Howdy, Stranger!

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

YouGov CON members poll has Truss 24% ahead – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,163
edited July 2022 in General
imageYouGov CON members poll has Truss 24% ahead – politicalbetting.com

If other pollsters have CON member polling with similar figures then it is very hard to see Truss being defeated.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    edited July 2022
    Thirst! - like @dixiedean
  • DriverDriver Posts: 4,963
    Second like - well, that is the question.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    FPT:
    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    ON topic, has anyone ever done a prolonged fast, like 5, 7 or 10 days?

    I'm so bored of the Lockdown Podge that I am getting brutal. I want it all gone by end August, and I'm going to kickstart the campaign with a fast


    I've fasted before but only 2-3 days (and even then I allowed wine). I'm now thinking: total water fast, 5 or 7 days. Go for it. Has anyone tried? Will I drop dead or go mad? The internet has varying advice (some day don't do it)

    Did a 44 hour total fast. No food or drink of any kind a couple of months ago.
    That was hard enough.
    Although the craving died off rather than intensified.
    But I wouldn't like to do much more. Did have minor trippy feelings second afternoon.
    Don't encourage him.

    Seriously, 44 hours without fluid sounds dangerous.
    I thought so too. Before I tried it. It wasn't hard at all tbh.
    I didn't say it was hard, I said it was dangerous.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,094
    2019 Tory Leadership Contest
    Johnson 66.4%
    Hubt 33.6%

    2005 Tory Leadership Contest
    Cameron 67.6%
    Davis 32.4%

    2001 Tory Leadership Contest
    Duncan Smith 60.7%
    Clarke 39.3%

    Tory Members don't like it to be close, it seems.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,896
    Betfair next prime minister
    1.55 Liz Truss 65%
    2.84 Rishi Sunak 35%

    Next Conservative leader
    1.53 Liz Truss 65%
    2.88 Rishi Sunak 35%
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Of course if Truss inspires Con inclined voters and the members then the polling decline due to 'not sure/not voting' goes into reverse.
    I can't stand her, but the polling is starting to suggest the public, or rather the Tory public, might not be as negative. Perceived wisdom warnings apply as much as they did to the Bozmatron
    I think an early 2023 GE is possible if we see a bounce.
    Her Redfield score versus Starmer is on a very steep incline.......
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,838
    edited July 2022
    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    Damn stupid. The Navy can't afford the running costs, and more importantly the crew commitment.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402

    Thirst! - like @dixiedean

    It's a standard Buddhist fasting practice. Nyungne. Varies from school to school, but it wasn't difficult at all. And has a long history. So it really isn't dangerous. Almost everyone fears they will die. But they don't.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,361
    So the members wanted a Badenoch v Mordaunt contest.

    Would seem a bit rough to blame the members for electing Truss then.
  • FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    ON topic, has anyone ever done a prolonged fast, like 5, 7 or 10 days?

    I'm so bored of the Lockdown Podge that I am getting brutal. I want it all gone by end August, and I'm going to kickstart the campaign with a fast


    I've fasted before but only 2-3 days (and even then I allowed wine). I'm now thinking: total water fast, 5 or 7 days. Go for it. Has anyone tried? Will I drop dead or go mad? The internet has varying advice (some day don't do it)

    Did a 44 hour total fast. No food or drink of any kind a couple of months ago.
    That was hard enough.
    Although the craving died off rather than intensified.
    But I wouldn't like to do much more. Did have minor trippy feelings second afternoon.
    Don't encourage him.

    Seriously, 44 hours without fluid sounds dangerous.
    I thought so too. Before I tried it. It wasn't hard at all tbh.
    I didn't say it was hard, I said it was dangerous.
    I have to second this, if you're not drinking water for 44 hours its dangerous. It not being hard can sometimes be a warning sign that its dangerous, because it should be hard to go so long without water.

    If you mean 44 hours without eg coffee or soft drinks but having water, that's a different matter. Unpleasant but not dangerous.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,896

    So the members wanted a Badenoch v Mordaunt contest.

    Would seem a bit rough to blame the members for electing Truss then.

    It would be an interesting counterfactual to run Conservative leadership elections (and Labour ones) the other way round. Let the members produce the shortlist and give MPs the final choice.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,003
    edited July 2022
    Leon said:

    Regular intermittent fasting is the way to go - 2 or 3 days a week.

    As said below, a bit like HIIT

    How do you define intermittent fasting, you mean the 5:2 diet?

    I do something like that normally, I quite often go a day without a meal

    Definitions of intermittent differ. What's yours?
    I do 8:16...8 hour window of where can eat, 16 fasted....and basically just live by that. Obviously if going out or away etc, I am not some weirdo, but its my default.

    I don't really buy some of all the hippy dippy stuff about such a regime, but I find it does a very simple thing, it restricts your calorie intake as you basically eat twice a day and you don't really snack.

    The most important thing is it gives you a very simple consistent routine and your body soon adjusts such that 16hrs without food really isn't an issue.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    ON topic, has anyone ever done a prolonged fast, like 5, 7 or 10 days?

    I'm so bored of the Lockdown Podge that I am getting brutal. I want it all gone by end August, and I'm going to kickstart the campaign with a fast


    I've fasted before but only 2-3 days (and even then I allowed wine). I'm now thinking: total water fast, 5 or 7 days. Go for it. Has anyone tried? Will I drop dead or go mad? The internet has varying advice (some day don't do it)

    Did a 44 hour total fast. No food or drink of any kind a couple of months ago.
    That was hard enough.
    Although the craving died off rather than intensified.
    But I wouldn't like to do much more. Did have minor trippy feelings second afternoon.
    Don't encourage him.

    Seriously, 44 hours without fluid sounds dangerous.
    I thought so too. Before I tried it. It wasn't hard at all tbh.
    I didn't say it was hard, I said it was dangerous.
    I have to second this, if you're not drinking water for 44 hours its dangerous. It not being hard can sometimes be a warning sign that its dangerous, because it should be hard to go so long without water.

    If you mean 44 hours without eg coffee or soft drinks but having water, that's a different matter. Unpleasant but not dangerous.
    Why unpleasant? I've managed 22 years without coffee and never felt any particular lack.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    kle4 said:

    2019 Tory Leadership Contest
    Johnson 66.4%
    Hubt 33.6%

    2005 Tory Leadership Contest
    Cameron 67.6%
    Davis 32.4%

    2001 Tory Leadership Contest
    Duncan Smith 60.7%
    Clarke 39.3%

    Tory Members don't like it to be close, it seems.

    They just dont like Europhiles or ridiculous flouncers who pose for campaign pictures with large breasted women
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,706
    edited July 2022
    It looks bad for Sunak but maybe not quite as bad as at first glance.

    The actual YouGov poll result is:

    Truss 49
    Sunak 31
    Will not vote 6
    Don't Know 15

    So if Sunak got all Don't Knows it's on a knife-edge.

    Even allocating DKs which gives 62-38, the point is it's not like a 24 point lead in a normal VI poll because in a head to head, one point off one candidate automatically means one point onto the other.

