Howdy, Stranger!

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

The first post leadership polling not good for Truss – politicalbetting.com

124678

Comments

  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637

    Woke department, channelling Leon - an interesting piece about how the meaning of "Jerusalem" has changed back and forth over the years. The musical discussion is over my head, but I see the abiguity of the text.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/sep/05/anti-empire-anti-fascist-pro-suffragette-last-night-of-the-proms-jerusalem-william-blake

    Ah, the annual culture war over Last Night of the Proms is just round the corner, isn't it?

    Joy.
    I feel for Leon when he realises Last Night of the Proms is straight out of the fascism playbook.
    Jingoism. Not Fascism. Important difference

    Every country needs a bit of jingoism. I’m glad that ours is a big gutsy cheerful singalong, not a vulgar military parade like Paris on Bastille Day
  • Woke department, channelling Leon - an interesting piece about how the meaning of "Jerusalem" has changed back and forth over the years. The musical discussion is over my head, but I see the abiguity of the text.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/sep/05/anti-empire-anti-fascist-pro-suffragette-last-night-of-the-proms-jerusalem-william-blake

    Ah, the annual culture war over Last Night of the Proms is just round the corner, isn't it?

    Joy.
    It's normally a dirge, but this is a brilliant version: https://youtu.be/QkZhh_7Px00
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    You know that is nonsense no doubt including peoples homes which no party could sell to the electorate
    Because the selfish property-owning class are unwilling to actually share the pain.
    The alternatives are to bring in CGT on own residence sales, and to abolish inheritance tax relief on residences. Both of which have their problems in terms of timing.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650



    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion

    It depends on the details, not least the rate and the duration. A reasonable middle course between the Starmer plan and what we think the Truss plan will be would be to pay the cost of the cap over 20 years, but recover it through a wealth tax and/or an extra band of income tax. Just putting it into debt is the sort of thing that Conservatives always claim Labour will do...
    Future governments can adjust the tax system according to their pecadillos once the inflationary effect on the national debt and the growth pattern is clear
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 32,308

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    You know that is nonsense no doubt including peoples homes which no party could sell to the electorate
    Because the selfish property-owning class are unwilling to actually share the pain.
    And the Pope shits in the woods.

    There are many things that governments could do to raise vast amounts of money for which the voters would slaughter them.

    Do you think that Lib Dem candidates (and in a few seats Labour) in Blue Wall seats would hesitate to make hay with a £30,000 tax on better off voters?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    I just don't see how putting a charge on 20 years worth of everyone's energy bills is viable but putting a charge on 3.4m houses is somehow "unviable".

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    Tres said:

    Reading the life of times of Truss. She has never done ANYTHING of importance has she?

    She went to the same college as William Bradwardine and John Heytesbury?*

    *I recently read a fascinating book about these Oxford mediaeval thinkers and their chums
  • BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    You know that is nonsense no doubt including peoples homes which no party could sell to the electorate
    Because the selfish property-owning class are unwilling to actually share the pain.
    The problem is the political parties are unwilling to propose it as it would be their poll tax
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,876
    edited September 2022

    You need to go back to what happened in Korea during the Japanese occupation in the early 1940s to understand why the country is so loathed. One of the drivers of the South Korean Economic Miracle has been the desire to get one up on the Japan. In my working days I had an office in Seoul

    I believe the occupation and despoliation of Korea went back to the start of the C20th, the antipathy has a long history.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,939
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    Probably 95% are voters.

    Probably less than 5% could easily afford that. Maybe less than 2%.

    Your policy is a guaranteed election loser.

    Back to the day job methinks.
    It's not my policy. I was giving an example.
    'Random terrible policy generator'?
    Better or worse than a Totally Random Unworkable Solution System? :innocent:
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798
    edited September 2022
    Mortimer said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    Probably 95% are voters.

    Probably less than 5% could easily afford that. Maybe less than 2%.

    Your policy is a guaranteed election loser.

    Back to the day job methinks.
    The young/old thing is a red herring. The problem is entrenching generational poverty by hitting renters and earners far too hard.

    I was very lucky to get help from my parents when I bought my flat - managed to get one around 4 or 5 years earlier than had I tried by myself. Since then, all my savings have gone towards holidays/a masters/a bigger flat. On top of that, my flat has increased in value by around 15% in 3 years - that increase is 2x as large as what I have saved.

    Someone who hadn't had the help I had would need to be on a salary around 150% of mine to be in the same financial position. And they wouldn't even have a flat yet!
  • Carnyx said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    You know that is nonsense no doubt including peoples homes which no party could sell to the electorate
    But it is still wealth. And crystallisable wealth. You can sell a house, take out a mortgage on it, and so on. HYUFD is always going on about this wealth and its importance to Tory voters, lsuch as you were.
    If you have followed my posts I am content for an increase in IT unlike @HYUFD

    As a matter of interest is Sturgeon proposing it ?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 14,025
    edited September 2022
    FF43 said:

    When Starmer proposed an energy bill cap a few weeks ago, I thought Conservatives would inevitably follow where Starmer led, despite their earlier criticisms. Including not being means tested. I also expected them to pretend their plan was radically different. This all looks to be the case.

    The Truss plan as leaked likely has a couple of further defects compared with the Starmer one. Paying through future bills is regressive compared with doing it through taxation. The poor will pay relatively more than the rich in the years to come. It's also more costly to borrow that way. This is par for the course. Wasteful and unfair is the Conservative way of doing things these days - Starmer should really be hammering that message.

    Nevertheless capping energy prices is a necessary thing to do - which is why they are doing it of course.

