Howdy, Stranger!

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

Moving the Goalposts – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited November 22 in General
Moving the Goalposts – politicalbetting.com

In these dark days we need all the shafts of light we can get in our politics. So it is with some gratitude that today we learn of two cases being brought before the European Court of Human Rights in the very same week that the tomato-throwing Lord Chancellor and Minister of Justice again brings forward his Bill of Rights and answers questions on it. What make these cases so delicious is that they are being brought by, first, Owen Paterson, erstwhile Tory MP and, second, Lord Ahmed, an ex-Labour Lord. Between them, these gentlemen’s activities have covered pretty much the entirety of what constitutes British politics these days: lobbying in breach of rules, favours for friends, anti-semitism, child abuse, sexual exploitation of women, contempt for the rules, a lack of any ethical standards, an arrogant refusal to abide by any judgment they don’t like and attempts to subvert Parliamentary processes for their own benefit. Only the wasting of untold billions on cockeyed schemes is missing, thank God. We’ve had quite enough of that to last several lifetimes.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?
  • Incredible.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,466
    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    Just send them down the coalmines and don't make the same mistakes with new babies.
  • pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,067
    Good to see @Cyclefree back.

    I must be slow. I didn't know these cases were going in front of the ECHR from these individuals and I'm astonished to hear that they are.

    Embarrassing.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,983

    Good to see @Cyclefree back.

    I must be slow. I didn't know these cases were going in front of the ECHR from these individuals and I'm astonished to hear that they are.

    Embarrassing.

    Yeah, it's hypocritical. If you don't think the ECHR should overrule British judges, why are you trying to get them to overrule British judges?
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229

    Good to see @Cyclefree back.

    I must be slow. I didn't know these cases were going in front of the ECHR from these individuals and I'm astonished to hear that they are.

    Embarrassing.

    The description of Paterson's self-justifying self-pity is spot on. Not an ounce of self awareness, just outrage that he dare be questioned and a lot of lies about the process he went through.

    Like cyclefree I'm rather baffled by the fundamental point that these public officials are, they believe, entitled to a level of privacy that extends to their conduct in office that would prevent any scrutiny of that conduct. I'm sure there is some really niche argument of law to be found here, even awful people have rights etc, but I'm really struggling to see it.

    I think it is pretty obvious Raab, Sunak and the rest of the party would be inclined to take Paterson's side - that's why they stuck up for him in the first place after all, and backed down when it became clear the issue was not going away.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,093
    edited November 22
    Ha, totally. I dislike being ultra cynical about politicians. I've always felt "they're all the same, riding that gravy train, in it for themselves" to be a lazy, false, corrosive sentiment. Still just about cling to this - but these last few years have tested me sorely.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,067
    RobD said:

    Good to see @Cyclefree back.

    I must be slow. I didn't know these cases were going in front of the ECHR from these individuals and I'm astonished to hear that they are.

    Embarrassing.

    Yeah, it's hypocritical. If you don't think the ECHR should overrule British judges, why are you trying to get them to overrule British judges?
    What's so depressing is to see how many people are comfortable with hypocrisy if they believe it to be in their own self-interest.

    Have they no integrity? How do they live with themselves?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    Sounds like good news to me, apparently people have been getting smarter and smarter, so sounds like this cohort might bring things back to my level.
  • pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145

    Have they no integrity? How do they live with themselves?

    "No" and, consequently, "very happily, thank you."
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,067
    kle4 said:

    Good to see @Cyclefree back.

    I must be slow. I didn't know these cases were going in front of the ECHR from these individuals and I'm astonished to hear that they are.

    Embarrassing.

    The description of Paterson's self-justifying self-pity is spot on. Not an ounce of self awareness, just outrage that he dare be questioned and a lot of lies about the process he went through.

    Like cyclefree I'm rather baffled by the fundamental point that these public officials are, they believe, entitled to a level of privacy that extends to their conduct in office that would prevent any scrutiny of that conduct. I'm sure there is some really niche argument of law to be found here, even awful people have rights etc, but I'm really struggling to see it.

    I think it is pretty obvious Raab, Sunak and the rest of the party would be inclined to take Paterson's side - that's why they stuck up for him in the first place after all, and backed down when it became clear the issue was not going away.
    I've generally tried to cut Owen Paterson some slack.

    His wife of 40 years killed herself barely two years ago, and that would devastate anyone and make them angry at themselves, reckless and possibly destructive too.

    But, I don't know why he's so poorly advised on this.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 7,858

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    Snap.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,513
    edited November 22
    Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.
  • Good to see @Cyclefree back.

    I must be slow. I didn't know these cases were going in front of the ECHR from these individuals and I'm astonished to hear that they are.

    Embarrassing.

    It's only embarrassing if you are capable of being embarrassed.