    It's obvious from all polls that nobody's support is deep - only 13% of members go for Truss (and 11% for Sunak) given the choice of all the original eight candidates.

    So things could change quickly - and the BBC head to head debate next Monday is before ballot papers go out. If Sunak won that convincingly he absolutely could turn it around - but the question is can he actually do that?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,781
    ydoethur said:

    FPT:

    dixiedean said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    ON topic, has anyone ever done a prolonged fast, like 5, 7 or 10 days?

    I'm so bored of the Lockdown Podge that I am getting brutal. I want it all gone by end August, and I'm going to kickstart the campaign with a fast


    I've fasted before but only 2-3 days (and even then I allowed wine). I'm now thinking: total water fast, 5 or 7 days. Go for it. Has anyone tried? Will I drop dead or go mad? The internet has varying advice (some day don't do it)

    Did a 44 hour total fast. No food or drink of any kind a couple of months ago.
    That was hard enough.
    Although the craving died off rather than intensified.
    But I wouldn't like to do much more. Did have minor trippy feelings second afternoon.
    Don't encourage him.

    Seriously, 44 hours without fluid sounds dangerous.
    I thought so too. Before I tried it. It wasn't hard at all tbh.
    I didn't say it was hard, I said it was dangerous.
    I have to second this, if you're not drinking water for 44 hours its dangerous. It not being hard can sometimes be a warning sign that its dangerous, because it should be hard to go so long without water.

    If you mean 44 hours without eg coffee or soft drinks but having water, that's a different matter. Unpleasant but not dangerous.
    Why unpleasant? I've managed 22 years without coffee and never felt any particular lack.
    Coffee is awful stuff. You are better off without it.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310

    So the members wanted a Badenoch v Mordaunt contest.

    Would seem a bit rough to blame the members for electing Truss then.

    It would be an interesting counterfactual to run Conservative leadership elections (and Labour ones) the other way round. Let the members produce the shortlist and give MPs the final choice.
    It would make more sense. The MPs actually know the personalities and they are more representative of the broader electorate.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,901
    FPT
    Leon said:

    ON topic, has anyone ever done a prolonged fast, like 5, 7 or 10 days?

    I'm so bored of the Lockdown Podge that I am getting brutal. I want it all gone by end August, and I'm going to kickstart the campaign with a fast


    I've fasted before but only 2-3 days (and even then I allowed wine). I'm now thinking: total water fast, 5 or 7 days. Go for it. Has anyone tried? Will I drop dead or go mad? The internet has varying advice (some day don't do it)

    Footage of that fast does exist...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI-v4o2HKkQ
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,781
    The Tories have gone mad.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,094
    MikeL said:

    It looks bad for Sunak but maybe not quite as bad as at first glance.

    The actual YouGov poll result is:

    Truss 49
    Sunak 31
    Will not vote 6
    Don't Know 15

    So if Sunak got all Don't Knows it's on a knife-edge.

    Even allocating DKs which gives 62-38, the point is it's not like a 24 point lead in a normal VI poll because in a head to head, one point off one candidate automatically means one point onto the other.

    It's obvious from all polls that nobody's support is deep - only 13% of members go for Truss (and 11% for Sunak) given the choice of all the original eight candidates.

    So things could change quickly - and the BBC head to head debate next Monday is before ballot papers go out. If Sunak won that convincingly he absolutely could turn it around - but the question is can he actually do that?

    Problem is he was deemed to have won the last one, and it hasn't helped his standing with the members yet.

    One would assume a series of strong performances would not go without some reward, but that's not even guaranteed - he's up against someone who's simultaneously the change candidate and continuity candidate, which is hard to combat!
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Despite one poll, which one of our number seems convinced is evidence most people in the country love Liz Truss and are looking forward to the forthcoming economic illiteracy, I imagine the opposition parties are quite content with events.

    Truss will be desperate to get some form of "bounce" and we'll all end up paying for it with her absurd unfunded tax cuts. Clearly, there are those who think cutting taxes is all that matters - it isn't. June's borrowing figures were awful and not helped by rising inflation and interest rates - after all, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods so giving people more money to spend is a sure fire way of reducing inflation?

    The Lafferites and their fellow travellers are obviously hoping the populism will be enough - maybe but I prefer to wonder about increased defence spending, money for education, the NHS, pensions, local Government services and all those small adjuncts to a civilised life beyond simply paying less in tax.

    The Sunak approach is boring but sensible - the Truss approach is championed by those for whom the only nightmare paying more tax is a non-Conservative Government. The perpetuation of the Conservative Party in Government justifies anything and everything including the evisceration of the public finances.

    Simple question for those who think Laffer is nonsense, given we've supposedly had "austerity" for most of the past 12 years and given we've got tax rates at the highest they've been in three quarters of a century - if Laffer is a nonsense why don't we have a huge budget surplus?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813
    edited July 2022
    The outcome was inevitable once the final two was confirmed.

    Truss is going to PM. Short of a scandal, Sunak cannot beat her.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310
    The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!
  • FPT

    Leon said:

    ON topic, has anyone ever done a prolonged fast, like 5, 7 or 10 days?

    I'm so bored of the Lockdown Podge that I am getting brutal. I want it all gone by end August, and I'm going to kickstart the campaign with a fast


    I've fasted before but only 2-3 days (and even then I allowed wine). I'm now thinking: total water fast, 5 or 7 days. Go for it. Has anyone tried? Will I drop dead or go mad? The internet has varying advice (some day don't do it)

    Footage of that fast does exist...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI-v4o2HKkQ
    7 day fast only drinking alcohol.....otherwise known as freshers week at uni.
    Dirty kebabs obviously not counting as food either.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310

    The Tories have gone mad.

    That happened prior to 2016
  • 🚨New Westminster Voting Intention🚨

    📈13pt Labour lead

    🌳Con 30 (+2)
    🌹Lab 43 (=)
    🔶LD 11 (-1)
    🎗️SNP 4 (=)
    🌍Gre 4 (=)
    ⬜️Other 8 (=)

    1,980 UK adults, 15-17 Jul

    (chg from 8-10 Jul)

    BJO please explain
  • The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    My violin for you, actual size: 🎻
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,896

    The outcome was inevitable once the final two was confirmed.

    Truss is going to PM. Short of a scandal, Sunak cannot beat her.

    Six weeks for a scandal to emerge, then, or more likely three given a lot of ballots will be returned early. There are some on pb who expect one, or two.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,633

    The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    With Starmer standing on a platform of Hard Brexit and no renationalisation, isn't it objectively true that the centre is close to where the Tories are now?
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,706
    It's funny how things change - last night Kirsty Wark on Newsnight pointed out that Starmer had campaigned on the basis of keeping the Corbyn legacy in tact.

    The thing is that we just don't know what Truss will actually do - except it almost certainly won't just be what we are expecting.

    I want Sunak to win but have to concede Truss may grow into the role and come across better than we think. And she may get lucky with events.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,587
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-62250899.amp

    Covid enquiry opens, to little fanfare.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310
    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,003
    edited July 2022

    The outcome was inevitable once the final two was confirmed.

