star was actually going to Canada.
An interesting snippet is that an interned German merchant captain, Otto Burfeind, stayed aboard the Star trying to organise the extremely disorganised evacuation and went down with it; a small act of heroic decency that shouldn’t be forgotten.
I'm with those who think that a memorial is appropriate wrt the Arandora Star.
I get quite irritated by the extraction of one aspect of a complex historical situation from its context for a rather partisan demand of a particular action now.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Is that his job? He's the guy who tries to save people money on consumer products and utilities and so on.
He's not an energy policy wonk.
If the government regulators are stupid enough to try and engineer the existence of a lively and active market by pretending some guy in a back bedroom can run an energy utility then that's the government's problem.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
It's suggested that household energy costs are going up towards £3000 pa. While this is terrible it may be worth bearing in mind proportionality. 10 fags, and a single daily pint in a pub will set you back about £3250 pa.
Fags are a niche luxury purchase these days. In my student days a bottle of wine cost about 2 packets of cigarettes. That has now inverted, 2 bottles of drinkable wine = 20 B&H. even quite rich smokers smoke smuggled rolling tobacco if they smoke at all.
It's my single biggest line of personal expenditure and by quite a long way. A great pity I can afford it, in a sense.
E cigarettes are much more affordable and I found to be a 'good enough' replacement. Took some getting used to as the patterns of use aren't quite the same (best to think of the e-cigarette as a pipe rather than a cigarette).
A caller in to Jeremy Vine now is asking whether it’s cheaper to boil a mug’s worth of water in a kettle or using one of those machines like a Breville One Cup that boil a cup worth at a time.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
They are going big on culture war issues precisely because they are trying to distract.
They will never overcome the economy. Clinton realised that years ago.
Though the government have botched the timing a bit in that case.
The abstract news that the economic situation looks grim has been building up for a while. But in the main, it's been clouds on the horizon. The real deluge- in the sense of too much month and not enough money- starts now. The recent culture war has been a bit of a waste of culture war weapons.
And, thank goodness, the UK Conservatives have enough scruples or not enough nerve to go full-on culture war, as shown by the wobble on gay conversion therapy.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Is that his job? He's the guy who tries to save people money on consumer products and utilities and so on.
He's not an energy policy wonk.
If the government regulators are stupid enough to try and engineer the existence of a lively and active market by pretending some guy in a back bedroom can run an energy utility then that's the government's problem.
That isn't quite true of his job. He has made £100 million out of owning a stake in a website that constantly advocates people to switch and its been shown that all these websites make their money out of commission payment structures lets say don't always result in consumers to be directed towards the cheapest deals.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
He is supposed to be a consumer champion. Like advocating self-certifying mortgages. There needs to be scenario analysis of the impact of a change in energy prices. Mr & Mrs Smith weren't about to do it, so he should have.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Is that his job? He's the guy who tries to save people money on consumer products and utilities and so on.
He's not an energy policy wonk.
If the government regulators are stupid enough to try and engineer the existence of a lively and active market by pretending some guy in a back bedroom can run an energy utility then that's the government's problem.
As per my answer above. He is supposed to be a consumer champion. All he did was advise going with the lowest priced provider whose economic model under stress turned out not to be viable and hence those are the people now who are seeing their energy costs skyrocket.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
That’s not good. Alas similar stories in England. My wife having to wait 12 months for just the booking appointment to get on the waitlist for a critical, life changing surgical procedure.
Officially not waiting in the stats.
I waited just over 36 months for a bi lateral hernia operation and before covid
Not good. I fear this will be at least as long, 12-15 months just to get on the waiting list is not a good sign. Unfortunately the problem is nasty and she already is nearly broken by it.
I am so sorry to hear that and hope your wife gets treated soon
Thanks. Looks like I will have spend our savings and extend the mortgage a bit to conjure up a plan B.
She can't go on living like this, which sounds like a throw away phrase - but I fear she really can't.
Waiting lists are very lumpy at the moment as they are coming rapidly down as just a few stragglers waiting over a year now, and with outpatients reduced for much of last year due to redeployment, not many went on. There are a lot of referrals to be seen, but what the conversion rate for surgical specialities to surgical waiting list will be, we don't know yet.
No one really knows whether 100% or 20% of the missing referrals from the last 2 years will materialise as there are few precedents. So waiting lists are a bit of a guessing game.
Anything requiring an anaesthetist, theatre staff or a surgical bed is not going to be quick. These are all in short supply, with staff vacancies and burnout, and beds still occupied by covid patients.
Talking to people I know in the NHS, Covid is currently playing merry hell with staffing levels. It may not be killing very many people, or even putting them into intensive care, but it is rampant in the country & the levels of staff sickness are off the scale.
Combine that with shortages due to burnout & lack of training / recruitment in prior years & things are really not great.
Getting over it now but if I'd been working it would have been 3 weeks off. Really is a nasty virus for many even post vax.
That’s not good. Alas similar stories in England. My wife having to wait 12 months for just the booking appointment to get on the waitlist for a critical, life changing surgical procedure.
Officially not waiting in the stats.
I waited just over 36 months for a bi lateral hernia operation and before covid
Not good. I fear this will be at least as long, 12-15 months just to get on the waiting list is not a good sign. Unfortunately the problem is nasty and she already is nearly broken by it.