    The politics of it? Don't know, Suspect there will be public relief when the cap's announced but the public won't be especially grateful to Liz Truss for it. It will neutralise a very big issue that she would otherwise have.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696
    Eabhal said:

    Mortimer said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    Probably 95% are voters.

    Probably less than 5% could easily afford that. Maybe less than 2%.

    Your policy is a guaranteed election loser.

    Back to the day job methinks.
    The young/old thing is a red herring. The problem is entrenching generational poverty by hitting renters and earners far too hard.

    I was very lucky to get help from my parents when I bought my flat - managed to get one around 4 or 5 years earlier than had I tried by myself. Since then, all my savings have gone towards holidays/a masters/a bigger flat. On top of that, my flat has increased in value by around 15% in 3 years - that increase is 2x as large as what I have saved.

    Someone who hadn't had the help I had would need to be on a salary around 150% of mine to be in the same financial position. And they wouldn't even have a flat yet!
    And this is another policy that will in effect reduce the income of those without capital assets.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    You know that is nonsense no doubt including peoples homes which no party could sell to the electorate
    Because the selfish property-owning class are unwilling to actually share the pain.
    The problem is the political parties are unwilling to propose it as it would be their poll tax
    Er, I would respectfully submit that that is nonsense. The whole point about the poll tax, as proven on Scttish guinea pigs, was that it was perceived as unfair in making everyone pay the same never mind whether they owned a window box or a quarter of the Southern Uplands. This land levy is completely the opposite.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 4,939

    I vote and I am getting shafted

    Wow. That option wasn't on my ballot.

    Who did you vote for?
    Veritas?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    edited September 2022
    A REALLY good article on the whole Jesus in Cornwall mythos, written by a now sadly neglected author


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/and-did-those-feet-in-ancient-times-9gzlfdmnhj9
  • Thunder and lightning here
  • TimSTimS Posts: 3,664
    Leon said:

    Speaking of countries, i am happy to report that Portugal hasn’t changed

    It is still weirdly cheap and sublimely peaceful in the countryside. Villages go into a coma in the afternoon. Look carefully and everyone gazes pensively to the west, from time to time, as they must have done for 1000 years. Contemplating the crucial but lethal Atlantic coast

    And they are now knocking out excellent wines to go with the still-excellent custard tarts

    It’s not a place to come for excitement, but for a sense of Ahhhhhh: very much yes

    Yes, why is Portugal so cheap? Not just one product, everything. Significantly cheaper than anywhere else in Western or indeed central Europe. Anyone know?

    Even the hard to reach by freight Azores are cheap.



  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    edited September 2022

    Carnyx said:

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    You know that is nonsense no doubt including peoples homes which no party could sell to the electorate
    But it is still wealth. And crystallisable wealth. You can sell a house, take out a mortgage on it, and so on. HYUFD is always going on about this wealth and its importance to Tory voters, lsuch as you were.
    If you have followed my posts I am content for an increase in IT unlike @HYUFD

    As a matter of interest is Sturgeon proposing it ?
    Central exchequer taxes are not devolved* and this certainly counts as one.

    The SNP have been discussing a reform of the rates system, rather too long for my liking, but that isn't the same thing, or for the same purposes.

    * The limited change to income tax rates apart, and stamp duty.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798
    Leon said:

    A REALLY good article on the whole Jesus in Cornwall mythos, written by a now sadly neglected author


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/and-did-those-feet-in-ancient-times-9gzlfdmnhj9

    £26 per month. In the current financial climate...
  • Interesting
    In England recent excess deaths have been highest amongst the most mrna vaccinated populations

    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1566777390499594247?s=20&t=24nBk9TYzOTz-P1Lchs4jA
  • BBC online tonight

    New Prime Minister Liz Truss used her victory speech to pledge to "deliver on the energy crisis" by dealing with bills as well as supplies.

    A freeze on energy bills is understood to be one of a number of options being worked on to help struggling households to cope with soaring costs.

    It is expected that energy suppliers will be able to take out government-backed loans to subsidise bills.

    Energy bosses have been meeting with government officials on the matter.

    A £100bn plan to freeze household bills was proposed by energy companies last month.

    Under the proposal, bills would be subsidised and the current price cap of £1,971 for a typical family would be maintained for two years.

    The BBC understands that a similar scheme will be used to limit the energy price increases being experienced by small and medium-sized businesses.

    And bigger companies may be offered tax breaks to help them through the period of high prices.

    'Bold action'
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798

    Thunder and lightning here

    Careful, you'll give away the location of the BigG bunker: https://www.lightningmaps.org/
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 14,025

    Interesting
    In England recent excess deaths have been highest amongst the most mrna vaccinated populations

    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1566777390499594247?s=20&t=24nBk9TYzOTz-P1Lchs4jA

    Because they are older?

    Didn't check the analysis. Sorry.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637

    Leon said:

    You need to go back to what happened in Korea during the Japanese occupation in the early 1940s to understand why the country is so loathed. One of the drivers of the South Korean Economic Miracle has been the desire to get one up on the Japan. In my working days I had an office in Seoul

    One of my stray random vivid travel memories is being in Seoul in about 1995 as lunch hour struck, Suddenly millions of happy young Korean office workers poured into the streets to eat bibimbap, laughing, chatty, friendly, excitable. A surge of brilliant energy. The Koreans are perhaps more exuberant than the relatively introverted Japanese, which added to the vibe

    The sense of a country on the rise and going places was palpable. And so it has proved
    I don't have very many travel stories, but I travelled to Daejeon, 3 hours from Seoul by bus, for a scientific conference around 2009-ish. Plenary session was delivered by the South Korean Prime Minister, I think it was, so security was very tight, and given the size of the conference it was translated into a myriad of different languages you could listen to on headphones like being at the UN, or something. From memory it was relatively soon after an unfortunate incident with a ship and a N. Korean mine, so I seem to remember relation were...tense... at the time, even by usual standards.