    Truss is going to PM. Short of a scandal, Sunak cannot beat her.

    Six weeks for a scandal to emerge, then, or more likely three given a lot of ballots will be returned early. There are some on pb who expect one, or two.
    Don't forget the Tory system for this leadership race, you can vote early and often.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    Personally (esp. as nonUKer!) have zero objection to privately-funded royal yacht PROVIDED
    > private funding included ALL costs including running & staff costs.
    > management was in hands of independent agency NOT under PM or other govt ministers
    > staffing was accomplished as as to NOT be burden or worse on Royal Navy & other military; instead, make it an asset for training & testing, for example by using naval cadets & sea scouts as well as retired & similar naval, merchant marine & other experienced veterans & similar.
    > scheduling designed to maximize UK foreign & economic interests (traditional role) PLUS environmental & educational goals, while allowing some scope for the IMMEDIATE royals to have a bit of fun while boating for Britain.
  • Carnyx said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    Damn stupid. The Navy can't afford the running costs, and more importantly the crew commitment.
    Well Defence spending should reach 3% of GDP under PM Truss so the Navy will have the money in 2030.
  • The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    With Starmer standing on a platform of Hard Brexit and no renationalisation, isn't it objectively true that the centre is close to where the Tories are now?
    Indeed. I'm amused that the notion of cutting taxes down from a 74 year high is considered extreme Hard Right Thatcher Tribute Act nonsense from people who call themselves former Conservatives.

    If taxes were at a 74 year low and a candidate was suggesting cutting them even lower then that might be objectionable, but when they're at a record high maybe continuing with ever higher taxes is not a smart idea?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310

    The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    With Starmer standing on a platform of Hard Brexit and no renationalisation, isn't it objectively true that the centre is close to where the Tories are now?
    Only if you are a populist swivel-eyed Farage supporting nutjob. Then you might consider Mark Francois as a simpering lefty.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402
    Demolish the roof while the storm is raging.
  • Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
    They could have product placement during the Queen's Speech too.

    "Once one pops, one just can't stop."
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,559
    Did the contest for votes of Conservative MPs yet again demonstrate the adage, that campaigns DO matter?

    And could the contest for the hearts, minds and votes of Tory Party members do the same yet again?

    Personally think answers are, 1) yes and 2) maybe . . . but leaning yes.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    MikeL said:

    It's funny how things change - last night Kirsty Wark on Newsnight pointed out that Starmer had campaigned on the basis of keeping the Corbyn legacy in tact.

    The thing is that we just don't know what Truss will actually do - except it almost certainly won't just be what we are expecting.

    I want Sunak to win but have to concede Truss may grow into the role and come across better than we think. And she may get lucky with events.

    Well established rule with tory leaders: expect the worst and you won't be disappointed.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,518
    Wasn’t the NI increase effectively the Tories’ big idea for solving the Adult Social Care problem? (and the movement to scrap it only really started when some of the public finance numbers started looking a bit healthier - but which subsequently have been blown apart).

    In which case, how does she propose to scrap it without opening up the whole funding of Social care issue again?

    I notice for all of her talk about big tax cuts driving growth and paying for themselves, she is still under the surface talking about looking for “efficiencies” in Govt spending… At a time of 9% inflation, rising pay demands and vacancies all over the place and everything already creaking and on the verge of collapse?

    Pull the other one!
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,896

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
    The late Duke of Edinburgh was a second world war sailor. Since his death, is there any great naval tradition in the Royal Family? Prince Andrew, perhaps, but he is sidelined. The younger Royals will not even remember the Britannia. This might be an idea whose time has passed.

    There again, what will happen to all the confiscated oligarchs' yachts?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310

    The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    With Starmer standing on a platform of Hard Brexit and no renationalisation, isn't it objectively true that the centre is close to where the Tories are now?
    Lol. I thought Barty Pinocchio Roberts would "like" that one. He is so off to the hard right that not only would Francois be regarded as a lefty, but so would Farage. I think even Farage might draw a breath before repeating some of the things "Barty" says from the safety of his keyboard
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,781

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Despite one poll, which one of our number seems convinced is evidence most people in the country love Liz Truss and are looking forward to the forthcoming economic illiteracy, I imagine the opposition parties are quite content with events.

    Truss will be desperate to get some form of "bounce" and we'll all end up paying for it with her absurd unfunded tax cuts. Clearly, there are those who think cutting taxes is all that matters - it isn't. June's borrowing figures were awful and not helped by rising inflation and interest rates - after all, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods so giving people more money to spend is a sure fire way of reducing inflation?

    The Lafferites and their fellow travellers are obviously hoping the populism will be enough - maybe but I prefer to wonder about increased defence spending, money for education, the NHS, pensions, local Government services and all those small adjuncts to a civilised life beyond simply paying less in tax.

    The Sunak approach is boring but sensible - the Truss approach is championed by those for whom the only nightmare paying more tax is a non-Conservative Government. The perpetuation of the Conservative Party in Government justifies anything and everything including the evisceration of the public finances.

    Simple question for those who think Laffer is nonsense, given we've supposedly had "austerity" for most of the past 12 years and given we've got tax rates at the highest they've been in three quarters of a century - if Laffer is a nonsense why don't we have a huge budget surplus?
    We don't have a surplus because while taxes are high spending is even higher. Spending is high because we have an elderly population who receive pensions and free healthcare. An elderly population also means relatively fewer taxpayers, and more tax per taxpayer.
    Cutting taxes without cutting spending will increase the deficit. Spending on things other than the elderly is already at low levels, unsustainably so in many cases. And spending on the elderly won't be cut because the Tories are the pensioner party. So Truss's voodoo economics just means higher debt and, most likely, even shittier public services than we have already.
    This is stage two of the Brexit sucker punch that I predicted on here some time ago. Stage one: Brexit, followed by economic stagnation. Stage two: the economy is stagnating, so we must slash the state and tear up regulation. No doubt there will be other stages of even more poverty and anger, even more populism, even more slash and burn. Repeat until we look like Alabama.
  • Yes indeed, NI was Johnson's social care fix he promised for two years.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
    The late Duke of Edinburgh was a second world war sailor. Since his death, is there any great naval tradition in the Royal Family? Prince Andrew, perhaps, but he is sidelined. The younger Royals will not even remember the Britannia. This might be an idea whose time has passed.

    There again, what will happen to all the confiscated oligarchs' yachts?
    Great idea, but a little blingy for Royal tastes I would hope.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402
    Simply saying the economic system isn't working has earned her a hearing. It's true. Corbyn said the same pre-2017.
    Folk aren't daft. They know it isn't.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,896

    Did the contest for votes of Conservative MPs yet again demonstrate the adage, that campaigns DO matter?

    And could the contest for the hearts, minds and votes of Tory Party members do the same yet again?

    Personally think answers are, 1) yes and 2) maybe . . . but leaning yes.