I am so sorry to hear that and hope your wife gets treated soon
Thanks. Looks like I will have spend our savings and extend the mortgage a bit to conjure up a plan B.
She can't go on living like this, which sounds like a throw away phrase - but I fear she really can't.
Waiting lists are very lumpy at the moment as they are coming rapidly down as just a few stragglers waiting over a year now, and with outpatients reduced for much of last year due to redeployment, not many went on. There are a lot of referrals to be seen, but what the conversion rate for surgical specialities to surgical waiting list will be, we don't know yet.
No one really knows whether 100% or 20% of the missing referrals from the last 2 years will materialise as there are few precedents. So waiting lists are a bit of a guessing game.
Anything requiring an anaesthetist, theatre staff or a surgical bed is not going to be quick. These are all in short supply, with staff vacancies and burnout, and beds still occupied by covid patients.
I’m due to have a biopsy under GA in two weeks time, about six weeks after a previous test where the doctor said I would need it: presumably the possibility that it is cancer (which would not be my first or even third) is putting me towards the front of the queue.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Is that his job? He's the guy who tries to save people money on consumer products and utilities and so on.
He's not an energy policy wonk.
If the government regulators are stupid enough to try and engineer the existence of a lively and active market by pretending some guy in a back bedroom can run an energy utility then that's the government's problem.
His consumer advice over the last decade will have saved customers thousands. With hindsight his advice last year could have been improved on, but not sure how predictable it all was. I certainly can't remember a clamour of other advisers urging people to lock in long term rates above the price cap.
His job was to advise us based on the framework of the government. Using the cheaper small firms had the backstop of govt and industry guarantees, so the risks were small to the consumer.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
It tells us more about Nick Pettigrew, than it does about UK energy supplies.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
No. I said on here before that the regulator have absolutely failed. A totally lubricious situation has arisen, where far too many of these companies are just a joke, literally one of them was owned by a 20 something with zero experience in the industry and no finance behind him. Just a laptop and his mums back bedroom and a willingness to think he can predict the world energy markets better than professional energy traders.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
If Putin's war effort is indeed folding up in ignominious defeat then those of us (like me) who called for a tougher stance from NATO and the EU were wrong.
Right now the forces ranged against Putin seem to actually have got their tactics pretty spot on and that includes Britain and Boris Johnson.
I'd say that the latest risk is how far the Ukr forces in the East can avoid the Ru attempt at creating a 'cauldron' - what in the West we call a 'pocket'.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Is that his job? He's the guy who tries to save people money on consumer products and utilities and so on.
He's not an energy policy wonk.
If the government regulators are stupid enough to try and engineer the existence of a lively and active market by pretending some guy in a back bedroom can run an energy utility then that's the government's problem.
His consumer advice over the last decade will have saved customers thousands. With hindsight his advice last year could have been improved on, but not sure how predictable it all was. I certainly can't remember a clamour of other advisers urging people to lock in long term rates above the price cap.
His job was to advise us based on the framework of the government. Using the cheaper small firms had the backstop of govt and industry guarantees, so the risks were small to the consumer.
When the tide goes out...I think Lehman was making good money in CDS before, you know...Or look at Lloyds - Names were making plenty of seemingly free money until...
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
You'd think the Tories didn't think that it was legitimate to have voters in Scotland elect whomsoever they might want to represent them. I wonder what that mentality might be called?
It's an odd one. You might expect such a position to lead to support for Sindy - hence solving the problem - but the opposite is often the case. Scotland should stay in the UK but not bother us seems to be a fairly common sentiment.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
Moneysavingexpert always gave a best price "mainstream" option as well as best "price" option. If people wanted well capitalised well known brands it was easy to find through them. The risks of using the smaller firms to the consumer were pretty low.
Perhaps 1 year in 20 they end up on the price cap with another firm and no option, which costs them 20% extra. The other 19 years they save 20%.
They get the energy supplied identically in either case.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
No. I said on here before that the regulator have absolutely failed. A totally lubricious situation has arisen, where far too many of these companies are just a joke, literally one of them was owned by a 20 something with zero experience in the industry and no finance behind him. Just a laptop and his mums back bedroom and a willingness to think he can predict the world energy markets better than professional energy traders.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
We were always told even by government to switch regularly. Why is it wrong for him to have made money from his website, are you socialist or something?
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
When he started I don't think there was an issue as such, although I always a bit uncomfortable with stuff like his standard "trick" of keep switching your credit card.
When he took a large stake and active role in moneysupermarket, that is the absolute definition of conflict of interest i.e. owns a large stake in a business who whole revenue model is to take commission from providers to get consumers to switch.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
Moneysavingexpert always gave a best price "mainstream" option as well as best "price" option. If people wanted well capitalised well known brands it was easy to find through them. The risks of using the smaller firms to the consumer were pretty low.
Perhaps 1 year in 20 they end up on the price cap with another firm and no option, which costs them 20% extra. The other 19 years they save 20%.
They get the energy supplied identically in either case.
As I said it all went swimmingly until it didn't. And I don't know about a "mainstream" option but people (moi included) just went to the top three on the list, saw a name that seemed vaguely ok (or not) and went with that.