    And whilst politicians have always had to be shame-light, the current generation (patron saint: BoJo) tend towards shameless.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,466
    ...

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    I think declining IQ has been documented, but you can see it in the handwriting. It's been getting worse progressively since the 19th century.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,513

    ...

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    I think declining IQ has been documented, but you can see it in the handwriting. It's been getting worse progressively since the 19th century.
    What an utterly batshit theory.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,466

    Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.

    Give them a chance.

    They'll soon be as unpopular with the over 60s.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 24,267

    ...

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    I think declining IQ has been documented, but you can see it in the handwriting. It's been getting worse progressively since the 19th century.
    What an utterly batshit theory.
    Indeed. The average typing speed has increased radically recently.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 7,858

    ...

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    I think declining IQ has been documented, but you can see it in the handwriting. It's been getting worse progressively since the 19th century.
    What the hell has handwriting got to do with IQ?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,407
    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
  • Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.

    Give them a chance.

    They'll soon be as unpopular with the over 60s.
    Only if house prices fall.
  • MightyAlexMightyAlex Posts: 874
    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    Having a drink were we. Well....

    'Associations between alcohol consumption and gray and white matter volumes in the UK Biobank'
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28735-5

    You don't want to know what chronic misuse does.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    edited November 22

    kle4 said:

    Good to see @Cyclefree back.

    I must be slow. I didn't know these cases were going in front of the ECHR from these individuals and I'm astonished to hear that they are.

    Embarrassing.

    The description of Paterson's self-justifying self-pity is spot on. Not an ounce of self awareness, just outrage that he dare be questioned and a lot of lies about the process he went through.

    Like cyclefree I'm rather baffled by the fundamental point that these public officials are, they believe, entitled to a level of privacy that extends to their conduct in office that would prevent any scrutiny of that conduct. I'm sure there is some really niche argument of law to be found here, even awful people have rights etc, but I'm really struggling to see it.

    I think it is pretty obvious Raab, Sunak and the rest of the party would be inclined to take Paterson's side - that's why they stuck up for him in the first place after all, and backed down when it became clear the issue was not going away.
    I've generally tried to cut Owen Paterson some slack.

    His wife of 40 years killed herself barely two years ago, and that would devastate anyone and make them angry at themselves, reckless and possibly destructive too.

    But, I don't know why he's so poorly advised on this.
    He suffered a personal tragedy, to be sure. It's one reason why I think had he not thrown such a tantrum and flounced out of Parliament in outrage he had a good chance of either not facing a successful recall petition, or winning a by-election had he the petition succeeded. He messed up, but it was a strong Tory area, polls were ok, and it'd be easy to have sympathy with him in that situation.

    Instead, his supporters later claimed to have allowed their sympathy for him to go too far in trying to protect him from the consequences of his actions - Jacob Rees-Mogg claimed that as the reason he encouraged Boris to protect Paterson, that he had been punished enough because of that personal tragedy.

    Which, unfortunately, was also a complete lie, since their action was a clear attempt to gut the standards regime, and a lot of nonsense about the process that had been taken, so had a clear political aim quite separate to sympathy with Paterson. At the most generous interpretation they used Paterson and he's a patsy.

    But his pursuing the matter now suggests that is not the case.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,407

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    my son born in 1992 considers his cohort fairly dim witted and indeed wonders how some people he went to university with manage to function especially after he found one he shared halls with trying to fry dried pasta
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    I'd defer to a historian, but the header claims Boris turned his ethics advisers into eunuchs, much like Ottoman Emperors, but surely those eunuchs could end up having a lot of power and influence? So not much like the ethics advisers.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    kjh said:

    ...

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    I think declining IQ has been documented, but you can see it in the handwriting. It's been getting worse progressively since the 19th century.
    What the hell has handwriting got to do with IQ?
    And here was me thinking my handwriting was degenerating (from a low base) because I barely ever write things by hand.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,466

    ...

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    I think declining IQ has been documented, but you can see it in the handwriting. It's been getting worse progressively since the 19th century.
    What an utterly batshit theory.
    It isn't really particularly outlandish. The Romans forgot how to draw.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,363
    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,513

    Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.

    Give them a chance.

    They'll soon be as unpopular with the over 60s.
    Only if house prices fall.
    Excoriated to fall 9% according to the OBR.
    Though if that’s in real terms, perhaps nobody will notice.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,067

    Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.

    We have.

    The Tories seem to have boxed themselves into a corner with the over 60s, and doubled-down.

    I can't think of any positive reason that's in my interests to vote for them.

    That doesn't mean I'll vote Labour BTW (they'd put my taxes up even more, charge VAT on private school fees, increase immigration - despite Starmer’s smoke and mirrors, make moves toward Rejoin, get way more hectoring and dogmatic on climate change, micro regulate my daily life, fuck about with the constitution, and turbocharge the Wokery) but I still have no positive reason to vote Tory.