    The people were lovely - absolutely desperate to practice their (most excellent) English with any Westerner who'd chat to them. They really loved to talk about football, particularly Man Utd. so I hope I didn't disappoint them too much when I mentioned Scottish football in return (as I was legally bound to) :smiley:
    Koreans are good fun. And nowhere near as buttoned up as some western perceptions say

    Squid Game actually gives a decent portrayal. They are nothing like as socially policed as the Japanese (who are also good fun, but in a different form)
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,110

    Interesting
    In England recent excess deaths have been highest amongst the most mrna vaccinated populations

    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1566777390499594247?s=20&t=24nBk9TYzOTz-P1Lchs4jA

    That looks very similar actually.
  • Eabhal said:

    Thunder and lightning here

    Careful, you'll give away the location of the BigG bunker: https://www.lightningmaps.org/
    It is OK - Llandudno is quite a large resort
  • FF43 said:

    Interesting
    In England recent excess deaths have been highest amongst the most mrna vaccinated populations

    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1566777390499594247?s=20&t=24nBk9TYzOTz-P1Lchs4jA

    Because they are older?

    Didn't check the analysis. Sorry.
    No the key is excess deaths....its controlled for age....
  • Like most quickies, they are neither memorable nor enjoyable. Ignore for 12 months and see when we are then.
    Priti has gone.. be thankful.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 1,477
    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    A REALLY good article on the whole Jesus in Cornwall mythos, written by a now sadly neglected author


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/and-did-those-feet-in-ancient-times-9gzlfdmnhj9

    £26 per month. In the current financial climate...
    If you go abroad, try signing up whilst there: I have been paying £5 a month for The Times for years.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,110
    FF43 said:

    Interesting
    In England recent excess deaths have been highest amongst the most mrna vaccinated populations

    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1566777390499594247?s=20&t=24nBk9TYzOTz-P1Lchs4jA

    Because they are older?

    Didn't check the analysis. Sorry.
    The analysis has nothing to do with MRNA vaccination status.
  • Interesting
    In England recent excess deaths have been highest amongst the most mrna vaccinated populations

    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1566777390499594247?s=20&t=24nBk9TYzOTz-P1Lchs4jA

    What? Are you seriously telling us that old people (most likely to be vaccinated) are more likely to die than young people? Extraordinary stuff.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576

    Interesting
    In England recent excess deaths have been highest amongst the most mrna vaccinated populations

    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1566777390499594247?s=20&t=24nBk9TYzOTz-P1Lchs4jA

    Good evening. Do you have strong feelings on Ivermectin too?

    We are seeing high excess deaths now because they were low in previous months, that and we’ve seen a bump from a heatwave, and covid ain’t gone away.

  • BBC online tonight

    New Prime Minister Liz Truss used her victory speech to pledge to "deliver on the energy crisis" by dealing with bills as well as supplies.

    A freeze on energy bills is understood to be one of a number of options being worked on to help struggling households to cope with soaring costs.

    It is expected that energy suppliers will be able to take out government-backed loans to subsidise bills.

    Energy bosses have been meeting with government officials on the matter.

    A £100bn plan to freeze household bills was proposed by energy companies last month.

    Under the proposal, bills would be subsidised and the current price cap of £1,971 for a typical family would be maintained for two years.

    The BBC understands that a similar scheme will be used to limit the energy price increases being experienced by small and medium-sized businesses.

    And bigger companies may be offered tax breaks to help them through the period of high prices.

    'Bold action'

    For clarification - Bold action are the BBC words not mine
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    TimS said:

    Leon said:

    Speaking of countries, i am happy to report that Portugal hasn’t changed

    It is still weirdly cheap and sublimely peaceful in the countryside. Villages go into a coma in the afternoon. Look carefully and everyone gazes pensively to the west, from time to time, as they must have done for 1000 years. Contemplating the crucial but lethal Atlantic coast

    And they are now knocking out excellent wines to go with the still-excellent custard tarts

    It’s not a place to come for excitement, but for a sense of Ahhhhhh: very much yes

    Yes, why is Portugal so cheap? Not just one product, everything. Significantly cheaper than anywhere else in Western or indeed central Europe. Anyone know?

    Even the hard to reach by freight Azores are cheap.




    The one thing that ISN’T cheap is good property. Presumably a lot of people have looked at how cheap Portugal is, and sunny, and crime-free, and thought: I’d like a second home there

    Big problem for the locals, tho they need the incomers
  • This is more on the phenomena of excess deaths now occurring round the world

    https://twitter.com/afshineemrani/status/1564000788107513856?s=20&t=IU1zfGr3VI5_JmiHBopGxQ
  • Leon said:

    Woke department, channelling Leon - an interesting piece about how the meaning of "Jerusalem" has changed back and forth over the years. The musical discussion is over my head, but I see the abiguity of the text.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/sep/05/anti-empire-anti-fascist-pro-suffragette-last-night-of-the-proms-jerusalem-william-blake

    Of course Blake was a revolutionary. It is amazing he has ever fallen out of favour with the Woke Left

    One thing tho: I am almost certain he WAS referring to the myth of Jesus landing, as a boy, in a Cornish cove. “And did those feet” refers to Jesus not the obscure uncle Joseph of Arimathea (who came back with the Grail)

    True story: many years ago i went for a walk around St Anthony Head across the waters from yachty St Mawes. As I approached Place Manor i was drawn to one shining little cove, overhung with tamarisks and cedars. Just so luminously beautiful

    i got back to my family house in Truro and relayed my experience, and my Dad said: “Er, you do realise that is supposedly the cove where Jesus landed, as a boy”

    I had no idea at all. Really. i had no idea Blake had referenced it, I had no idea the legend existed. Yet I was struck by that same cove

    I don’t believe Jesus landed as a boy in Cornwall. I do believe some places have a genius of their own, which inspire legends
    Jesus couldn't have landed in Cornwall. If he had he would have never left.