The whole premise did not accommodate the inherent uncertainty and volatility of the u/l product.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
No. I said on here before that the regulator have absolutely failed. A totally lubricious situation has arisen, where far too many of these companies are just a joke, literally one of them was owned by a 20 something with zero experience in the industry and no finance behind him. Just a laptop and his mums back bedroom and a willingness to think he can predict the world energy markets better than professional energy traders.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
We were always told even by government to switch regularly. Why is it wrong for him to have made money from his website, are you socialist or something?
These websites are incentivised by the commission structures they receive. It has been shown in the past that they have on regular occasions pushed consumers towards deals which best reward the website not the consumer.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
No. I said on here before that the regulator have absolutely failed. A totally lubricious situation has arisen, where far too many of these companies are just a joke, literally one of them was owned by a 20 something with zero experience in the industry and no finance behind him. Just a laptop and his mums back bedroom and a willingness to think he can predict the world energy markets better than professional energy traders.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
We were always told even by government to switch regularly. Why is it wrong for him to have made money from his website, are you socialist or something?
These websites are incentivised by the commission structures they receive. It has been shown in the past that they have on regular occasions pushed consumers towards deals which best reward the website not the consumer.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
No. I said on here before that the regulator have absolutely failed. A totally lubricious situation has arisen, where far too many of these companies are just a joke, literally one of them was owned by a 20 something with zero experience in the industry and no finance behind him. Just a laptop and his mums back bedroom and a willingness to think he can predict the world energy markets better than professional energy traders.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
Lubricious? There have been some strange kinks on PB over the years but getting turned on (geddit?!) by the UK energy market is right up there.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
No. I said on here before that the regulator have absolutely failed. A totally lubricious situation has arisen, where far too many of these companies are just a joke, literally one of them was owned by a 20 something with zero experience in the industry and no finance behind him. Just a laptop and his mums back bedroom and a willingness to think he can predict the world energy markets better than professional energy traders.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
We were always told even by government to switch regularly. Why is it wrong for him to have made money from his website, are you socialist or something?
These websites are incentivised by the commission structures they receive. It has been shown in the past that they have on regular occasions pushed consumers towards deals which best reward the website not the consumer.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
No. I said on here before that the regulator have absolutely failed. A totally lubricious situation has arisen, where far too many of these companies are just a joke, literally one of them was owned by a 20 something with zero experience in the industry and no finance behind him. Just a laptop and his mums back bedroom and a willingness to think he can predict the world energy markets better than professional energy traders.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
Lubricious? There have been some strange kinks on PB over the years but getting turned on (geddit?!) by the UK energy market is right up there.
Hey I watched that Falklands prog yesterday - very good indeed thanks for the reminder.
Spoke with a couple of mates who were on the Galahad. Surprisingly they had some (some only) degree of sympathy with Wilson, who they said was a lunatic but were not sure about there being no right of reply from him (d.2019) and yes, they said that the southern route was ridiculous and everyone knew it at the time.
I spent time attached to 1WG and my CSM at the time recalls having his clothes blown clean off him - as in everything, leaving him without a stitch.
Martin Lewis was not the energy regulator. Just like the FCA under Bailey vis a vis p2p lending, OFGEM catastrophically mis-regulated UK energy markets.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
Moneysavingexpert always gave a best price "mainstream" option as well as best "price" option. If people wanted well capitalised well known brands it was easy to find through them. The risks of using the smaller firms to the consumer were pretty low.
Perhaps 1 year in 20 they end up on the price cap with another firm and no option, which costs them 20% extra. The other 19 years they save 20%.
They get the energy supplied identically in either case.
As I said it all went swimmingly until it didn't. And I don't know about a "mainstream" option but people (moi included) just went to the top three on the list, saw a name that seemed vaguely ok (or not) and went with that.
The whole premise did not accommodate the inherent uncertainty and volatility of the u/l product.
And warnings, as I remember it, came there none.
They were there, but you didn't read them. As an example from an email I received 18 Dec 2017:
Please read how MoneySavingExpert.com works We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of this email and the site. We're a journalistic website, and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques - but can't promise to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.
What you need to know
This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances - and remember we focus on rates not service.
We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned, how likely they are to go bust, but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the section 75 guide for protection tips).
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
Moneysavingexpert always gave a best price "mainstream" option as well as best "price" option. If people wanted well capitalised well known brands it was easy to find through them. The risks of using the smaller firms to the consumer were pretty low.
Perhaps 1 year in 20 they end up on the price cap with another firm and no option, which costs them 20% extra. The other 19 years they save 20%.
They get the energy supplied identically in either case.
As I said it all went swimmingly until it didn't. And I don't know about a "mainstream" option but people (moi included) just went to the top three on the list, saw a name that seemed vaguely ok (or not) and went with that.
The whole premise did not accommodate the inherent uncertainty and volatility of the u/l product.
And warnings, as I remember it, came there none.
They were there, but if you didn't read them. As an example from an email I received 18 Dec 2017:
Please read how MoneySavingExpert.com works We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of this email and the site. We're a journalistic website, and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques - but can't promise to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.
What you need to know
This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances - and remember we focus on rates not service.
We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned, how likely they are to go bust, but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the section 75 guide for protection tips).
Yep and I'm sure all those PPI claims were made by people who always read the terms and conditions.
Edit: and why shouldn't they have investigated the solvency of the companies mentioned?