    I may draw a phallus on my paper or chicken out and just write JOKE across it.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,407
    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    I am aware being in my mid 50's I may have bias....however my son's perception of his own cohort is making me wonder if it isnt true, when you cant even read the instructions on how to cook spaghetti when its printed on the pack and yet you are at uni.....and only one of his anecdotes about the stupidity of his peers.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,407
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    The balance is ludicrously tilted to those on defined benefit pension schemes....largely these days public sector workers
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,067
    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    Not sure France has powered past anything for about 200 years.

    Seems to be a history of epic undershooting and delayed industrialisation, followed by it picking up the geopolitical scraps.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218
    … Grade A hypocrisy and… self-pitying twaddle. If there was a World Cup in this, England would win it every time.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145

    Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.

    We have.

    The Tories seem to have boxed themselves into a corner with the over 60s, and doubled-down.

    I can't think of any positive reason that's in my interests to vote for them.

    That doesn't mean I'll vote Labour BTW (they'd put my taxes up even more, charge VAT on private school fees, increase immigration - despite Starmer’s smoke and mirrors, make moves toward Rejoin, get way more hectoring and dogmatic on climate change, micro regulate my daily life, fuck about with the constitution, and turbocharge the Wokery) but I still have no positive reason to vote Tory.

    I may draw a phallus on my paper or chicken out and just write JOKE across it.
    I don't even have much confidence that Labour won't suck OAP dick just like the Conservatives TBH (the Lib Dems definitely will.) We'll soon know whether they're any different when the manifesto comes out. If Starmer commits to keeping the triple lock forever, and slaps yet more taxes on wages rather than property to pay for his schemes, then we'll know we're just swapping one lot of Tories for another.
  • pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    Not all the over 55s vote Tory and ensuring there are more homeowners is the way to ensure there's more Tory voters. Cameron and Osborne did good work with things like putting the tax surcharge on BTL properties, Help to Buy to help people onto the ladder, and ensuring more homes [relatively, still not enough] get built. The Tories have benefited from that as a result at subsequent elections.

    If they fall back on a core vote of those who already own a home and cut off aspiration then the Tories will lose massively, and deserve to lose massively.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,466

    … Grade A hypocrisy and… self-pitying twaddle. If there was a World Cup in this, England would win it every time.

    Poor Cyclefree, that's very unfair.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 7,858
    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    It was new to me and on the basis that the class system is less prevalent these days the genetic element may be more relevant (ie bright working class kids are better able to climb the social ladder now and become better off).

    Although I often don't agree with @Pagan2 he does come out with some left field ideas that are logically sound and very thought provoking.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    edited November 22

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    OK. Hard evidence it is, then


    Here you go:

    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/iq-rates-are-dropping-many-developed-countries-doesn-t-bode-ncna1008576

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/04/29/technology-is-on-the-rise-while-iq-is-on-the-decline/

    "IQ rates are dropping in many developed countries and that doesn't bode well for humanity

    An intelligence crisis could undermine our problem-solving capacities and dim the prospects of the global economy."

    The phenomenon has even got a name - the Reverse Flynn Effect. It is so-called for the New Zealand psychometrician who spotted that IQs have been rising for decades, until about 2000; then he noticed them going into decline, which might be accelerating

    https://www.develop.bc.ca/news-and-publications/the-reverse-flynn-effect/#:~:text=Flynn attributed this increase to,the 'Reverse Flynn Effect'.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218
    Allez la France !

    Allez la nouvelle alliance !

    🇫🇷 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,513
    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    Yes, correct in every respect.
    Well maybe not the very last bit, there has to be a correction at some stage.
  • pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    That theory is called "dysgenic drift" and it too is very real

    We do not have eugenic natal policies, nor does any western country. Quite the opposite
  • Pagan2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    I am aware being in my mid 50's I may have bias....however my son's perception of his own cohort is making me wonder if it isnt true, when you cant even read the instructions on how to cook spaghetti when its printed on the pack and yet you are at uni.....and only one of his anecdotes about the stupidity of his peers.
    A few interconnected factors.

    As schools have been more driven to get good grades in academic subjects for as many pupils as possible, life skills have fallen off the curriculum in many schools.

    Linked to that, fewer kids do things like scouting and guiding, which was an excellent way of disseminating those sort of skills.

    Finally, most of us are worse at home skills than our parents and grandparents. We don't need them in the same way.

    It's probably better this way overall, but it's not cost-free.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218

    … Grade A hypocrisy and… self-pitying twaddle. If there was a World Cup in this, England would win it every time.