    Have you seen Jerusalem, the play? It captures something of the myths and legends of old England vibe of the song. Mark Rylance is fucking brilliant in it.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,110
    edited September 2022

    This is more on the phenomena of excess deaths now occurring round the world

    https://twitter.com/afshineemrani/status/1564000788107513856?s=20&t=IU1zfGr3VI5_JmiHBopGxQ

    It's funny, the text of the tweet is completely unrelated to what the graph is showing.
  • "But so far, her thinking seems to involve borrowing on a scale that when advocated by Jeremy Corbyn triggered doomsday warnings of slashed national credit ratings, maybe even a full-blown sovereign debt crisis and the humiliation of an IMF bailout."

    Guardian.

    They have a point.
  • Eabhal said:

    Thunder and lightning here

    Careful, you'll give away the location of the BigG bunker: https://www.lightningmaps.org/
    It is OK - Llandudno is quite a large resort
    Big G is in the REALLY large house!
  • Leon said:

    Woke department, channelling Leon - an interesting piece about how the meaning of "Jerusalem" has changed back and forth over the years. The musical discussion is over my head, but I see the abiguity of the text.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/sep/05/anti-empire-anti-fascist-pro-suffragette-last-night-of-the-proms-jerusalem-william-blake

    Of course Blake was a revolutionary. It is amazing he has ever fallen out of favour with the Woke Left

    One thing tho: I am almost certain he WAS referring to the myth of Jesus landing, as a boy, in a Cornish cove. “And did those feet” refers to Jesus not the obscure uncle Joseph of Arimathea (who came back with the Grail)

    True story: many years ago i went for a walk around St Anthony Head across the waters from yachty St Mawes. As I approached Place Manor i was drawn to one shining little cove, overhung with tamarisks and cedars. Just so luminously beautiful

    i got back to my family house in Truro and relayed my experience, and my Dad said: “Er, you do realise that is supposedly the cove where Jesus landed, as a boy”

    I had no idea at all. Really. i had no idea Blake had referenced it, I had no idea the legend existed. Yet I was struck by that same cove

    I don’t believe Jesus landed as a boy in Cornwall. I do believe some places have a genius of their own, which inspire legends
    Jesus couldn't have landed in Cornwall. If he had he would have never left.

    Have you seen Jerusalem, the play? It captures something of the myths and legends of old England vibe of the song. Mark Rylance is fucking brilliant in it.
    I thought he was at Old Trafford yesterday !!!
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,423
    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    A REALLY good article on the whole Jesus in Cornwall mythos, written by a now sadly neglected author


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/and-did-those-feet-in-ancient-times-9gzlfdmnhj9

    £26 per month. In the current financial climate...
    I read a few articles free by registering without paying.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576

    "But so far, her thinking seems to involve borrowing on a scale that when advocated by Jeremy Corbyn triggered doomsday warnings of slashed national credit ratings, maybe even a full-blown sovereign debt crisis and the humiliation of an IMF bailout."

    Guardian.

    They have a point.

    I thought that was borrowing in normal economic times, not in a crisis?
  • This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,506
    edited September 2022

    Leon said:

    Woke department, channelling Leon - an interesting piece about how the meaning of "Jerusalem" has changed back and forth over the years. The musical discussion is over my head, but I see the abiguity of the text.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/sep/05/anti-empire-anti-fascist-pro-suffragette-last-night-of-the-proms-jerusalem-william-blake

    Of course Blake was a revolutionary. It is amazing he has ever fallen out of favour with the Woke Left

    One thing tho: I am almost certain he WAS referring to the myth of Jesus landing, as a boy, in a Cornish cove. “And did those feet” refers to Jesus not the obscure uncle Joseph of Arimathea (who came back with the Grail)

    True story: many years ago i went for a walk around St Anthony Head across the waters from yachty St Mawes. As I approached Place Manor i was drawn to one shining little cove, overhung with tamarisks and cedars. Just so luminously beautiful

    i got back to my family house in Truro and relayed my experience, and my Dad said: “Er, you do realise that is supposedly the cove where Jesus landed, as a boy”

    I had no idea at all. Really. i had no idea Blake had referenced it, I had no idea the legend existed. Yet I was struck by that same cove

    I don’t believe Jesus landed as a boy in Cornwall. I do believe some places have a genius of their own, which inspire legends
    Jesus couldn't have landed in Cornwall. If he had he would have never left.

    Have you seen Jerusalem, the play? It captures something of the myths and legends of old England vibe of the song. Mark Rylance is fucking brilliant in it.
    I thought he was at Old Trafford yesterday !!!
    Why would Mark Rylance have been at Old Trafford?

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 14,025
    Tres said:

    Reading the life and times of Truss. She has never done ANYTHING of importance has she?

    She got a good number of non-EU rollover trade agreements through. Not quite as good in aggregate as the EU agreements they replaced, but will have taken considerable project-management effort. Truss clearly wasn't the project manager but can reasonably take credit for the relative success of whoever it was.