Doesn't seem to have been an option to say "Labour is the party of low taxes and I disapprove", which would be my choice But still, given how people feel, this is encouraging for Labour.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
When he started I don't think there was an issue as such, although I always a bit uncomfortable with stuff like his standard "trick" of keep switching your credit card.
When he took a large stake and active role in moneysupermarket, that is the absolute definition of conflict of interest i.e. owns a large stake in a business who whole revenue model is to take commission from providers to get consumers to switch.
Why were you uncomfortable about keeping switching your credit card? Through this model, I haven't paid any interest on credit for years...
However, I do have sympathy with your views on switching energy supplier – it's landed me knee deep in admin these last two years with very little financial benefit. That said, it's a symptom of a moronic system – a casino based on energy price speculation is simple madness.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
Moneysavingexpert always gave a best price "mainstream" option as well as best "price" option. If people wanted well capitalised well known brands it was easy to find through them. The risks of using the smaller firms to the consumer were pretty low.
Perhaps 1 year in 20 they end up on the price cap with another firm and no option, which costs them 20% extra. The other 19 years they save 20%.
They get the energy supplied identically in either case.
As I said it all went swimmingly until it didn't. And I don't know about a "mainstream" option but people (moi included) just went to the top three on the list, saw a name that seemed vaguely ok (or not) and went with that.
The whole premise did not accommodate the inherent uncertainty and volatility of the u/l product.
And warnings, as I remember it, came there none.
They were there, but if you didn't read them. As an example from an email I received 18 Dec 2017:
Please read how MoneySavingExpert.com works We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of this email and the site. We're a journalistic website, and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques - but can't promise to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.
What you need to know
This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances - and remember we focus on rates not service.
We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned, how likely they are to go bust, but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the section 75 guide for protection tips).
Yep and I'm sure all those PPI claims were made by people who always read the terms and conditions.
The only people who will have lost following his advice are those who started only in 2020 or early 2021. Everyone else will have saved more than the costs of not fixing last year. Even those few lost because prices sometimes spike, not because it was bad advice.
It is completely different to PPI, where people were paying for something they were not eligible for.
Martin Lewis was not the energy regulator. Just like the FCA under Bailey vis a vis p2p lending, OFGEM catastrophically mis-regulated UK energy markets.
Why have a market at all? What is the bloody point of it? Nationalise it.
It's suggested that household energy costs are going up towards £3000 pa. While this is terrible it may be worth bearing in mind proportionality. 10 fags, and a single daily pint in a pub will set you back about £3250 pa.
Fags are a niche luxury purchase these days. In my student days a bottle of wine cost about 2 packets of cigarettes. That has now inverted, 2 bottles of drinkable wine = 20 B&H. even quite rich smokers smoke smuggled rolling tobacco if they smoke at all.
It's my single biggest line of personal expenditure and by quite a long way. A great pity I can afford it, in a sense.
E cigarettes are much more affordable and I found to be a 'good enough' replacement. Took some getting used to as the patterns of use aren't quite the same (best to think of the e-cigarette as a pipe rather than a cigarette).
Yes, works for some. I want to kick the nicotine addiction though. I'm psyching up to go cold turkey.
An American journalist asked the widow of Charles de Gaulle what she misses most. “Everyday a penis.” Came the reply. The reporter was stunned. “Really.” Came the reply eventually. “Yes. Everyday was app-penis.”
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
Moneysavingexpert always gave a best price "mainstream" option as well as best "price" option. If people wanted well capitalised well known brands it was easy to find through them. The risks of using the smaller firms to the consumer were pretty low.
Perhaps 1 year in 20 they end up on the price cap with another firm and no option, which costs them 20% extra. The other 19 years they save 20%.
They get the energy supplied identically in either case.
As I said it all went swimmingly until it didn't. And I don't know about a "mainstream" option but people (moi included) just went to the top three on the list, saw a name that seemed vaguely ok (or not) and went with that.
The whole premise did not accommodate the inherent uncertainty and volatility of the u/l product.
And warnings, as I remember it, came there none.
They were there, but if you didn't read them. As an example from an email I received 18 Dec 2017:
Please read how MoneySavingExpert.com works We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of this email and the site. We're a journalistic website, and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques - but can't promise to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.
What you need to know
This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances - and remember we focus on rates not service.
We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned, how likely they are to go bust, but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the section 75 guide for protection tips).
Yep and I'm sure all those PPI claims were made by people who always read the terms and conditions.
The only people who will have lost following his advice are those who started only in 2020 or early 2021. Everyone else will have saved more than the costs of not fixing last year. Even those few lost because prices sometimes spike, not because it was bad advice.
It is completely different to PPI, where people were paying for something they were not eligible for.
This is a ridiculous comparison, so I am out!
See ya. For those who don't wimp out:
As I said everything went well until it didn't. He should, as consumer champion, have been querying the system, not jumping on for a lucrative ride on the back of it.
"MoneySavingExpert - cutting your costs, fighting your corner"
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
When he started I don't think there was an issue as such, although I always a bit uncomfortable with stuff like his standard "trick" of keep switching your credit card.
When he took a large stake and active role in moneysupermarket, that is the absolute definition of conflict of interest i.e. owns a large stake in a business who whole revenue model is to take commission from providers to get consumers to switch.