    Poor Cyclefree, that's very unfair.
    She’s big enough and ugly enough to look after herself. You don’t need to fling your nice M&S blazer in a puddle to protect the lady’s stilettos.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,466
    pigeon said:

    Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.

    We have.

    The Tories seem to have boxed themselves into a corner with the over 60s, and doubled-down.

    I can't think of any positive reason that's in my interests to vote for them.

    That doesn't mean I'll vote Labour BTW (they'd put my taxes up even more, charge VAT on private school fees, increase immigration - despite Starmer’s smoke and mirrors, make moves toward Rejoin, get way more hectoring and dogmatic on climate change, micro regulate my daily life, fuck about with the constitution, and turbocharge the Wokery) but I still have no positive reason to vote Tory.

    I may draw a phallus on my paper or chicken out and just write JOKE across it.
    I don't even have much confidence that Labour won't suck OAP dick just like the Conservatives TBH (the Lib Dems definitely will.) We'll soon know whether they're any different when the manifesto comes out. If Starmer commits to keeping the triple lock forever, and slaps yet more taxes on wages rather than property to pay for his schemes, then we'll know we're just swapping one lot of Tories for another.
    I find all this hatred of the 'privileged' elderly a bit unedifying. It feels like divide and rule to me. The Government is increasing its own size vastly and expecting us to pay for it. There are no cuts - neither immediate, nor deferred, in their financial plans. The tax burden makes Jeremy Corbyn's plans look Thatcherite. And we're busy resenting one group amongst us who have come out of it a little less scathed than the others.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    Having these views of the younger generation is just a sign of you getting old. Surprised you weren't complaining the music isn't as good as in your day.
    Except that, as I have just amply evidenced, this is true. IQs are in decline
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    Not all young people are poor and powerless, and not all old people are rich and powerful, but there is no doubt at all about where the balance of both attributes lies in this society. None. This is a country with an economic system that operates strongly to the net benefit of the aged.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,850
    edited November 22

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    Rich isn't just about income which is the problem, we tax income far too much.

    A young software developer with high taxes, tuition fees, exorbitantly high rent and childcare costs might be quite worse off than a pensioner with a moderate pension income that isn't taxed significantly and has no housing or childcare costs.

    Rent can cost many tens of thousands nowadays of pretax income. Living rent-free doesn't change tax rates, but does change living expenses more than anything else imagineable.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 19,466

    … Grade A hypocrisy and… self-pitying twaddle. If there was a World Cup in this, England would win it every time.

    Poor Cyclefree, that's very unfair.
    She’s big enough and ugly enough to look after herself. You don’t need to fling your nice M&S blazer in a puddle to protect the lady’s stilettos.
    I was actually joking, because I thought you were describing Owen Patterson as hypocritical and self-pitying! But actually you were shooting from the hips about the header. So that joke fell flat.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,513
    Leon said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    Having these views of the younger generation is just a sign of you getting old. Surprised you weren't complaining the music isn't as good as in your day.
    Except that, as I have just amply evidenced, this is true. IQs are in decline
    I believe there is evidence that the Flynn effect has gone into reverse.

    But to correlate it with the decline of copperplate script is defcon moonbat.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,407

    Pagan2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    I am aware being in my mid 50's I may have bias....however my son's perception of his own cohort is making me wonder if it isnt true, when you cant even read the instructions on how to cook spaghetti when its printed on the pack and yet you are at uni.....and only one of his anecdotes about the stupidity of his peers.
    A few interconnected factors.

    As schools have been more driven to get good grades in academic subjects for as many pupils as possible, life skills have fallen off the curriculum in many schools.

    Linked to that, fewer kids do things like scouting and guiding, which was an excellent way of disseminating those sort of skills.

    Finally, most of us are worse at home skills than our parents and grandparents. We don't need them in the same way.

    It's probably better this way overall, but it's not cost-free.
    Sorry when did reading the how to cook instructions on a packet of spaghetti become a life skill. If they can't do that and understand some pretty basic instructions how can they hope to pass a degree?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,891

    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    Not sure France has powered past anything for about 200 years.

    Seems to be a history of epic undershooting and delayed industrialisation, followed by it picking up the geopolitical scraps.
    SNCF TGV Réseau, for one thing. Something the wonderful UK state still has got nowhere near emulatin
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,891
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    I am aware being in my mid 50's I may have bias....however my son's perception of his own cohort is making me wonder if it isnt true, when you cant even read the instructions on how to cook spaghetti when its printed on the pack and yet you are at uni.....and only one of his anecdotes about the stupidity of his peers.
    A few interconnected factors.

    As schools have been more driven to get good grades in academic subjects for as many pupils as possible, life skills have fallen off the curriculum in many schools.

    Linked to that, fewer kids do things like scouting and guiding, which was an excellent way of disseminating those sort of skills.

