Howdy, Stranger!

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

As we start World Cup Final weekend punters make it 50-50 – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,163
edited December 2022 in General
imageAs we start World Cup Final weekend punters make it 50-50 – politicalbetting.com

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,904
    First?
  • ClippP said:

    First?

    First like France or first like Argentina?
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    edited December 2022

    ClippP said:

    First?

    First like France or first like Argentina?
    First like France.

    Third like Croatia.
  • I hope it is France. Really like them as a team.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,019
    edited December 2022

    I hope it is France. Really like them as a team.

    They are the best team, or rather the best balanced team and lots of strength in depth. No real weaknesses anywhere. Where as for example Argentina have less than stellar centre backs (a bit like England).

    I actually think the likes of Pogba being out injured may well have helped them as reduced them having to play individuals who take their bat and ball home if asked to do something that means they aren't asked to play their favoured role.
  • …
  • YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.
  • Bronze medal:

    Croatia 2.4
    Draw 3.5
    Morocco 3.17
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,316
    Magnificent

    Colour TV footage of two American ladies whose grandfather...fought in the American War of Independence in 1776-79

    "Incredible interview with two sisters whose grandfather fought with GEORGE WASHINGTON’S army during the 1776 AMERICAN REVOLUTION."

    https://twitter.com/JamesL1927/status/1603897028903313414?s=20&t=4GE7ol4HNz3ZvD57S054_A

    History is so very close to us
  • Very good.

    This chap was a witness to Lincoln's assassination and it got him onto a game show! Not in colour though, unfortunately.

    https://youtu.be/1RPoymt3Jx4
  • "You don't get to lead a government you tried to destroy": 40 Dems introduce bill to block Trump run
    "The 14th Amendment makes clear that Donald Trump is disqualified from ever holding federal office again," Dem says

    https://www.salon.com/2022/12/16/you-dont-get-to-lead-a-government-you-tried-to-destroy-40-dems-introduce-bill-to-block-run_partner/
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 12,146
    edited December 2022
    Leon said:

    Magnificent

    Colour TV footage of two American ladies whose grandfather...fought in the American War of Independence in 1776-79

    "Incredible interview with two sisters whose grandfather fought with GEORGE WASHINGTON’S army during the 1776 AMERICAN REVOLUTION."

    https://twitter.com/JamesL1927/status/1603897028903313414?s=20&t=4GE7ol4HNz3ZvD57S054_A

    History is so very close to us

    My grandfather, who had emigrated to Canada, returned to Europe with the Canadian armed forces to fight in the Great War. He suffered badly from shell-shock for the rest of his life and would literally dive under the table at the sound of a child’s balloon bursting or a car backfiring.

    Funnily enough my other grandfather had also emigrated to Canada during the Depression, but also returned to Scotland.

    One of the great untold stories of European emigration to the New World is the vast number who didn’t stay but returned. I’m sure that is a pattern seen in many of the great migrations of history.
  • I hope it is France. Really like them as a team.

    They are the best team, or rather the best balanced team and lots of strength in depth. No real weaknesses anywhere. Where as for example Argentina have less than stellar centre backs (a bit like England).

    I actually think the likes of Pogba being out injured may well have helped them as reduced them having to play individuals who take their bat and ball home if asked to do something that means they aren't asked to play their favoured role.
    The French defence is also quite poor.
  • Fire inside the MNKY HSE ( London)

    https://twitter.com/CrimeLdn/status/1603899707323043840

    Its the bloke, I guessing called something like Giles, making sure not to forget this wine on the way out....

  • This would certainly explain Kwasi Kwarteng’s bizarre behaviour in Westminster Abbey at HMQ’s funeral service.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,019
    edited December 2022

    I hope it is France. Really like them as a team.

    They are the best team, or rather the best balanced team and lots of strength in depth. No real weaknesses anywhere. Where as for example Argentina have less than stellar centre backs (a bit like England).