    Don't think she has done anything else of note in a longish ministerial career but has overseen more than her share of screw-ups.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    edited September 2022

    Interesting
    In England recent excess deaths have been highest amongst the most mrna vaccinated populations

    https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1566777390499594247?s=20&t=24nBk9TYzOTz-P1Lchs4jA

    Good evening. Do you have strong feelings on Ivermectin too?

    We are seeing high excess deaths now because they were low in previous months, that and we’ve seen a bump from a heatwave, and covid ain’t gone away.

    Oh yes, the stats prove that if you infect yourself with worms (round ones only, not flat ones) and then take ivermectin, you do a lot better as a covid patient.*

    *THis is not serious, IANAD, etc.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798

    This is more on the phenomena of excess deaths now occurring round the world

    https://twitter.com/afshineemrani/status/1564000788107513856?s=20&t=IU1zfGr3VI5_JmiHBopGxQ

    Welcome! We are certainly running excess deaths at the moment in the UK. The general theory (I'm sure PB doctors will jump in) is that the waiting lists are actually having a bit of an impact on avoidable deaths. Quite young too, so hitting QALYs.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 1,477
    Andy_JS said:

    Eabhal said:

    Leon said:

    A REALLY good article on the whole Jesus in Cornwall mythos, written by a now sadly neglected author


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/and-did-those-feet-in-ancient-times-9gzlfdmnhj9

    £26 per month. In the current financial climate...
    I read a few articles free by registering without paying.
    Pasting URLs into archive.ph also works, for those comfortable with that sort of thing.
  • Evening all! Have I missed much? :lol:
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 7,459
    edited September 2022
    Paul Johnson of the IFS sounding distinctly iffy about Truss overall, on C4 news earlier. He seems to draw a very clear disrinction between what he calls "essential one-off costs", like the GFC, pandemic and energy crisis, and what he calls the "permanent costs" to the economy in the long-term of tax cuts.

    Reading between the lines of his incredibly cautious usual economist-speak, if he thinks the combination of the energy bailout and the "permanent costs" of the tax cuts might create a situation that's "less sustainable", he's obvioualy concerned.

    I wonder if there's actually some mileage here for Starmer to go very heavily on the tax cuts in the kind of simultaneously Blairite and Corbynite language that I think might win him the election, and that I personally would support. It's economically extremely unwise and non-sensible, and it's also socially unfair, an outrage, even, at a time when we're all struggling so much, for the top earners to get the most gains. And he'd be absolutely right to say all that, too.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,110

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,354
    edited September 2022

    Eabhal said:

    Thunder and lightning here

    Careful, you'll give away the location of the BigG bunker: https://www.lightningmaps.org/
    It is OK - Llandudno is quite a large resort
    Big G is in the REALLY large house!
    It is fairly large but it is the family home, our three children been raised here, two of which have provided us with 5 grandchildren, the latest at 7.50 am this morning
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 14,025

    Paul Johnson of the IFS sounding distinctly iffy about Truss overall, on C4 news earlier. He seems to draw a very clear disrinction between what he calls "essential one-off costs", like the GFC, pandemic and energy crisis, and what he calls the "permanent costs" to the economy in the long-term of tax cuts,

    Reading between the lines of his incredibly cautious usual economist-speak, if he thinks the combination of the energy bailout and the "permanent costs" of the tax cuts might create a situation that's "less sustainable", he's obvioualy concerned.

    I wonder if there's actually some mileage here for Starmer to go very heavily on the tax cuts in the kind of simlutaneously Blairite and Corbynite language that I think might win him the election. It's economically extremely unwise and non-sensible, and it's also socially unfair, an outrage, even, at a time when we're all struggling so much, for the top earners to get the most gains. And he'd be absolutely right, in saying all that, too.

    "Tories are both wasteful and unfair"
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,423

    IshmaelZ said:

    I vote and I am getting shafted

    Your age cohort does not, or not enough.
    I agree.

    But I do and I am getting shafted.

    Pay for the elderly twats. Fuck them
    Why do young people compare themselves with elderly people when the correct comparison would be for young people today to compare themselves with previous generations at the same age? You'd find that most baby boomers weren't travelling much or eating out much when they were young.
  • This is what ed dowd says about disability due to the vaccines.

    And the impacts to society are way worse than a sudden death … My partner, who was an ex-Wall Street insurance analyst, discovered a Federal database, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the good news about them is they don’t have any skin in this game.

    They do a household survey every month. Every month we get the employment numbers that comes from them, and they do a bunch of different questions, some of which are in regards to disability, which essentially come down to ‘Are you disabled and/or is anybody in your household disabled of working age?’

    For the five years prior to 2021, that number was between 29 million and 30 million. It’s now 33 million and growing significantly since 2021. And it really started to take off in May, June of 2021. I had some Ph.D. physicists who’ve done some statistical analyses, and they’re saying that it’s almost a four-standard deviation above the norm, and the slope of it, the rate of change, is alarming.

    We’ve increased the disabled by 10%. Now, this has nothing to do with disability claims. This is self-identification. This is not tied to a doctor’s note or getting on disability. This is just someone saying, voluntarily, that they’re disabled …

    So, the number of disabled could be way, way more. We’re just scratching the surface here. But the signal is the change, the rate of change, the standard deviation above the norm, which is four. Three standard deviations is crazy. Four is like, ‘WOW!’ So, this is what’s going on. If you ask yourself, why is there a labor shortage? I think this explains a lot.

    And you multiply this globally, and they talk about supply chains and inability to hire people — this is definitely going on. I also think a large part of the inflation we’re seeing is due to people not able to work.”

  • BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    You know that is nonsense no doubt including peoples homes which no party could sell to the electorate
    Because the selfish property-owning class are unwilling to actually share the pain.
    So why complicate an important policy rather than just having a wealth tax separately?
  • Leon said:

    Woke department, channelling Leon - an interesting piece about how the meaning of "Jerusalem" has changed back and forth over the years. The musical discussion is over my head, but I see the abiguity of the text.

    https://www.theguardian.com/music/2022/sep/05/anti-empire-anti-fascist-pro-suffragette-last-night-of-the-proms-jerusalem-william-blake

    Of course Blake was a revolutionary. It is amazing he has ever fallen out of favour with the Woke Left

    One thing tho: I am almost certain he WAS referring to the myth of Jesus landing, as a boy, in a Cornish cove. “And did those feet” refers to Jesus not the obscure uncle Joseph of Arimathea (who came back with the Grail)

    True story: many years ago i went for a walk around St Anthony Head across the waters from yachty St Mawes. As I approached Place Manor i was drawn to one shining little cove, overhung with tamarisks and cedars. Just so luminously beautiful

    i got back to my family house in Truro and relayed my experience, and my Dad said: “Er, you do realise that is supposedly the cove where Jesus landed, as a boy”

    I had no idea at all. Really. i had no idea Blake had referenced it, I had no idea the legend existed. Yet I was struck by that same cove

    I don’t believe Jesus landed as a boy in Cornwall. I do believe some places have a genius of their own, which inspire legends
    Jesus couldn't have landed in Cornwall. If he had he would have never left.

    Have you seen Jerusalem, the play? It captures something of the myths and legends of old England vibe of the song. Mark Rylance is fucking brilliant in it.
    I thought he was at Old Trafford yesterday !!!
    Why would Mark Rylance have been at Old Trafford?

    I thought Arsenal had a Jesus
  • RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,696

    BBC economics editor saying that Truss and her team are engaged with energy companies as of now to agree a 2 year energy price cap for consumers at a cost of approximately 90 billion

    Additional a price cap of some sort will also apply to small businesses inflating the figure over £100 billion

    If Truss announces this scheme or something similar than the debate changes and of course consumers will be relieved

    And before anyone says windfall taxes will pay for this they simply will not, and it is likely to be a scheme payable over 20 years on energy bills

    Depends on the level of the cap.

    But yeah, make millennials pay for it. Again.
    If it’s being repaid through energy bills the millennials will also be getting the benefit.

    The current asset rich should be paying. It shouldn't be coming out of the future income of the young, who already face a ridiculous cost of living.
    You are conflating 2 issues

    If you believe energy prices are too high solve that

    If you believe that the asset rich aren’t paying their fair share then solve that

    Don’t try to use the same solution to address two problems
    Truss’s solution is not going to reduce energy prices, nor is it going to make the asset rich pay their fair share, so I’m not sure what your point is.
    You are complaining that the cost of the freeze will be paid for out of taxation not by the asset rich.

    Money is fungible - pay for the cost of the freeze out of borrowing and then look at the appropriate tax structure

    Don’t design a complicated scheme to make the asset rich pay for the cost of the freeze directly
    Why do you think "let everyone pay over 20 years" is any less complicated than "let the rich pay now"?
    I come back to the two questions I raised

    How much does a windfall tax and even a wealth tax ameliorate the £100 billion
    According to a quick Google, 3.5m households are millionaires.

    £28k ish each is £100 billion. You're welcome.
    You know that is nonsense no doubt including peoples homes which no party could sell to the electorate
    Because the selfish property-owning class are unwilling to actually share the pain.
    So why complicate an important policy rather than just having a wealth tax separately?
    The policy is already complicated with a repayment mechanism!
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798

    Eabhal said:

    Thunder and lightning here

    Careful, you'll give away the location of the BigG bunker: https://www.lightningmaps.org/
    It is OK - Llandudno is quite a large resort
    Big G is in the REALLY large house!
    It is fairly large but it is the family home, our three children been raised here, two of which have provided us with 5 grandchildren, the latest at 7.50 am this morning
    Genetic and capital flex of the evening. Congrats!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,110
    .

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
    Ah, yes, "facts".
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 28,836
    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Must be from Inverness (though not typical of the place):

    https://www.google.com/maps/@57.4785084,-4.2311338,3a,31.6y,163.61h,88.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8w22Ni5ETxDvZKfPzMY57g!2e0!5s20201101T000000!7i16384!8i8192
  • Must say having a good old-fashioned anti-vaxxer on the board makes a refreshing change from the Russian trolls we've had recently.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    I hesitate to engage with you as you clearly have come here to vent anti-vax tripe. What is the IFR for covid without vaccines? And how many people have died as a result of the vaccines? Sadly the second number is not zero, but it’s a tiny fraction of the billions who have had it.

    Do you believe you know better than the scientists at the MHRA, EMA, FDA etc? I happen to know some who work for the MHRA and FDA and they are not stupid people.

    You are, though.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798
    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Must be from Inverness (though not typical of the place):

    https://www.google.com/maps/@57.4785084,-4.2311338,3a,31.6y,163.61h,88.11t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8w22Ni5ETxDvZKfPzMY57g!2e0!5s20201101T000000!7i16384!8i8192
    My only problem with those guys is how shit a job they do with the graffiti on the signs up the A9. Terrible handwriting.
  • It's a good job Jesus didn't land in Sunderland.

  • RobD said:

    .

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
    Ah, yes, "facts".
    You ought to ask someone like MaxPB with his irregular heartbeat. Could be one of the vaccine injured
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576
    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Surely better to try for AV for a first post? Or just diss Radiohead.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 32,145
    eek said:

    Leon said:

    2000 Dinghy People crossed at the weekend

    I quite like Priti Patel - or at least I weirdly fancy her - but she had one job, and she failed. Exeunt

    So how would you solve the problem in a way that doesn't break international and maritime law???
    Dead simple.