    Finally, most of us are worse at home skills than our parents and grandparents. We don't need them in the same way.

    It's probably better this way overall, but it's not cost-free.
    Sorry when did reading the how to cook instructions on a packet of spaghetti become a life skill. If they can't do that and understand some pretty basic instructions how can they hope to pass a degree?
    They starve and die before they repay their student loans?
  • tysontyson Posts: 5,988
    edited November 22

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    I'm wary of this sort of theory, which tends to be fuelled by observer bias and specifically grumpy old man (him not you) bias. I know a fair number of teenagers and they seem to me very much as usual. That too is just anecdotal, of course, but in the absence of hard evidence, file under "speculation".
    I live in student central, and nothing much seems to have changed since Covid...

    The one thing is their drinking habits......cocktails and shots...What happened to old school drinking?... two bottles of thunderbird with house mates getting ready listening to the Smiths, half price drinks at the Union and then off to a student club pilfering other peoples drinks....with luck and a fair wind you could get home on a fiver, a kebab and a shag to boot....
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,513

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    Rich isn't just about income which is the problem, we tax income far too much.

    A young software developer with high taxes, tuition fees, exorbitantly high rent and childcare costs might be quite worse off than a pensioner with a moderate pension income that isn't taxed significantly and has no housing or childcare costs.

    Rent can cost many tens of thousands nowadays of pretax income. Living rent-free doesn't change tax rates, but does change living expenses more than anything else imagineable.
    What is “amusing” is watching all the Tory boys (like Mr BrightBlue) turn on the Tories as they slowly realise they’ll never actually get that terraced house in a Georgian square and will have to put up with an ex-council flat in a towerblock next to sheltered accommodation for criminally insane refugees.
  • pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    You can easily spend £18000 a year renting a normalish house in Romford, and that's out of post-tax income.

    Having a paid-off mortgage is worth a lot of cashflow.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,767
    Shooting ducks.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,957
    Evening all :)

    On housing and planning, it's not easy and we talk a lot on here about residential development and house building but there's also the commercial aspect to planning such as the re-classification of sites and property and change of use from one type of commercial activity to another.

    That can also cause a lot of local concern especially if it is considered likely to "disturb" the local area.

    I've long been of the view housing can't be seen in isolation - it's called planning for a reason and that means not just roads and transport but the whole web of infrastructure including schools, health services, shops and the like. The mood music in my part of London has been to throw up blocks of flats (mainly for rental) on brownfield sites (failed retail parks) without much consequential improvement to other local services.

    I'm all for an active but properly regulated private rental sector as that is often what people require rather than moving straight into home ownership.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,729
    Another goal
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,513
    William Wragg, who once complained he could not get on the housing ladder on MP wages, is stepping down.

    https://twitter.com/william_wragg/status/1595137668421410816?s=46&t=ViQb5-1MnxoAQ6vSdbOLnQ
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,767
    Another one!
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218
    Nous sommes champions!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 16,513

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    You can easily spend £18000 a year renting a normalish house in Romford, and that's out of post-tax income.

    Having a paid-off mortgage is worth a lot of cashflow.
    Now add the cost of raising children.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 42,729
    And another
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218
    edited November 22
    L'Europe 4 - 1 L'empire anglais
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,891
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/nov/22/severely-ill-refusing-sicknotes-as-they-cannot-afford-not-to-work-says-gps-head

    Intderesting comments:

    'Ill patients are refusing sicknotes from their GP because they cannot afford time off work, while physicians suffer “moral distress” at their powerlessness to do more to help the most vulnerable, the new leader of Britain’s family doctors has revealed.'
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 48,067
    I think the best thing we can teach the next generation is critical thinking: to robustly test an argument from all angles, and to recognise that playing devil's advocate is part of that, and that is even more important when something is a fashionable orthodoxy, not less. Just because the contrary view is a minority opinion doesn't mean it doesn't hold some validity. The alternative is poor ideas gaining traction, leading to poor policy, disillusionment and polarisation.

    I have absolutely no truck with those who say critical thinking or fullsome debate is part of structural racism, or the hetronormative patriarchy or other such nonsense, and they are usually just cultural Marxists who are trying to escape scrutiny.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    .

    Good to see @Cyclefree back.

    I must be slow. I didn't know these cases were going in front of the ECHR from these individuals and I'm astonished to hear that they are.

    Embarrassing.

    With any luck, the ECHR will rule on the limited right to privacy of public figures in these circumstances, and tell them to go boil their heads.

    In somewhat related news, the USSC just ruled 9-0 that the House is entitled to see Trump's tax returns.
  • Nous sommes champions!

    Écosse
    la Suède
    Vive la France
  • pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    Rich isn't just about income which is the problem, we tax income far too much.