    Not really. At every stage bar one, the person eliminated was the one who'd been the lowest-scoring survivor of the previous round.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited July 2022

    🚨New Westminster Voting Intention🚨

    📈13pt Labour lead

    🌳Con 30 (+2)
    🌹Lab 43 (=)
    🔶LD 11 (-1)
    🎗️SNP 4 (=)
    🌍Gre 4 (=)
    ⬜️Other 8 (=)

    1,980 UK adults, 15-17 Jul

    (chg from 8-10 Jul)

    BJO please explain

    Taken in the round, we saw about a 3 point swing con to lab during and after 'the chaos' and now on average about a 2 point swingback (this one not quite as much). We will get a techne tomorrow and a yougov hopefully and Survation have hinted they may do regular Friday PM releases. Should help fill in the picture.
    I sense we will settle somewhere near an 8 point lead and the next movement will be September after new PM installed
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,647

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
    The late Duke of Edinburgh was a second world war sailor. Since his death, is there any great naval tradition in the Royal Family? Prince Andrew, perhaps, but he is sidelined. The younger Royals will not even remember the Britannia. This might be an idea whose time has passed.

    There again, what will happen to all the confiscated oligarchs' yachts?
    Prince Charles was in the Navy.
  • CiceroCicero Posts: 3,078

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
    The late Duke of Edinburgh was a second world war sailor. Since his death, is there any great naval tradition in the Royal Family? Prince Andrew, perhaps, but he is sidelined. The younger Royals will not even remember the Britannia. This might be an idea whose time has passed.

    There again, what will happen to all the confiscated oligarchs' yachts?
    The Prince of Wales served for five or six years in the Navy and ended up commanding a Mine Hunter, if I recall.
  • The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    With Starmer standing on a platform of Hard Brexit and no renationalisation, isn't it objectively true that the centre is close to where the Tories are now?
    Lol. I thought Barty Pinocchio Roberts would "like" that one. He is so off to the hard right that not only would Francois be regarded as a lefty, but so would Farage. I think even Farage might draw a breath before repeating some of the things "Barty" says from the safety of his keyboard
    I should hope so, Farage can be a bit of a lefty on economic matters. He believes in protectionism, rejecting free trade with America, Australia and the rest of the world, shielding our agricultural sector from competition and so on.

    I'd hope I'd be to the right on economic issues of such a nutter. Its on social and racial issues I take the liberal rather than authoritarian view and differ from him and his racist ilk.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,633

    The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    With Starmer standing on a platform of Hard Brexit and no renationalisation, isn't it objectively true that the centre is close to where the Tories are now?
    Only if you are a populist swivel-eyed Farage supporting nutjob. Then you might consider Mark Francois as a simpering lefty.
    You'd have called the Labour Party's Brexit policy swivel-eyed in 2015. The centre has moved.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310

    The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    My violin for you, actual size: 🎻
    Amusing, but save it for yourself, when you don't get the payout for Sunak. I don't get the feeling you are exactly rolling in it on the cash front despite your hard right views, so I should think a few grand would have come in handy. I will have an even smaller viola for you, though seeing as you seem to follow clowns, a banjo might be more appropriate.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    It’s a fucking stupid idea. The big knobs they are trying to impress are used to being invited onto the sort of yachts the oligarchs used to have or the middle easterners still have. Schmoozed to a level that would induce the vapours of the press if the govt were found to be doing it on a boat jolly in Singapore etc. so unless it’s basically the biggest and best tacky out there - as at least Brittany’s had old school caché - nobody will be impressed.

    Better sense in keeping swanky embassies as you have a good property investment and don’t have the problem when the engines give out on the way to sign a trade deal with some conveniently placed sunny spots with beautiful shoreline when the ministers fancy going all Prince Andrew.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310

    The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    With Starmer standing on a platform of Hard Brexit and no renationalisation, isn't it objectively true that the centre is close to where the Tories are now?
    Lol. I thought Barty Pinocchio Roberts would "like" that one. He is so off to the hard right that not only would Francois be regarded as a lefty, but so would Farage. I think even Farage might draw a breath before repeating some of the things "Barty" says from the safety of his keyboard
    I should hope so, Farage can be a bit of a lefty on economic matters. He believes in protectionism, rejecting free trade with America, Australia and the rest of the world, shielding our agricultural sector from competition and so on.

    I'd hope I'd be to the right on economic issues of such a nutter. Its on social and racial issues I take the liberal rather than authoritarian view and differ from him and his racist ilk.
    Yet despite your claim not to have any truck with his racist views as you see them, you still supported him. You supported a man you considered a racist. You also supported a man known to be a liar. Your moral compass is all over the place Barty. It is about as believable as your "journey" or your story about your "employee" lol. You live in la la land. No wonder you believe in Brexit
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,896
    Cicero said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
    The late Duke of Edinburgh was a second world war sailor. Since his death, is there any great naval tradition in the Royal Family? Prince Andrew, perhaps, but he is sidelined. The younger Royals will not even remember the Britannia. This might be an idea whose time has passed.

    There again, what will happen to all the confiscated oligarchs' yachts?
    The Prince of Wales served for five or six years in the Navy and ended up commanding a Mine Hunter, if I recall.
    Was he? I never knew that.

    Except I must have known that because I can remember Charles' investiture as Prince of Wales. One too many bangs on the old noggin, I fear.
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Despite one poll, which one of our number seems convinced is evidence most people in the country love Liz Truss and are looking forward to the forthcoming economic illiteracy, I imagine the opposition parties are quite content with events.

    Truss will be desperate to get some form of "bounce" and we'll all end up paying for it with her absurd unfunded tax cuts. Clearly, there are those who think cutting taxes is all that matters - it isn't. June's borrowing figures were awful and not helped by rising inflation and interest rates - after all, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods so giving people more money to spend is a sure fire way of reducing inflation?

    The Lafferites and their fellow travellers are obviously hoping the populism will be enough - maybe but I prefer to wonder about increased defence spending, money for education, the NHS, pensions, local Government services and all those small adjuncts to a civilised life beyond simply paying less in tax.

    The Sunak approach is boring but sensible - the Truss approach is championed by those for whom the only nightmare paying more tax is a non-Conservative Government. The perpetuation of the Conservative Party in Government justifies anything and everything including the evisceration of the public finances.

    Simple question for those who think Laffer is nonsense, given we've supposedly had "austerity" for most of the past 12 years and given we've got tax rates at the highest they've been in three quarters of a century - if Laffer is a nonsense why don't we have a huge budget surplus?
    We don't have a surplus because while taxes are high spending is even higher. Spending is high because we have an elderly population who receive pensions and free healthcare. An elderly population also means relatively fewer taxpayers, and more tax per taxpayer.
    Cutting taxes without cutting spending will increase the deficit. Spending on things other than the elderly is already at low levels, unsustainably so in many cases. And spending on the elderly won't be cut because the Tories are the pensioner party. So Truss's voodoo economics just means higher debt and, most likely, even shittier public services than we have already.
    This is stage two of the Brexit sucker punch that I predicted on here some time ago. Stage one: Brexit, followed by economic stagnation. Stage two: the economy is stagnating, so we must slash the state and tear up regulation. No doubt there will be other stages of even more poverty and anger, even more populism, even more slash and burn. Repeat until we look like Alabama.
    So how would you suppose we should get spending down on the elderly population's pensions and healthcare?