Why were you uncomfortable about keeping switching your credit card? Through this model, I haven't paid any interest on credit for years...
However, I do have sympathy with your views on switching energy supplier – it's landed me knee deep in admin these last two years with very little financial benefit. That said, it's a symptom of a moronic system – a casino based on energy price speculation is simple madness.
Renationalise it FFS. It's all the same juice.
I am uncomfortable because if you have run up a big balance on your credit card you can't repay that is a debt hanging over your head. Now switching say once to try and get your finances in order and repay that debt is one thing, but Lewis advice could easily be seen as no problem keep jumping every 6 months and you will never have to worry.....that was pretty much his catchphrase for ages, every appearance, switching your credit card for a 0%, keep doing it.
The worry is of course those 0% offers end / your financial situation changes for the worse and in the meantime people haven't taken action to repay the debt (or worse spent more money they don't have) or they forget to switch once and get hit.
I notice a number on the left have are very concerned over these providers like Klarna. Don't worry, you don't need to pay any interest, just pay up 3 times in the future. There is a similar concern that people just bounce it all down the road, spending on other things in the meantime and then the road runs out.
Martin Lewis was not the energy regulator. Just like the FCA under Bailey vis a vis p2p lending, OFGEM catastrophically mis-regulated UK energy markets.
Why have a market at all? What is the bloody point of it? Nationalise it.
I've thought about this and on the face of it it seems sensible, however
Downsides
i. Unions push wages up. ii. No efficiency forced through competition. iii. Expectation of treasury busting pensions. iv. Lack of investment due to healthcare and welfare taking priority in treasury spend.
& the gas backbone of the grid has just been flogged to an Oz mining co I think (Though National grid was already private !)
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
When he started I don't think there was an issue as such, although I always a bit uncomfortable with stuff like his standard "trick" of keep switching your credit card.
When he took a large stake and active role in moneysupermarket, that is the absolute definition of conflict of interest i.e. owns a large stake in a business who whole revenue model is to take commission from providers to get consumers to switch.
Why were you uncomfortable about keeping switching your credit card? Through this model, I haven't paid any interest on credit for years...
However, I do have sympathy with your views on switching energy supplier – it's landed me knee deep in admin these last two years with very little financial benefit. That said, it's a symptom of a moronic system – a casino based on energy price speculation is simple madness.
Renationalise it FFS. It's all the same juice.
I am uncomfortable because if you have run up a big balance on your credit card you can't repay that is a debt hanging over your head. Now switching say once to try and get your finances in order and repay that debt is one thing, but Lewis advice could easily be seen as no problem keep jumping every 6 months and you will never have to worry.....that was pretty much his catchphrase for ages, every appearance, switching your credit card for a 0%, keep doing it.
The worry is of course those 0% offers end / your financial situation changes for the worse and in the meantime people haven't taken action to repay the debt (or worse spent more money they don't have) or they forget to switch once and get hit.
I notice a number on the left have are very concerned over these providers like Klarna. Don't worry, you don't need to pay any interest, just pay up 3 times in the future. There is a similar concern that people just bounce it all down the road, spending on other things in the meantime and then the road runs out.
Sure but you are conflating two different things:
1. People taking on debt they can’t afford 2. People paying interest on loans unnecessarily
Switching is a remedy for 2 - nothing to do with 1.
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
No. I said on here before that the regulator have absolutely failed. A totally lubricious situation has arisen, where far too many of these companies are just a joke, literally one of them was owned by a 20 something with zero experience in the industry and no finance behind him. Just a laptop and his mums back bedroom and a willingness to think he can predict the world energy markets better than professional energy traders.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
Lubricious? There have been some strange kinks on PB over the years but getting turned on (geddit?!) by the UK energy market is right up there.
Hey I watched that Falklands prog yesterday - very good indeed thanks for the reminder.
Spoke with a couple of mates who were on the Galahad. Surprisingly they had some (some only) degree of sympathy with Wilson, who they said was a lunatic but were not sure about there being no right of reply from him (d.2019) and yes, they said that the southern route was ridiculous and everyone knew it at the time.
I spent time attached to 1WG and my CSM at the time recalls having his clothes blown clean off him - as in everything, leaving him without a stitch.
Wilson seemed almost a comic book Rupert, but yeah, speaking so ill of a dead one did make me a bit uneasy. I thought it was going to be a series and when I realised not wondered how they were going to pack it all in, but it worked pretty well imho.
A caller in to Jeremy Vine now is asking whether it’s cheaper to boil a mug’s worth of water in a kettle or using one of those machines like a Breville One Cup that boil a cup worth at a time.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
The problem is that energy prices are spiking globally and there's only limited amounts anyone can realistically do about it.
The best idea the Opposition seems to have is a populist tax on energy firms that would discourage the investment we need to bring energy costs back down.
Perhaps the Government will be blamed just because they're in office, that happens sometimes, but there's only so much that can realistically be done.
Yes, your post seems to echo the mood music coming from government. Essentially, a collective shrug of the shoulders. Nothing we can do. Free market innit?
It's a very brave attitude to take by the government. Rope-a-dope. How long can they take it?
Is 'populist' back to being pejorative again now it's something that is popular with the great unwashed and comes from the left?