    A young software developer with high taxes, tuition fees, exorbitantly high rent and childcare costs might be quite worse off than a pensioner with a moderate pension income that isn't taxed significantly and has no housing or childcare costs.

    Rent can cost many tens of thousands nowadays of pretax income. Living rent-free doesn't change tax rates, but does change living expenses more than anything else imagineable.
    At risk of going off-topic, especially while watching the soccerball, in the old days, when pensioners were young, childcare was free for most people. Mum stayed at home and took care of the children. The corollaries of this are that most households were single income, and most older women do not have generous private pensions.
  • eristdooferistdoof Posts: 4,411
    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    Did you also discuss with your friend that policemen seem to get a bit younger every year?
  • pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    You can easily spend £18000 a year renting a normalish house in Romford, and that's out of post-tax income.

    Having a paid-off mortgage is worth a lot of cashflow.
    Now add the cost of raising children.
    I'd rather not. The flashbacks are traumatic enough, thank you.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,850
    edited November 22

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    You can easily spend £18000 a year renting a normalish house in Romford, and that's out of post-tax income.

    Having a paid-off mortgage is worth a lot of cashflow.
    Indeed, that's the same point I was making.

    £18000 in post-tax income is a hell of a lot more in pre-tax income. And with tuition fees too, childcare etc ...

    Comparing an untaxed income with a mortgage-free home with a pre-tax income with rent is preposterously misleading.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    .

    Nous sommes champions!

    And Australia, champignons.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218

    Nous sommes champions!

    Écosse
    la Suède
    Vive la France
    Suède. Écossais. France. Nous sommes frères. Nous sommes des citoyens, pas des sujets.
  • Nous sommes champions!

    France beating Australia is no more noteworthy than England beating Iran or Argentina beating, well, you get the picture.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 3,145

    pigeon said:

    Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.

    We have.

    The Tories seem to have boxed themselves into a corner with the over 60s, and doubled-down.

    I can't think of any positive reason that's in my interests to vote for them.

    That doesn't mean I'll vote Labour BTW (they'd put my taxes up even more, charge VAT on private school fees, increase immigration - despite Starmer’s smoke and mirrors, make moves toward Rejoin, get way more hectoring and dogmatic on climate change, micro regulate my daily life, fuck about with the constitution, and turbocharge the Wokery) but I still have no positive reason to vote Tory.

    I may draw a phallus on my paper or chicken out and just write JOKE across it.
    I don't even have much confidence that Labour won't suck OAP dick just like the Conservatives TBH (the Lib Dems definitely will.) We'll soon know whether they're any different when the manifesto comes out. If Starmer commits to keeping the triple lock forever, and slaps yet more taxes on wages rather than property to pay for his schemes, then we'll know we're just swapping one lot of Tories for another.
    I find all this hatred of the 'privileged' elderly a bit unedifying. It feels like divide and rule to me. The Government is increasing its own size vastly and expecting us to pay for it. There are no cuts - neither immediate, nor deferred, in their financial plans. The tax burden makes Jeremy Corbyn's plans look Thatcherite. And we're busy resenting one group amongst us who have come out of it a little less scathed than the others.
    The Government isn't striving to create a low tax economy because that isn't practical when it has such a lengthy list of demands placed upon it, and most of those relate to education, healthcare, social security and defence, none of which it dare take an axe to, and the servicing of a gigantic national debt.

    The problem isn't the tax burden itself, which frankly we can't reduce to American levels without accepting American levels of poverty and inequality along with it, but with the unequal distribution of the tax burden. Property and inheritances should be taxed a lot more, to enable earned incomes to be taxed less; and the dreaded triple lock should be scrapped, in favour of targeted support for poorer pensioners - before we find ourselves in a situation where young people are handing over so much of what they earn to support luxury lifestyle spending by minted Home Counties' septuagenarians with hugely valuable houses that they can barely afford to feed themselves, let alone reproduce.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,407
    kjh said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    The only people that can afford more than one kid are the very rich and the very poor these days. There aren't very many of the very rich. Assuming that there is a genetic component to the intelligence (and yes its more complicated than that) I would suspect that the very poor tend towards the left of the intelligence bell curve. Over time then the apex of the bell curve will move downwards. cf the march of the idiots.

    Is this true, no idea it does sound plausible however
    That theory has been bandied around for about 300 years, so you're not new to it.

    There doesn't seem to be much evidence for it actually impacting intelligence.

    (With the proviso that, if it is correct, then it will be France that powers past its continental neighbours, for that is the only country in the world where graduates are more likely to have babies than non-graduates.)
    It was new to me and on the basis that the class system is less prevalent these days the genetic element may be more relevant (ie bright working class kids are better able to climb the social ladder now and become better off).