    Personally I've said we need to tax the Grey vote more, and give fewer sweeties to the Grey voters which would cut the bills.

    While a side-effect and not the motivation, I'm also quite OK with letting Covid rip even if that means more Covid fatalities which would mean fewer Grey voters at the next election, fewer Grey pension liabilities and fewer Grey healthcare appointments in the future (the dead don't appear on waiting lists).

    But almost every left-wing voter here seems to want to not just moan about the Tories being the 'pensioner party' but want to object any time a Tory threatens the Triple Lock, and any time less than perfect protection against Covid is suggested.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Despite one poll, which one of our number seems convinced is evidence most people in the country love Liz Truss and are looking forward to the forthcoming economic illiteracy, I imagine the opposition parties are quite content with events.

    Truss will be desperate to get some form of "bounce" and we'll all end up paying for it with her absurd unfunded tax cuts. Clearly, there are those who think cutting taxes is all that matters - it isn't. June's borrowing figures were awful and not helped by rising inflation and interest rates - after all, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods so giving people more money to spend is a sure fire way of reducing inflation?

    The Lafferites and their fellow travellers are obviously hoping the populism will be enough - maybe but I prefer to wonder about increased defence spending, money for education, the NHS, pensions, local Government services and all those small adjuncts to a civilised life beyond simply paying less in tax.

    The Sunak approach is boring but sensible - the Truss approach is championed by those for whom the only nightmare paying more tax is a non-Conservative Government. The perpetuation of the Conservative Party in Government justifies anything and everything including the evisceration of the public finances.

    Simple question for those who think Laffer is nonsense, given we've supposedly had "austerity" for most of the past 12 years and given we've got tax rates at the highest they've been in three quarters of a century - if Laffer is a nonsense why don't we have a huge budget surplus?
    We don't have a surplus because while taxes are high spending is even higher. Spending is high because we have an elderly population who receive pensions and free healthcare. An elderly population also means relatively fewer taxpayers, and more tax per taxpayer.
    Cutting taxes without cutting spending will increase the deficit. Spending on things other than the elderly is already at low levels, unsustainably so in many cases. And spending on the elderly won't be cut because the Tories are the pensioner party. So Truss's voodoo economics just means higher debt and, most likely, even shittier public services than we have already.
    This is stage two of the Brexit sucker punch that I predicted on here some time ago. Stage one: Brexit, followed by economic stagnation. Stage two: the economy is stagnating, so we must slash the state and tear up regulation. No doubt there will be other stages of even more poverty and anger, even more populism, even more slash and burn. Repeat until we look like Alabama.
    So how would you suppose we should get spending down on the elderly population's pensions and healthcare?

    Personally I've said we need to tax the Grey vote more, and give fewer sweeties to the Grey voters which would cut the bills.

    While a side-effect and not the motivation, I'm also quite OK with letting Covid rip even if that means more Covid fatalities which would mean fewer Grey voters at the next election, fewer Grey pension liabilities and fewer Grey healthcare appointments in the future (the dead don't appear on waiting lists).

    But almost every left-wing voter here seems to want to not just moan about the Tories being the 'pensioner party' but want to object any time a Tory threatens the Triple Lock, and any time less than perfect protection against Covid is suggested.
    I didn't see much moaning about not having the triple lock last year. Not on here anyway.
    Bringing it back next, yes.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310

    The idea of Liz Truss as PM is pretty awful, and almost certainly guarantees a Labour GE victory, but it is still infinitely preferable to the Clown remaining in office. Perhaps the Tories need a GE bashing in order for them to move back toward the centre. Hey ho!

    With Starmer standing on a platform of Hard Brexit and no renationalisation, isn't it objectively true that the centre is close to where the Tories are now?
    Only if you are a populist swivel-eyed Farage supporting nutjob. Then you might consider Mark Francois as a simpering lefty.
    You'd have called the Labour Party's Brexit policy swivel-eyed in 2015. The centre has moved.
    The Labour Party (of whom I am not a supporter) have taken the pragmatic view that rejoining makes no sense. I share that view. They have not done a complete 180 switch from being pro-European to being a frothing xenophobic bunch of nutjobs (unlike yourself). Polls demonstrate that many people who thought Leave was a good idea now realise it was dumb. You (assuming you are the same person) must have been hit on the head by something and changed in the reverse from one extreme to the other.

    I don't think you would know what the middle road position was if you were standing on a white line.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813
    MikeL said:

    It's funny how things change - last night Kirsty Wark on Newsnight pointed out that Starmer had campaigned on the basis of keeping the Corbyn legacy in tact.

    The thing is that we just don't know what Truss will actually do - except it almost certainly won't just be what we are expecting.

    I want Sunak to win but have to concede Truss may grow into the role and come across better than we think. And she may get lucky with events.

    It is of course conceivable that Truss could be a lucky general with CoL and I suppose it is also conceivable that she might turn out to do a good job, win over hearts and minds, and win the Tories a small majority as a “doer” in 2024.

    We have to acknowledge that events intervene and just because we think Lizzie is crap doesn’t mean she actually is doomed to defeat at the next GE.

    .. what I would say is that becoming PM at mid-term is difficult. I compare Truss to May and to Brown. Both were considered more “serious” politicians with less charisma than those that went before them. Both tried to trade off on that in the early days - May with her strong and stable and Brown with his response to a number of crises in his first few weeks. Neither was able to make this veneer of change and a return to ‘serious’ politics last beyond a few months, because both were flawed individuals who didn’t possess the necessary political skills to be strong leaders and Prime Ministers.

    Maybe Truss is different and she does have what it takes where those two didn’t. I have strong doubts though, given what I’ve seen of her. In fact I think she’s even worse presentationally than both of them.


  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,515

    The outcome was inevitable once the final two was confirmed.

    Truss is going to PM. Short of a scandal, Sunak cannot beat her.

    And Sunak seems more scandal-prone than Truss.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,281
    Thanks for all the advice on fasting


    I'm going to give it a go, probably, just out of curiosity. Try everything twice has always been my motto, and it has served me well. You have to do *anything* twice in case you hate it the first time, but something was just awry, eg I hated heroin the first time and vommed everywhere, but the second time I loved it, and that cued me up for a twelve year smack addiction, so Yay

    Reckon I'm going to do a 5 day water fast. 7 days does sound insanely tough

    Also thanks to @foxy for that "800 calorie" link. A lot of sense in that article, especially this:

    "He also argues that a rapid weight loss programme, like the one they used in this trial, can be a more successful strategy than trying to lose it gradually. “Doing it slowly is torture. Contrary to the belief of many dieticians, people who lose weight more quickly, more emphatically, are more likely to keep it off long term”."