Yes, well spotted. Starmer knows Windfall Tax polls well and he'll play it to the hilt, quite rightly. We will take NO LECTURES from this Boris Johnson government about dumbing down complex issues and avoiding tough questions.
"Windfall Tax fixes the energy crisis. Why won't the Tories do it? Why are they letting ordinary people take the brunt? Why are they scared to confront big business?"
He was the guy who championed the uswitch model of energy supply when he should have been asking how these companies were structured and how robust they would be under various energy price scenarios.
Why?
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Actually it is the fundamental description of what his main job was, he had / has a commercial interest in exactly people constantly switching (he setup up MoneySavingExpert which merged with moneysupermarket) and become very wealthy of the back of it.
I disagree. His job was to organise the cheapest and best deal for his clients. It wasn't to act as a regulator. That should be a quango or government job. Deflecting blame perhaps?
Rubbish. Listen to him for five minutes. He is a self-appointed consumer champion and invited onto consumer programmes on precisely that basis. As @FrancisUrquhart notes, he made squillions (brazilians, even) on the back of those switching websites. There was never a caveat emptor or if it was you could ask if it was akin to the PPI phenomenon.
When he started I don't think there was an issue as such, although I always a bit uncomfortable with stuff like his standard "trick" of keep switching your credit card.
When he took a large stake and active role in moneysupermarket, that is the absolute definition of conflict of interest i.e. owns a large stake in a business who whole revenue model is to take commission from providers to get consumers to switch.
Why were you uncomfortable about keeping switching your credit card? Through this model, I haven't paid any interest on credit for years...
However, I do have sympathy with your views on switching energy supplier – it's landed me knee deep in admin these last two years with very little financial benefit. That said, it's a symptom of a moronic system – a casino based on energy price speculation is simple madness.
Renationalise it FFS. It's all the same juice.
I am uncomfortable because if you have run up a big balance on your credit card you can't repay that is a debt hanging over your head. Now switching say once to try and get your finances in order and repay that debt is one thing, but Lewis advice could easily be seen as no problem keep jumping every 6 months and you will never have to worry.....that was pretty much his catchphrase for ages, every appearance, switching your credit card for a 0%, keep doing it.
The worry is of course those 0% offers end / your financial situation changes for the worse and in the meantime people haven't taken action to repay the debt (or worse spent more money they don't have) or they forget to switch once and get hit.
I notice a number on the left have are very concerned over these providers like Klarna. Don't worry, you don't need to pay any interest, just pay up 3 times in the future. There is a similar concern that people just bounce it all down the road, spending on other things in the meantime and then the road runs out.
Sure but you are conflating two different things:
1. People taking on debt they can’t afford 2. People paying interest on loans unnecessarily
Switching is a remedy for 2 - nothing to do with 1.
The point is by advocating a message that basically you can get paying 0% interest on an existing debt, many will take that opportunity to rack up more debt. I never felt Lewis was advocating strongly enough that for many having credit card debt for an extended period isn't ideal, instead easily taken as selling a message of you can bash the banks at their own game and have their money for nothing. The worry is that many whose incomes are less stable or there is change in financial markets, the sea is going to go out and they will be left naked. The fact that interest rates have remained historically way below norms means that hasn't happened yet, but if they had gone up to 3-5%, all those 0% offers would be less likely to be about.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
Fair enough. But don't make the mistake of thinking LDs is one step along the road to Labour. On the metric of liberty, LDs are at one end of the spectrum and Labour at the other. The point is, I suppose, that very few votes are baked in - they need to be won all over again each time.
It's good to see everyone of influence now is on the same page on the important stuff, even as they can (and should) still disagree on so many other policy matters.
David Lammy: "For too long, parts of the left, even some members of my own party, falsely divided the world into two camps. America and the West on one side, and their victims on the other. This has never been right, but this view has now been exposed for all to see as a farce."
Says the man who spat his dummy out about "white saviours" Stacey Dooley, where he literally did that, West vs "victims".
He didn't spit his dummy out. He made a point that is interesting to consider, agree or not.
He didn't make a point that is interesting to consider, agree or not; he absolutely nailed the "dying like flies" (white) Western approach to aid.
That's also my view. But my point was more about how odd it is, even if that isn't your view, to call it "spitting his dummy out". There's something going on there and I think I know what it is. Do you Mr Jones? Yes, I think so.
It's suggested that household energy costs are going up towards £3000 pa. While this is terrible it may be worth bearing in mind proportionality. 10 fags, and a single daily pint in a pub will set you back about £3250 pa.
Fags are a niche luxury purchase these days. In my student days a bottle of wine cost about 2 packets of cigarettes. That has now inverted, 2 bottles of drinkable wine = 20 B&H. even quite rich smokers smoke smuggled rolling tobacco if they smoke at all.
It's my single biggest line of personal expenditure and by quite a long way. A great pity I can afford it, in a sense.
E cigarettes are much more affordable and I found to be a 'good enough' replacement. Took some getting used to as the patterns of use aren't quite the same (best to think of the e-cigarette as a pipe rather than a cigarette).
Yes, works for some. I want to kick the nicotine addiction though. I'm psyching up to go cold turkey.
I fell off the wagon quite spectacularly recently after having a few blasts on my mate's blueberry vape whilst down the pub. Gone cold turkey again this week.