    Although I often don't agree with @Pagan2 he does come out with some left field ideas that are logically sound and very thought provoking.
    Agreement is not necessary, I have no monopoly on wisdom nor am I particularly party political. I do have a right leaning view and try to post what I think might work
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 23,609
    Good thread header @Cyclefree, thanks.

    Who indeed is paying the legal fees?
  • tysontyson Posts: 5,988
    edited November 22

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    Rich isn't just about income which is the problem, we tax income far too much.

    A young software developer with high taxes, tuition fees, exorbitantly high rent and childcare costs might be quite worse off than a pensioner with a moderate pension income that isn't taxed significantly and has no housing or childcare costs.

    Rent can cost many tens of thousands nowadays of pretax income. Living rent-free doesn't change tax rates, but does change living expenses more than anything else imagineable.
    What is “amusing” is watching all the Tory boys (like Mr BrightBlue) turn on the Tories as they slowly realise they’ll never actually get that terraced house in a Georgian square and will have to put up with an ex-council flat in a towerblock next to sheltered accommodation for criminally insane refugees.
    Tories turning on Tories as they come to realise that they are actually incompetent, clueless, entitled morons who have caused needless, pointless and ideologically nihilistic suffering and pain on the UK....

    The only pathetic thing these useless fuckwits can barely cling onto is their nonsense diatribe on woke....

  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469

    Leon said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    Having these views of the younger generation is just a sign of you getting old. Surprised you weren't complaining the music isn't as good as in your day.
    Except that, as I have just amply evidenced, this is true. IQs are in decline
    I believe there is evidence that the Flynn effect has gone into reverse.

    But to correlate it with the decline of copperplate script is defcon moonbat.
    I've actually talked one-to-one with Prof Flynn. His personal theory - unproven, as he insists - is that the internet, social media and smartphones are dumbing us all down
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 874
    I haven't seen any studies on this, but it is my impression that legal immigrants to the US generally have IQs above our current average. And judging from the names of the National Merit scholars in this area, tend to have smart kids.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218

    Nous sommes champions!

    France beating Australia is no more noteworthy than England beating Iran or Argentina beating, well, you get the picture.
    Le stade Al Bayt
    10 décembre

    Angleterre 1 - 7 France

    🇫🇷 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 🇫🇷
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 104,861

    Given how party preference is so radically skewed by age, the Tories must be more hated by the under 60s since any time in modern history.

    Even during peak Major-sleaze the Tories attracted a decent slug of working age people and even students.

    Think on that.

    Major lost even over 65s in 1997 and Labour was again miles ahead with under 40s. Sunak is at least still winning pensioners
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218

    Good thread header @Cyclefree, thanks.

    Who indeed is paying the legal fees?

    Ms Legal Feminist pro bono?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    edited November 22
    Ah, I've just noticed that Prof James R Flynn died during Covid. December 2020

    RIP. A nice, clever, amiable geezer

    How many people died in that awful blur of plague and lockdown, and we didn't notice?
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 9,850
    edited November 22

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pigeon said:

    pillsbury said:

    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Rishi Sunak faces a rebellion on planning reform - but will the govt try to delay the vote? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-22/sunak-faces-first-tory-rebellion-over-uk-housebuilding-targets

    Rebels expecting votes on the Villiers amendments on Monday but rumours around the vote may be pulled …?

    What is the Villiers amendment?

    Feels like they've not really acehived anything since ditching Boris's attempt at reforms which got Jenrick sacked.
    Best explanation of it - https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1594243295638482945?s=46&t=ulZnK8gXpBM2m2fmzXVNeg
    "On Wednesday the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill returns to the House of Commons. It contains a set of amendments proposed by Theresa Villiers, a former environment secretary, with the support of Iain Duncan Smith, Chris Grayling, Damian Green, John Redwood, Tracey Crouch, Alicia Kearns and others. The effect will be to eviscerate the planning system as we know it by making all housing targets set by Whitehall purely advisory and removing the existing presumption in favour of development — in other words, scrapping the two core policies that tell councils they have to build, and punish them for not doing so."
    Contemptible. If that goes through, the Tories deserve a landslide defeat.
    Nimbies - disproportionately drawn from amongst, your guessed it, the serried ranks of the selfish old - will love it. Every sop to the grey vote *decreases* the likelihood of the Tories being flushed down the toilet. Expect a whole lot more of this kind of thing.
    Nah, its self-defeating. Nimbies still only get 1 vote each, no matter how much they love the Tories. Tories appealling to Tories is like Labour appealling to Corbynites/SJW/Momentum etc

    More people getting onto the property ladder gives a bigger pool of Tory voters. More people stuck renting or cohabiting in others homes, gives a bigger pool of Labour voters, even if those already voting Tory "love it".
    It is always worth repeating at this juncture that about half of the entire electorate, accounting for age-related differences in turnout, is aged over 55. This cohort consists very largely of affluent homeowning pensioners, soon-to-be pensioners, and expectant heirs to pensioner property fortunes.