    100k fine on any employer of undocumented workers.

    The employee who shops them and gives evidence, gets 50k and unlimited leave to remain.

    The ambulance chasing vultures who cold call about car accidents will be queuing round the block to take cases on for a slice of the 50k…

  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 6,907
    Tres said:

    Reading the life and times of Truss. She has never done ANYTHING of importance has she?

    She looks sweet and vulnerable and charming here:

    https://tinyurl.com/2tehds9w

    as she holds the Paisley CND banner at Greenham.

    And Father Truss looks dapper as well.

    Just a great photo. No wonder Prof Truss can't understand where it all went wrong. :)
  • This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    I hesitate to engage with you as you clearly have come here to vent anti-vax tripe. What is the IFR for covid without vaccines? And how many people have died as a result of the vaccines? Sadly the second number is not zero, but it’s a tiny fraction of the billions who have had it.

    Do you believe you know better than the scientists at the MHRA, EMA, FDA etc? I happen to know some who work for the MHRA and FDA and they are not stupid people.

    You are, though.
    Read what Ed Dowd says about those disabled from vaccines...in the millions...
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
    You haven’t posted facts yet.
  • Andy_JS said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I vote and I am getting shafted

    Your age cohort does not, or not enough.
    I agree.

    But I do and I am getting shafted.

    Pay for the elderly twats. Fuck them
    Why do young people compare themselves with elderly people when the correct comparison would be for young people today to compare themselves with previous generations at the same age? You'd find that most baby boomers weren't travelling much or eating out much when they were young.
    You'd need to compare life for baby boomers when they were aged 20-30 which, for most, would be between about 1965 and 1980.

    Not a huge amount of economic fun in those years. Important thing is they will have bought just before house prices really took off. And possibly had a lot of sex too (which as their children/grandchildren they've never ever told us about, thankfully)
  • - ”… all the talk is of letters to Graham Brady.”

    The Conservative & Unionist Party is broken.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576

    RobD said:

    .

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
    Ah, yes, "facts".
    You ought to ask someone like MaxPB with his irregular heartbeat. Could be one of the vaccine injured
    Or like my friend who was diagnosed 10 years ago with an irregular heartbeat. Very much pre mRNA vaccines.

  • Eabhal said:

    RobD said:

    .

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
    Ah, yes, "facts".
    You ought to ask someone like MaxPB with his irregular heartbeat. Could be one of the vaccine injured
    Bringing up someone's health, unless they mention it themselves, isn't really on imo.

    I had three rounds of Moderna and ran 32km yesterday. Heart's in tip top condition.
    So what thats like saying I had covid and I was fine...you are a sample of 1
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    I hesitate to engage with you as you clearly have come here to vent anti-vax tripe. What is the IFR for covid without vaccines? And how many people have died as a result of the vaccines? Sadly the second number is not zero, but it’s a tiny fraction of the billions who have had it.

    Do you believe you know better than the scientists at the MHRA, EMA, FDA etc? I happen to know some who work for the MHRA and FDA and they are not stupid people.

    You are, though.
    Read what Ed Dowd says about those disabled from vaccines...in the millions...
    More likely by long covid.

    How do you prove it was the vaccine? (Tip - you can’t, because it wasn’t).
  • Eabhal said:

    RobD said:

    .

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
    Ah, yes, "facts".
    You ought to ask someone like MaxPB with his irregular heartbeat. Could be one of the vaccine injured
    Bringing up someone's health, unless they mention it themselves, isn't really on imo.

    I had three rounds of Moderna and ran 32km yesterday. Heart's in tip top condition.
    It is just so wrong and unacceptable
  • Have you read Pfizer final report to the fda or Robert Kennedy book The Real Anthony Fauci
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576

    Eabhal said:

    RobD said:

    .

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
    Ah, yes, "facts".
    You ought to ask someone like MaxPB with his irregular heartbeat. Could be one of the vaccine injured
    Bringing up someone's health, unless they mention it themselves, isn't really on imo.

    I had three rounds of Moderna and ran 32km yesterday. Heart's in tip top condition.
    So what thats like saying I had covid and I was fine...you are a sample of 1
    Nope, we’ve sampled billions. Look at the actual data, not what some idiot comspiracist has warbled on twitter.
  • RobD said:

    .

    RobD said:

    This is what portfolio manager ed down says about the vaccines

    The all-cause mortality endpoint, this is something we need to talk about. Normally, if you’re a single product biotech company and you do a clinical trial that fails the all-cause mortality endpoint, the drug does not get approved [by the FDA].

    At the end of the day, if the risk is higher than the benefit, this thing doesn’t get approved. The all-cause mortality endpoint for the Pfizer vaccine, when they touted its effectiveness, they conveniently hid that data point from everybody. It came out in the FOIA request in the fall and, again, the trial was only 28 days.

    This is also just unprecedented. So, in 28 days, there was something like 23 deaths in the vaccine group and 17 in the placebo group, which gives all-cause mortality excess of 23%. It should not have been approved on that alone. That’s fraud in my humble opinion.”

    Seriously, did you just join a discussion forum about politics and betting to discuss vaccine conspiracy theories?
    Facts not conspiracies
    Ah, yes, "facts".
    You ought to ask someone like MaxPB with his irregular heartbeat. Could be one of the vaccine injured
    That comment is out of order
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 19,093
    edited September 2022
    Andy_JS said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I vote and I am getting shafted

    Your age cohort does not, or not enough.
    I agree.

    But I do and I am getting shafted.