If you're still on the fags my advice is get vaping, then drop the strength of the juice down gradually. Start at 20% and drop yourself down gradually to 3%. The cold turkey's not so bad then, you've weaned yourself off most of it.
And try not to give in to temptation when you're full of beer.
On topic, God I hate poor people, always whining, wanting more, they should stop whining and work harder I've been banging on for ages that the cost of living crisis would damage the government.
Edit: or perhaps it's the photoshop. Wine bottles, aircraft carriers...
That shows only two carriers. It is the French carrier in the middle that looks too small compared with the aircraft on the British carrier. Hence, photoshop?
I think they've all retreated. Some say they had gone from Hostomel airport on Monday.
The Russians get to do a bit of a stock-take now. Word is that Putin won't see the comparison between troops and equipment sent across the border and the numbers that came back.
Maybe they'll stick the numbers in an appendix and put a bar chart together instead.
Comments
But they appear to have given it up completely.
The advice is to get a smart meter and see which uses most electricity.
Never mind chicks with dicks or what is happening in Ukraine, terrible as it is, do the government really think this energy stuff won’t damage them, that culture war stuff will get them through? When people are worried about the cost of boiling a mug’s worth of water?
Maybe it will. They certainly seem sanguine about it.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2020/jun/01/weatherwatch-freak-snow-stopped-cricket-on-2-june-1975
On 2 June 1975, snow an inch thick covered the pitch at Buxton in a match between Derbyshire and Lancashire, and snow stopped play at several other county cricket matches. Snowflakes even briefly fell on the Lord’s cricket ground in London.
Raw Arctic winds swept across the UK that day with -3.3C (26F) recorded at Gleneagles, in Perthshire, more like the depths of winter than early summer. Sleet was even reported as far south as Portsmouth, and although the snow melted quickly across southern areas of Britain, it lingered on the ground for a few days in parts of Scotland.
Be grateful for global warming.
They will never overcome the economy. Clinton realised that years ago.
@sdbernard
NEW: Map of territory Ukrainian forces have recaptured from Russians.
Huge thanks to
@Nrg8000
for supplying GIS data at what must have been 3:30am!
@HenryJFoy
@JP_Rathbone
and Roman Olearchyk's fascinating piece on Ukrainian forces taking fight to Russia
https://ft.com/content/9e3f0736-d60d-4627-95fa-ced2aa422a82
https://twitter.com/sdbernard/status/1509794828787331074
The best idea the Opposition seems to have is a populist tax on energy firms that would discourage the investment we need to bring energy costs back down.
Perhaps the Government will be blamed just because they're in office, that happens sometimes, but there's only so much that can realistically be done.
An interesting snippet is that an interned German merchant captain, Otto Burfeind, stayed aboard the Star trying to organise the extremely disorganised evacuation and went down with it; a small act of heroic decency that shouldn’t be forgotten.
@IAPonomarenko
Yes, the Ukrainian military are just kicking anti-tank landmines.
It’s called the Ukrainian curling on the Warsaw Highway close to Kyiv.
https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1509856093459128325
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60949791
It wasn't his job to do that. Where was offgas or offlec, that's their job.
Or resort to Small Beer.
Regarding the trans stuff, my sense was that Rachel Reeves pretty much buried this as a hot topic with a very sensible statement on Sky News yesterday. You can't please all of the people all of the time, so why try? Her position struck me as eminently sensible.
But worryingly, folk seem to be normalising the idea that nukes are the answer.
Greg Yudin
@YudinGreg
I am constantly asked about atmosphere in Russia. I am making a THREAD🧵to give an impression of how it feels in Moscow but also to explain how what I call “A few months theory” reigns supreme 1/19
Greg Yudin
@YudinGreg
·
6h
For many Russians, Putin is testing, once again, the ingrained belief that might makes right. Hubris is unlimited: one simply has to be impudent enough to become the master of the universe. The West is often said to be weak because it is not ready to risk a nuclear war 16/x
https://twitter.com/YudinGreg/status/1509758606689939497
Right now the forces ranged against Putin seem to actually have got their tactics pretty spot on and that includes Britain and Boris Johnson.
It's a very brave attitude to take by the government. Rope-a-dope. How long can they take it?
Is 'populist' back to being pejorative again now it's something that is popular with the great unwashed and comes from the left?
Macron spent nearly €1 bn on Management Consultants last year. Including McKinsey. And they keep recommending reform of the public services. He is getting some stick.
https://www.politico.eu/article/mckinsey-gate-emmanuel-macron-campaign-france/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-53248157
I'm with those who think that a memorial is appropriate wrt the Arandora Star.
I get quite irritated by the extraction of one aspect of a complex historical situation from its context for a rather partisan demand of a particular action now.
BTW the documentary I link is excellent.
He's not an energy policy wonk.
If the government regulators are stupid enough to try and engineer the existence of a lively and active market by pretending some guy in a back bedroom can run an energy utility then that's the government's problem.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
The abstract news that the economic situation looks grim has been building up for a while. But in the main, it's been clouds on the horizon. The real deluge- in the sense of too much month and not enough money- starts now. The recent culture war has been a bit of a waste of culture war weapons.
And, thank goodness, the UK Conservatives have enough scruples or not enough nerve to go full-on culture war, as shown by the wobble on gay conversion therapy.