    Today's Tory MPs realise, of course, that the young despise them, and that the problem will get worse as all those youthful have-nots age, but why should they care about that? They want to save their jobs now, not worry about what might happen in twenty years' time when most of the Boomers are dead.
    There are lots of hard-up pensioners out there, and quite a few rich young and middle-aged people.
    That's whataboutery. The average pensioner household now has, after housing costs, a higher disposable income than the average working household. Most pensioners are homeowners. QED.

    State pension income is guaranteed to rise by inflation or more (depending on circumstances) by the triple lock, whereas most earned incomes are in real terms decline. Earned incomes are taxed to absolute fuck to service the Government's expenses (largely pensions, health and social care for pensioners, and a colossal debt racked up during the Covid lockdowns,) whilst taxation of property and inheritances is kept at rock bottom. Childcare costs are allowed to inflate out of control, whilst ministers persist with plans (even if briefly delayed) to cap social care costs so as to allow estates to be preserved. The supply of new homes is deliberately and systematically deprioritised and choked off, so that prices will be kept buoyant, to the advantage of existing owners (i.e. older people.) Even Brexit was a pure and simple case of the will of the aged trumping that of the young. The list goes on.

    Yes, quite a lot of pensioners are hard-up and quite a lot of younger people are very comfortable, but taken as a whole the balance of society is ludicrously tilted in favour of the former and against the latter - and it's at the core of all of our problems as a nation. A country that sinks an ever-greater share of its wealth into servicing the care and interests of unproductive assets (houses) and unproductive people (the retired) is doomed to failure. Britain is doomed to failure. End of story.
    No, it isn't whataboutery. Rich vs poor is not the same as young vs old. The software developer on £80,000 a year is better off than the pensioner on £10,000 a year, and is also better off than the shelf stacker on £20,000.
    Rich isn't just about income which is the problem, we tax income far too much.

    A young software developer with high taxes, tuition fees, exorbitantly high rent and childcare costs might be quite worse off than a pensioner with a moderate pension income that isn't taxed significantly and has no housing or childcare costs.

    Rent can cost many tens of thousands nowadays of pretax income. Living rent-free doesn't change tax rates, but does change living expenses more than anything else imagineable.
    At risk of going off-topic, especially while watching the soccerball, in the old days, when pensioners were young, childcare was free for most people. Mum stayed at home and took care of the children. The corollaries of this are that most households were single income, and most older women do not have generous private pensions.
    You're completely missing the point. Deliberately or not.

    On average 1 generous and 1 not-generous income with a mortgage-free home leaves more disposable income than 2 average worked for incomes subject to all taxes, plus tuition fees, plus rent, plus childcare etc

    That's before we factor in the fact that the workers rent is on average going again to those who are living rent-free in their own home and that rent isn't taxed as heavily as going to work and paying National Insurance and Tuition Fees etc

    And before we question how come 1 income was sufficient to buy a home in the past, but 2 incomes isn't today.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 6,767
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    FPT for @Luckyguy1983

    "Younger people are generally stupider. I think it's dietary."


    +++

    I had a drink with an academic friend yesterday. He was talking about the latest crop of students, 18 and 19, who are the first cohort really impacted by Covid and Lockdowns

    He said it is horrifying. They are clueless and dim, AND their social skills are pitiful, they don't know how to interact, to flirt, charm, persuade. All they can do is scroll their phones, monotonously

    He was already concerned by a decline in intelligence, but this has now - he told me - turned into a freefall

    What have we done?

    Having these views of the younger generation is just a sign of you getting old. Surprised you weren't complaining the music isn't as good as in your day.
    Except that, as I have just amply evidenced, this is true. IQs are in decline
    I believe there is evidence that the Flynn effect has gone into reverse.

    But to correlate it with the decline of copperplate script is defcon moonbat.
    I've actually talked one-to-one with Prof Flynn. His personal theory - unproven, as he insists - is that the internet, social media and smartphones are dumbing us all down
    Smartphones for dumb people.

  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,214

    Nous sommes champions!

    France beating Australia is no more noteworthy than England beating Iran or Argentina beating, well, you get the picture.
    Le stade Al Bayt
    10 décembre

    Angleterre 1 - 7 France

    🇫🇷 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 🇫🇷
    How do you think Scotland will do in this one?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 17,268
    edited November 22
    OT Space X launch due in five minutes but NASA says only 30 per cent likely owing to bad weather.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lxD1cs8eYU

    ETA launch just cancelled.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 11,218
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Nous sommes champions!

    And Australia, champignons.
    Tu es drôle.
Sign In or Register to comment.