    This is totally true. And this is why fasting is a really good diet strategy (even if my fasts to date have just been 2-3 day jobs). When you fast the weight falls away quickly, which is encouraging, so you stick to the diet because you are getting immediate results, and you want more

    Slow calorie counting when you lose half a pound a week is a recipe for failure
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,838

    Cicero said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
    The late Duke of Edinburgh was a second world war sailor. Since his death, is there any great naval tradition in the Royal Family? Prince Andrew, perhaps, but he is sidelined. The younger Royals will not even remember the Britannia. This might be an idea whose time has passed.

    There again, what will happen to all the confiscated oligarchs' yachts?
    The Prince of Wales served for five or six years in the Navy and ended up commanding a Mine Hunter, if I recall.
    Was he? I never knew that.

    Except I must have known that because I can remember Charles' investiture as Prince of Wales. One too many bangs on the old noggin, I fear.
    Ton class minesweeper Bronington, if that rings any bells.

    https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2022/february/17/20220217-last-push-made-to-save-veteran-minesweeper-hms-bronington-prince-charles-warship

    I suppose his youngest brother can also be said to have been in the Navy, albeit not for very long, as he was in the Royal Marines for a while, though he failed to complete training.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874


    Simple question for those who think Laffer is nonsense, given we've supposedly had "austerity" for most of the past 12 years and given we've got tax rates at the highest they've been in three quarters of a century - if Laffer is a nonsense why don't we have a huge budget surplus?

    You mentioned "austerity" - I didn't.

    I will cut the current Government quite a bit of slack - the response to the pandemic required financial largesse as the economy basically stopped in the spring of 2020. It's no surprise the deficit and the debt increased sharply but the response was required at the time.

    The response traditionally to public spending problems from the Conservative side has been to cut - as Osborne had it in 2010, for every £1 raised through higher taxes, £5 came from spending cuts. The problem is the room for spending cuts just isn't there - defence, welfare, NHS, education are sacrosanct and while I suppose we could cut capital and infrastructure spending that's as short sighted as it gets for future growth.

    Local Government has to keep the care of vulnerable adults and children going so the scope for "cutting the fat" is restricted.

    The other side has been to cut taxes - this of course usually favours the very wealthy and as Sri Lanka has shown, if you cut too much too far for too many you're storing up trouble.

    No one likes putting up taxes (yes, even the Left) but at least Sunak raises the first problem is inflation and getting that back under control. As for budget surpluses, Ken Clarke ran a budget surplus in the mid 90s - he was under huge pressure from a floundering Tory Party to cut taxes in the run up to 1997 as a way to improve the Party's electoral prospects. He refused.

    Sometimes what's best for the country isn't what's best for the Conservative Party.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,838
    edited July 2022

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    I wonder whether the Monarch will have to finish off each speech with "sponsored by....." and be required to do product placement like a James Bond movie? King Charles will turn to the camera and say "Not your Royal Yacht Lizzy, but Your M&S Royal Yacht Lizzy."
    The late Duke of Edinburgh was a second world war sailor. Since his death, is there any great naval tradition in the Royal Family? Prince Andrew, perhaps, but he is sidelined. The younger Royals will not even remember the Britannia. This might be an idea whose time has passed.

    There again, what will happen to all the confiscated oligarchs' yachts?
    Great idea, but a little blingy for Royal tastes I would hope.
    Also very, very tactless at a time of austerity - whether an Ersatz Britannia (as the Germans called planned replacements for vessels) or an oligarch's yacht. The maintenance and crewing and running are an issue, whomsoever paid for the vessel and its kit-out.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,747
    Sunak has been really weak on Ukraine and Defence. He needs to come out over the weekend with a POW BOW WHAM joint front page with Ben Wallace running through their spending plans with a massively enhanced defence budget and in particular the support for Ukraine clearly and unambiguously spelled out.

    His wishy washy “I don’t believe in absolute budget targets” makes him look a wet blanket that doesn’t care about national security. Whoever is advising him on that needs to be fired.

    He can’t beat Truss on the issue, because Truss clearly f*kin hates Putin and Lavrov and the feeling is mutual. But he can try harder to nullify her advantage.

    That he still hasn’t realised this goes to show he is not a very clever politician, much like when he thought it ok for the wife of the chancellor to be a non-dom while increasing taxes to their highest level in a human lifetime.

    I don’t have a vote but if I did right now I’d vote for the cyborg ahead of him on this issue alone.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,377

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Despite one poll, which one of our number seems convinced is evidence most people in the country love Liz Truss and are looking forward to the forthcoming economic illiteracy, I imagine the opposition parties are quite content with events.

    Truss will be desperate to get some form of "bounce" and we'll all end up paying for it with her absurd unfunded tax cuts. Clearly, there are those who think cutting taxes is all that matters - it isn't. June's borrowing figures were awful and not helped by rising inflation and interest rates - after all, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods so giving people more money to spend is a sure fire way of reducing inflation?

    The Lafferites and their fellow travellers are obviously hoping the populism will be enough - maybe but I prefer to wonder about increased defence spending, money for education, the NHS, pensions, local Government services and all those small adjuncts to a civilised life beyond simply paying less in tax.

    The Sunak approach is boring but sensible - the Truss approach is championed by those for whom the only nightmare paying more tax is a non-Conservative Government. The perpetuation of the Conservative Party in Government justifies anything and everything including the evisceration of the public finances.

    Simple question for those who think Laffer is nonsense, given we've supposedly had "austerity" for most of the past 12 years and given we've got tax rates at the highest they've been in three quarters of a century - if Laffer is a nonsense why don't we have a huge budget surplus?
    We don't have a surplus because while taxes are high spending is even higher. Spending is high because we have an elderly population who receive pensions and free healthcare. An elderly population also means relatively fewer taxpayers, and more tax per taxpayer.
    Cutting taxes without cutting spending will increase the deficit. Spending on things other than the elderly is already at low levels, unsustainably so in many cases. And spending on the elderly won't be cut because the Tories are the pensioner party. So Truss's voodoo economics just means higher debt and, most likely, even shittier public services than we have already.
    This is stage two of the Brexit sucker punch that I predicted on here some time ago. Stage one: Brexit, followed by economic stagnation. Stage two: the economy is stagnating, so we must slash the state and tear up regulation. No doubt there will be other stages of even more poverty and anger, even more populism, even more slash and burn. Repeat until we look like Alabama.
    So how would you suppose we should get spending down on the elderly population's pensions and healthcare?

    Personally I've said we need to tax the Grey vote more, and give fewer sweeties to the Grey voters which would cut the bills.

    While a side-effect and not the motivation, I'm also quite OK with letting Covid rip even if that means more Covid fatalities which would mean fewer Grey voters at the next election, fewer Grey pension liabilities and fewer Grey healthcare appointments in the future (the dead don't appear on waiting lists).

    But almost every left-wing voter here seems to want to not just moan about the Tories being the 'pensioner party' but want to object any time a Tory threatens the Triple Lock, and any time less than perfect protection against Covid is suggested.
    You really are quite an unpleasant chap, aren't you, assuming you mean your penultimate paragraph as written?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,281
    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310
    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    It is one of your, sorry his, madder moments. There is no ET. There is no Father Christmas, and Brexit is pointless. All these things are for the extremely gullible and should be as discounted by someone as bright as you Sean, er, I mean Leon.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    What are the aliens waiting for then?