His job was to advise us based on the framework of the government. Using the cheaper small firms had the backstop of govt and industry guarantees, so the risks were small to the consumer.
But, Martin Lewis, for all his I am saying everybody money shtick, has become very wealthy by having a large stake in a website that advocated constant switching of not just energy, but credit cards, etc etc etc, and the business model of these sites is such that what drives the traffic is guiding towards those paying best commission.
Perhaps 1 year in 20 they end up on the price cap with another firm and no option, which costs them 20% extra.
The other 19 years they save 20%.
They get the energy supplied identically in either case.
When he took a large stake and active role in moneysupermarket, that is the absolute definition of conflict of interest i.e. owns a large stake in a business who whole revenue model is to take commission from providers to get consumers to switch.
The whole premise did not accommodate the inherent uncertainty and volatility of the u/l product.
And warnings, as I remember it, came there none.
https://theconversation.com/energy-price-comparison-sites-are-bad-news-for-consumers-heres-how-to-fix-them-142225
This is even more critical...
A “parasite market”: A competitive market of energy price comparison websites reduces consumer welfare
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519308109
Spoke with a couple of mates who were on the Galahad. Surprisingly they had some (some only) degree of sympathy with Wilson, who they said was a lunatic but were not sure about there being no right of reply from him (d.2019) and yes, they said that the southern route was ridiculous and everyone knew it at the time.
I spent time attached to 1WG and my CSM at the time recalls having his clothes blown clean off him - as in everything, leaving him without a stitch.
Please read how MoneySavingExpert.com works
We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of this email and the site. We're a journalistic website, and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques - but can't promise to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.
What you need to know
This info does not constitute financial advice, always do your own research on top to ensure it's right for your specific circumstances - and remember we focus on rates not service.
We don't as a general policy investigate the solvency of companies mentioned, how likely they are to go bust, but there is a risk any company can struggle and it's rarely made public until it's too late (see the section 75 guide for protection tips).
Edit: and why shouldn't they have investigated the solvency of the companies mentioned?
https://labourlist.org/2022/03/exclusive-39-of-uk-adults-see-tories-as-high-tax-party-vs-27-for-labour-poll/
Doesn't seem to have been an option to say "Labour is the party of low taxes and I disapprove", which would be my choice
However, I do have sympathy with your views on switching energy supplier – it's landed me knee deep in admin these last two years with very little financial benefit. That said, it's a symptom of a moronic system – a casino based on energy price speculation is simple madness.
Renationalise it FFS. It's all the same juice.
It is completely different to PPI, where people were paying for something they were not eligible for.
This is a ridiculous comparison, so I am out!
https://twitter.com/MarQs__/status/1509807486731264002?t=Ku1zb7W43oITvyNt4FeadQ&s=19
Oh never mind about that.
An American journalist asked the widow of Charles de Gaulle what she misses most.
“Everyday a penis.” Came the reply.
The reporter was stunned. “Really.” Came the reply eventually.
“Yes. Everyday was app-penis.”
As I said everything went well until it didn't. He should, as consumer champion, have been querying the system, not jumping on for a lucrative ride on the back of it.
"MoneySavingExpert - cutting your costs, fighting your corner"
https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/reclaim/consumer-rights-refunds-exchange/
The worry is of course those 0% offers end / your financial situation changes for the worse and in the meantime people haven't taken action to repay the debt (or worse spent more money they don't have) or they forget to switch once and get hit.
I notice a number on the left have are very concerned over these providers like Klarna. Don't worry, you don't need to pay any interest, just pay up 3 times in the future. There is a similar concern that people just bounce it all down the road, spending on other things in the meantime and then the road runs out.
Downsides
i. Unions push wages up.
ii. No efficiency forced through competition.
iii. Expectation of treasury busting pensions.
iv. Lack of investment due to healthcare and welfare taking priority in treasury spend.
& the gas backbone of the grid has just been flogged to an Oz mining co I think (Though National grid was already private !)
1. People taking on debt they can’t afford
2. People paying interest on loans unnecessarily
Switching is a remedy for 2 - nothing to do with 1.
"Windfall Tax fixes the energy crisis. Why won't the Tories do it? Why are they letting ordinary people take the brunt? Why are they scared to confront big business?"
This is the way to go. Fire with fire.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/content/dam/news/2021/05/20/TELEMMGLPICT000259146327_trans_NvBQzQNjv4Bqq0hXPkI_GX3QDYmEw99JfDlaTMTxUhlzF8Rkw038U-A.jpeg
Edit: or perhaps it's the photoshop. Wine bottles, aircraft carriers...
The point is, I suppose, that very few votes are baked in - they need to be won all over again each time.
If you're still on the fags my advice is get vaping, then drop the strength of the juice down gradually. Start at 20% and drop yourself down gradually to 3%. The cold turkey's not so bad then, you've weaned yourself off most of it.
And try not to give in to temptation when you're full of beer.
God I hate poor people, always whining, wanting more, they should stop whining and work harderI've been banging on for ages that the cost of living crisis would damage the government.Poor Rishi, he's not dishy anymore.
The Russians get to do a bit of a stock-take now. Word is that Putin won't see the comparison between troops and equipment sent across the border and the numbers that came back.
Maybe they'll stick the numbers in an appendix and put a bar chart together instead.