    Pay for the elderly twats. Fuck them
    Why do young people compare themselves with elderly people when the correct comparison would be for young people today to compare themselves with previous generations at the same age? You'd find that most baby boomers weren't travelling much or eating out much when they were young.
    Depends what age of boomer you are looking at. Early boomers yes, but late boomers like me, we were the jet age and travelled, we were down the pub every night and we ate out at modest restaurants, normally after the pub.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576
    And he’s gone. Just getting started too… all the old hits, and some of the new stuff.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567

    "But so far, her thinking seems to involve borrowing on a scale that when advocated by Jeremy Corbyn triggered doomsday warnings of slashed national credit ratings, maybe even a full-blown sovereign debt crisis and the humiliation of an IMF bailout."

    Guardian.

    They have a point.

    Depends on the context. In response to something like covid or unprecedented in living memory energy inflation crisis? I don't know, I don't understand economics. Simply as a normal policy announcement? Just feels wrong instinctively.

    As I say I really have no idea what might be reasonable, but I'm unconvinced the comparison of emergency measure vs non emergency rends criticism of the latter invalid or hypocritical.
  • And he’s gone. Just getting started too… all the old hits, and some of the new stuff.

    I miss the ones that said the vaccines killed 40% of BA pilots.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756

    And he’s gone. Just getting started too… all the old hits, and some of the new stuff.

    I miss the ones that said the vaccines killed 40% of BA pilots.
    I was wondering if Contrarian was having a second bite at the cherry after I spanked his arse over Abraham Lincoln the other day.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    Weird troll. What’s the point?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 82,567
    Andy_JS said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    I vote and I am getting shafted

    Your age cohort does not, or not enough.
    I agree.

    But I do and I am getting shafted.

    Pay for the elderly twats. Fuck them
    Why do young people compare themselves with elderly people when the correct comparison would be for young people today to compare themselves with previous generations at the same age? You'd find that most baby boomers weren't travelling much or eating out much when they were young.
    You mean like comparing age of first home ownership?

    Been awhile since I've seen a 'Whippersnappers are ungrateful and don't know how tough we had it' argument though.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,110
    Leon said:

    Weird troll. What’s the point?

    Some are paid good rubles for it. ;)
  • And he’s gone. Just getting started too… all the old hits, and some of the new stuff.

    Yep straight red. It was the PB equivalent of the two-footed lunge.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 105,491
    edited September 2022
    Leon said:

    Weird troll. What’s the point?

    I read a report that predicted a rise in Russian sponsored troll activity around the time the Ruskies would cut off gas to the West.

    It is to sow discord.

    The irony is on here it just unites us more, I think 99% of this board are pro vaccines, so we united and laugh at them.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 11,576
    Leon said:

    Weird troll. What’s the point?

    It’s been a while since we’ve had a good covid thread, so maybe he/she thought they might find some fellow idiots. But yes, it seems pointless.
  • eek said:

    Leon said:

    2000 Dinghy People crossed at the weekend

    I quite like Priti Patel - or at least I weirdly fancy her - but she had one job, and she failed. Exeunt

    So how would you solve the problem in a way that doesn't break international and maritime law???
    Dead simple.

    100k fine on any employer of undocumented workers.

    The employee who shops them and gives evidence, gets 50k and unlimited leave to remain.

    The ambulance chasing vultures who cold call about car accidents will be queuing round the block to take cases on for a slice of the 50k…

    Though there are several very good reasons why we don't do any of that.

    First dirty secret, some people really don't wan't anyone foreign-looking in the country, especially if they're foreign-looking snitches on innocent Brits who are just trying to build a business.

    Second dirty secret, chunks of our lifestyle depend on other people working hard in scummy conditions. Get rid of undocumented workers, quite a few things stop happening or become expensive and then stop happening.

    Third dirty secret, we don't want the inconvenience of having documentation, because we're British or something.

    Final, dirtiest secret of all. For some, the cruelty is the point. We can't have a low-key solution, because posing on the coastline with some sort of stun gun is what we want to see.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756
    Leon said:

    Weird troll. What’s the point?

    Would people please stop this? Irony meters are expensive and mean working extra in the tuition lark to buy new ones.

    However, having given up the job where a bunch of barely literate drunks cocked everything up to save their worthless employment, I did have a most enjoyable walk along the Glyndwr way from Knighton to Felindre, rather than sitting in a stuffy classroom being told what to expect the next time the incompetent safeguarding risks, ooops, OFSTED inspectors visit.

    So it's swings and roundabouts.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756

    Leon said:

    Weird troll. What’s the point?

    I read a report that predicted a rise in Russian sponsored troll activity around the time the Ruskies would cut off gas to the West.

    It is to sow discord.

    The irony is on here it just unites us more, I think 99% of this board are pro vaccines, so we united and laugh at them.
    We should invite them all here to talk morning, noon and night.

    The hot air will appreciably reduce gas needs.
  • ydoethur said:

    And he’s gone. Just getting started too… all the old hits, and some of the new stuff.

    I miss the ones that said the vaccines killed 40% of BA pilots.
    I was wondering if Contrarian was having a second bite at the cherry after I spanked his arse over Abraham Lincoln the other day.
    Indeed.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 8,689
    edited September 2022

    Leon said:

    Weird troll. What’s the point?

    I read a report that predicted a rise in Russian sponsored troll activity around the time the Ruskies would cut off gas to the West.

    It is to sow discord.

    The irony is on here it just unites us more, I think 99% of this board are pro vaccines, so we united and laugh at them.
    PB's response to new trolls is a glorious thing to see.

    Makes you proud to be British.
This discussion has been closed.