    Are they hostile but polite, and would like to give humanity time to be properly briefed of its imminent demise?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,281

    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    It is one of your, sorry his, madder moments. There is no ET. There is no Father Christmas, and Brexit is pointless. All these things are for the extremely gullible and should be as discounted by someone as bright as you Sean, er, I mean Leon.
    This is a discussion of potential alien life and you managed to bring Brexit into it. And yet you accuse OTHERS of being obsessed with Brexit?
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,293
    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    Sounds eerily similar to the Three Body Problem/Remembrance of Earth's past series.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,310
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    It is one of your, sorry his, madder moments. There is no ET. There is no Father Christmas, and Brexit is pointless. All these things are for the extremely gullible and should be as discounted by someone as bright as you Sean, er, I mean Leon.
    This is a discussion of potential alien life and you managed to bring Brexit into it. And yet you accuse OTHERS of being obsessed with Brexit?
    I just like to tease you, even though I like you. I always miss you when you get banned.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    moonshine said:

    Sunak has been really weak on Ukraine and Defence. He needs to come out over the weekend with a POW BOW WHAM joint front page with Ben Wallace running through their spending plans with a massively enhanced defence budget and in particular the support for Ukraine clearly and unambiguously spelled out.

    His wishy washy “I don’t believe in absolute budget targets” makes him look a wet blanket that doesn’t care about national security. Whoever is advising him on that needs to be fired.

    He can’t beat Truss on the issue, because Truss clearly f*kin hates Putin and Lavrov and the feeling is mutual. But he can try harder to nullify her advantage.

    That he still hasn’t realised this goes to show he is not a very clever politician, much like when he thought it ok for the wife of the chancellor to be a non-dom while increasing taxes to their highest level in a human lifetime.

    I don’t have a vote but if I did right now I’d vote for the cyborg ahead of him on this issue alone.


    Out of interest how do you know he’s been weak on Ukraine?

    Was it from an unattributed comment to a journo saying he thought Russia would win so what’s the point?

    Maybe Wallace will let us know but unless I heard otherwise that comment could come from the Boris camp to undermine him.

    Secondly if he did say something like that then before the invasion and in the early days I think most people were sadly thinking Russia would inevitably win so he’s not out of the ordinary there.

    Third, he’s the Chancellor of the Exchequer so his job in cabinet is to manage the country’s finances first and foremost - it’s for other relevant ministers in cabinet to put forward counter arguments based on their ministry’s research and evaluation. Then I assume it’s up to the PM to take all views into consideration and then follow a line based on their advice.

    If it’s not that then what’s the point in having cabinet?

    Anyway, again and I’m totally accepting I might have missed something evidential that he has been weak on Ukraine, why is he seen as weak on Ukraine?

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    "Friend of mine..." Lol
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    I had no idea Dom Cummings was a mate of yours

    If they want to thwack the shit out of us what has been stopping them?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    edited July 2022
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    It is one of your, sorry his, madder moments. There is no ET. There is no Father Christmas, and Brexit is pointless. All these things are for the extremely gullible and should be as discounted by someone as bright as you Sean, er, I mean Leon.
    This is a discussion of potential alien life and you managed to bring Brexit into it. And yet you accuse OTHERS of being obsessed with Brexit?
    "...don't mention Brexit. I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it..."
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,275
    ITV just showed a group of young Tory members who thought Truss’s economic plan was a fantasy and she was wooden and wouldn’t win the next election but are still supporting her .

    And these people are being entrusted to give us the next PM .
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,716

    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    "Friend of mine..." Lol
    How come these hostiles haven't been erm...actually hostile?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,281
    It is fascinating to speculate what would happen if my friend is right

    If officials at the top of the USG or HMG or the CCP got the idea we were being visited by aliens of supernormal technical prowess, with hostile intentions to mankind, what the hell would they do? How would you inform the people? Quickly, slowly, in code? Would you even try? Would they themselves be able to comprehend something so outlandish AND awful?
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,605
    stodge said:


    Simple question for those who think Laffer is nonsense, given we've supposedly had "austerity" for most of the past 12 years and given we've got tax rates at the highest they've been in three quarters of a century - if Laffer is a nonsense why don't we have a huge budget surplus?

    You mentioned "austerity" - I didn't.

    I will cut the current Government quite a bit of slack - the response to the pandemic required financial largesse as the economy basically stopped in the spring of 2020. It's no surprise the deficit and the debt increased sharply but the response was required at the time.

    The response traditionally to public spending problems from the Conservative side has been to cut - as Osborne had it in 2010, for every £1 raised through higher taxes, £5 came from spending cuts. The problem is the room for spending cuts just isn't there - defence, welfare, NHS, education are sacrosanct and while I suppose we could cut capital and infrastructure spending that's as short sighted as it gets for future growth.

    Local Government has to keep the care of vulnerable adults and children going so the scope for "cutting the fat" is restricted.

    The other side has been to cut taxes - this of course usually favours the very wealthy and as Sri Lanka has shown, if you cut too much too far for too many you're storing up trouble.

    No one likes putting up taxes (yes, even the Left) but at least Sunak raises the first problem is inflation and getting that back under control. As for budget surpluses, Ken Clarke ran a budget surplus in the mid 90s - he was under huge pressure from a floundering Tory Party to cut taxes in the run up to 1997 as a way to improve the Party's electoral prospects. He refused.

    Sometimes what's best for the country isn't what's best for the Conservative Party.
    No one likes putting up taxes

    They do when its on groups they don't like.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663

    Leon said:

    Friend of mine has a theory that the aliens are a probably HOSTILE life form, and all the mystery is because governments have no idea how to break this terrifying news to humanity

    He's a very clever free thinker who sometimes gets things completely bang on out of nowhere - incredible insights - yet at the same time can entertain utterly mad ideas, at least for a while

    I hope this is one of his madder moments

    "Friend of mine..." Lol
    How come these hostiles haven't been erm...actually hostile?
    Biden their time before they Putin the boot?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,896
    Betfair — someone this afternoon wants to lay 1.01 that Boris will leave in 2022.
    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/en/politics-betting-2378961
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921
    Looks like a repeat of the 2001 Tory leadership election at the moment.

    Sunak like Ken Clarke won most MPs but IDS won the membership vote 61% to 39%, similar to Truss' lead over Sunak with members with Yougov
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    Carnyx said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    Damn stupid. The Navy can't afford the running costs, and more importantly the crew commitment.
    But if Truss is planning on resigning in a few months so Johnson can win another leadership election, as he appears to believe is how it works, he can still have the yacht he has yearned for.

    I note he was out campaigning again, so never say never again.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,839

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Despite one poll, which one of our number seems convinced is evidence most people in the country love Liz Truss and are looking forward to the forthcoming economic illiteracy, I imagine the opposition parties are quite content with events.

    Truss will be desperate to get some form of "bounce" and we'll all end up paying for it with her absurd unfunded tax cuts. Clearly, there are those who think cutting taxes is all that matters - it isn't. June's borrowing figures were awful and not helped by rising inflation and interest rates - after all, inflation is too much money chasing too few goods so giving people more money to spend is a sure fire way of reducing inflation?

    The Lafferites and their fellow travellers are obviously hoping the populism will be enough - maybe but I prefer to wonder about increased defence spending, money for education, the NHS, pensions, local Government services and all those small adjuncts to a civilised life beyond simply paying less in tax.

    The Sunak approach is boring but sensible - the Truss approach is championed by those for whom the only nightmare paying more tax is a non-Conservative Government. The perpetuation of the Conservative Party in Government justifies anything and everything including the evisceration of the public finances.

    Simple question for those who think Laffer is nonsense, given we've supposedly had "austerity" for most of the past 12 years and given we've got tax rates at the highest they've been in three quarters of a century - if Laffer is a nonsense why don't we have a huge budget surplus?
    We don't have a surplus because while taxes are high spending is even higher. Spending is high because we have an elderly population who receive pensions and free healthcare. An elderly population also means relatively fewer taxpayers, and more tax per taxpayer.
    Cutting taxes without cutting spending will increase the deficit. Spending on things other than the elderly is already at low levels, unsustainably so in many cases. And spending on the elderly won't be cut because the Tories are the pensioner party. So Truss's voodoo economics just means higher debt and, most likely, even shittier public services than we have already.
    This is stage two of the Brexit sucker punch that I predicted on here some time ago. Stage one: Brexit, followed by economic stagnation. Stage two: the economy is stagnating, so we must slash the state and tear up regulation. No doubt there will be other stages of even more poverty and anger, even more populism, even more slash and burn. Repeat until we look like Alabama.
    So how would you suppose we should get spending down on the elderly population's pensions and healthcare?

    Personally I've said we need to tax the Grey vote more, and give fewer sweeties to the Grey voters which would cut the bills.

    While a side-effect and not the motivation, I'm also quite OK with letting Covid rip even if that means more Covid fatalities which would mean fewer Grey voters at the next election, fewer Grey pension liabilities and fewer Grey healthcare appointments in the future (the dead don't appear on waiting lists).

    But almost every left-wing voter here seems to want to not just moan about the Tories being the 'pensioner party' but want to object any time a Tory threatens the Triple Lock, and any time less than perfect protection against Covid is suggested.
    You've just identified the correct means to solve the problem of the gap between taxation and day-to-day Government spending, if you're committed not to slashing spending. Higher taxes.

    The Truss prospectus is bonkers: effectively, she wishes to cut taxes very considerably without having to make difficult and unpopular cuts to services like healthcare and payouts like pensions, by the simple expedient of borrowing to fund the gap (and keeping her fingers crossed that Laffer will kick in quickly and the proceeds of growth will plug said gap in a year or two.)

    Problems:

    1. She's inviting another substantial ramping up of inflation, firstly through releasing all that extra cash into what is (relative to most of Europe) already a comparatively low tax economy; and secondly through a crackpot borrow-to-spend policy which poses a serious risk of triggering a run on the pound.

    2. She's also burning the Tories' USP as the party of fiscal responsibility. If we can lower taxes, borrow as much as we like to directly fund public spending, and get away with it (spoiler: we can't) then what happens when Labour decides to enter a bidding war and says that it will borrow to give nurses a 15% pay hike? The Conservatives cannot win against Labour on such territory. Or, for that matter, what if Labour decides to say that Tory policy is unsustainable and reckless, and it would behave more responsibly - what is Truss's response to that? Or, for that matter, that of the substantial fraction of the Parliamentary party that will find itself in complete agreement with the Opposition over this?

    Most economists, and almost anyone out in the country at large who can be bothered to take long enough to think about this, can see that Truss is indulging in magical thinking, because daft elderly Tories want to hear that they can have spending on all the things and massive tax cuts at the same time.

    I suppose the best that can be said of this is that at least Truss has gone straight for more borrowing, rather than the alternative fantasy that we could find all the money if only we stamped on benefit scroungers hard enough. Which, given how many poor people are really struggling, how miserly social security is, and how high a proportion of claimants are in work, would really take the biscuit.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 26,605
    With the covid data now only updated weekly has it been mentioned that the latest wave is now receding:

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921
    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    Clever move from Truss, she needs to re establish her royalist credentials with Tory members after that dreadful LD conference speech from her youth
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386

    Carnyx said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Liz Truss backs privately funded royal yacht

    "I do support the idea of promoting our trade around the world. What I would be seeking is to get investment into a yacht, looking to the private sector to assist with that to make it financially viable”

    Victory for @christopherhope

    Damn stupid. The Navy can't afford the running costs, and more importantly the crew commitment.
    Well Defence spending should reach 3% of GDP under PM Truss so the Navy will have the money in 2030.
    I don't think the £15 that will amount to after the effects of her economic policies will go very far.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921
    Italian general election on 25th September, hard right Brothers of Italy lead current polls

    https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1550154165967589378?s=20&t=f37hitfRgvk8yj8YRPXQPg
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,896
    Leon said:

    It is fascinating to speculate what would happen if my friend is right

    If officials at the top of the USG or HMG or the CCP got the idea we were being visited by aliens of supernormal technical prowess, with hostile intentions to mankind, what the hell would they do? How would you inform the people? Quickly, slowly, in code? Would you even try? Would they themselves be able to comprehend something so outlandish AND awful?

    What does your friend imagine the hostile aliens are waiting for? To see the new Doctor Who?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,716
    Leon said:

    Thanks for all the advice on fasting


    I'm going to give it a go, probably, just out of curiosity. Try everything twice has always been my motto, and it has served me well. You have to do *anything* twice in case you hate it the first time, but something was just awry, eg I hated heroin the first time and vommed everywhere, but the second time I loved it, and that cued me up for a twelve year smack addiction, so Yay

    Reckon I'm going to do a 5 day water fast. 7 days does sound insanely tough

    Also thanks to @foxy for that "800 calorie" link. A lot of sense in that article, especially this:

    "He also argues that a rapid weight loss programme, like the one they used in this trial, can be a more successful strategy than trying to lose it gradually. “Doing it slowly is torture. Contrary to the belief of many dieticians, people who lose weight more quickly, more emphatically, are more likely to keep it off long term”."

    This is totally true. And this is why fasting is a really good diet strategy (even if my fasts to date have just been 2-3 day jobs). When you fast the weight falls away quickly, which is encouraging, so you stick to the diet because you are getting immediate results, and you want more

    Slow calorie counting when you lose half a pound a week is a recipe for failure

    The 800 calorie thing, which I am right in think came from the brilliant prof at Newcastle who found you can often reverse diabetes by big weight loss, is tough but doable. I did it a couple of years ago for about two weeks. Lost quite a bit.

    BUT, it is most definitely not the same as a five day fast which is just bonkers in my book.

    I have no idea why you want to stop drinking water as well if you want to shift the "podge"?
This discussion has been closed.