    I actually think the likes of Pogba being out injured may well have helped them as reduced them having to play individuals who take their bat and ball home if asked to do something that means they aren't asked to play their favoured role.
    The French defence is also quite poor.
    Lloris
    Koundé, Varane, Konaté, Hernández

    I don't think any will ever go down as greats, but I think poor is stretching it a bit. They are fine with 3 out of the 5 have lots of experience at playing in games at the highest level over the years and the other two play for top clubs in Europe.

    TBH, I don't think there are actually that many amazing defensive players at the moment. Van Dijk is the stand out centre back. We aren't blessed with the era of Baresi, Maldini, etc etc etc.
  • Ireland will have a new taoiseach (prime minister) later as Micheál Martin and Leo Varadkar swap roles.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63945064
  • I hope it is France. Really like them as a team.

    They are the best team, or rather the best balanced team and lots of strength in depth. No real weaknesses anywhere. Where as for example Argentina have less than stellar centre backs (a bit like England).

    I actually think the likes of Pogba being out injured may well have helped them as reduced them having to play individuals who take their bat and ball home if asked to do something that means they aren't asked to play their favoured role.
    The French defence is also quite poor.
    Lloris
    Koundé, Varane, Konaté, Hernández

    I don't think any will ever go down as greats, but I think poor is stretching it a bit. They are fine with 3 out of the 5 have lots of experience at playing in games at the highest level over the years and the other two play for top clubs in Europe.
    I hope you are right. I backed France at the start but not for a life-changing sum.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 4,587
    Leon said:

    Magnificent

    Colour TV footage of two American ladies whose grandfather...fought in the American War of Independence in 1776-79

    "Incredible interview with two sisters whose grandfather fought with GEORGE WASHINGTON’S army during the 1776 AMERICAN REVOLUTION."

    https://twitter.com/JamesL1927/status/1603897028903313414?s=20&t=4GE7ol4HNz3ZvD57S054_A

    History is so very close to us

    Not seen that one before. This one does the rounds also:

    https://youtu.be/1RPoymt3Jx4

    "I saw John Wilkes Booth shoot Lincoln"
  • Fire inside the MNKY HSE ( London)

    https://twitter.com/CrimeLdn/status/1603899707323043840

    Its the bloke, I guessing called something like Giles, making sure not to forget this wine on the way out....

    Irrational behaviour like that seems to be atypical. The article published by the International Association of Fire and Rescue Services says “… panic which supposes irrational behavior for an emergency situation is rather atypical of human behavior in a fire.”

    https://ctif.org/news/panic-and-human-behavior-fire-emergency-situations
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,019
    edited December 2022

    I hope it is France. Really like them as a team.

    They are the best team, or rather the best balanced team and lots of strength in depth. No real weaknesses anywhere. Where as for example Argentina have less than stellar centre backs (a bit like England).

    I actually think the likes of Pogba being out injured may well have helped them as reduced them having to play individuals who take their bat and ball home if asked to do something that means they aren't asked to play their favoured role.
    The French defence is also quite poor.
    Lloris
    Koundé, Varane, Konaté, Hernández

    I don't think any will ever go down as greats, but I think poor is stretching it a bit. They are fine with 3 out of the 5 have lots of experience at playing in games at the highest level over the years and the other two play for top clubs in Europe.
    I hope you are right. I backed France at the start but not for a life-changing sum.
    Put it this way if you think France's defence is poor,

    Molina, Romero, Otamendi, Tagliafico

    None of that lot are up to much (nor play for top clubs). Barcelona, Real, Liverpool, Man City, etc aren't interested in them. Otamendi was awful at Man City.
  • Ireland will have a new taoiseach (prime minister) later as Micheál Martin and Leo Varadkar swap roles.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63945064

    Latest Irish poll:

    Sinn Féin 34% (nc)
    Fine Gael 23% (+2)
    Fianna Fáil 21% (-2)
    Greens 5% (+1)
    Labour 3% (-2)
    People Before Profit/Solidarity 1% (nc)
    Social Democrats 1% (-1)
    Aontú - (-1)
    others/independents 12% (+3)

    (Behaviour and Attitudes/The Sunday Times; 6 December)
  • DJ41DJ41 Posts: 792
    Off-topic: what is Elon Musk up to? Those journalists from the NYT, CNN, the Washington Post, etc., didn't doxx him. He's got both the UN and EU against him now. When has that ever happened before in the whole history of the media? Talk about a provocation job. The Elon Prize Committee are seeking nominations for Musk's "Worst Groveller". There's been a lot of Musk-praise at the Daily Sceptic. It all adds up, but I'm not sure their guys have yet plumbed the same embarrassing depths as US senator John Neely Kennedy who expressed his admiration for the size of Musk's testicles.

    https://twitter.com/elonprizes/status/1603908528359489537
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,019
    edited December 2022
    DJ41 said:

    Off-topic: what is Elon Musk up to? Those journalists from the NYT, CNN, the Washington Post, etc., didn't doxx him. He's got both the UN and EU against him now. When has that ever happened before in the whole history of the media? Talk about a provocation job. The Elon Prize Committee are seeking nominations for Musk's "Worst Groveller". There's been a lot of Musk-praise at the Daily Sceptic. It all adds up, but I'm not sure their guys have yet plumbed the same embarrassing depths as US senator John Neely Kennedy who expressed his admiration for the size of Musk's testicles.

    https://twitter.com/elonprizes/status/1603908528359489537

    If we were being generous, one could see it as perhaps an ongoing plan to keep stirring up controversy which we know fuels the twitterati. Basically rehash of the Orange man approach to social media. Keep driving the traffic by saying or doing something outrageous.

    Or he is just a massive bellend, suffering under the new mid-life crisis that turns middle classed men into people who get a hard-on for social media "engagement"...see Lineker, Morgan, Brand, Fox....
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,863

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,084
    edited December 2022
    "Sums up the whole tournament"

    Eh?

    In footballing terms it has been an absolutely brilliant world cup. The best I can remember. The final group stages were so gripping.

    Infantino may not be to everyone's taste but he was right to describe it as the best world cup ever.

    Makes me think we should do winter ones more often. The players are much more match fit when they're not injured. If that sounds paradoxical, it is. It's like thoroughbred racehorses. They have come into this competition at peak match fitness, which also puts them right on the cusp of injury at any moment.

    In the summer month world cups they are noticeably less sharp and more sluggish.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,084

    I hope it is France. Really like them as a team.

    They are the best team, or rather the best balanced team and lots of strength in depth. No real weaknesses anywhere. Where as for example Argentina have less than stellar centre backs (a bit like England).

    I actually think the likes of Pogba being out injured may well have helped them as reduced them having to play individuals who take their bat and ball home if asked to do something that means they aren't asked to play their favoured role.
    The French defence is also quite poor.
    Lloris
    Koundé, Varane, Konaté, Hernández

    I don't think any will ever go down as greats, but I think poor is stretching it a bit. They are fine with 3 out of the 5 have lots of experience at playing in games at the highest level over the years and the other two play for top clubs in Europe.
    I hope you are right. I backed France at the start but not for a life-changing sum.
    Put it this way if you think France's defence is poor,

    Molina, Romero, Otamendi, Tagliafico

    None of that lot are up to much
    Drivel
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,658

    I hope it is France. Really like them as a team.

    They are the best team, or rather the best balanced team and lots of strength in depth. No real weaknesses anywhere. Where as for example Argentina have less than stellar centre backs (a bit like England).

    I actually think the likes of Pogba being out injured may well have helped them as reduced them having to play individuals who take their bat and ball home if asked to do something that means they aren't asked to play their favoured role.
    The French defence is also quite poor.
    Both teams have conceded 5 goals in 6 games, with their SF a clean sheet, so I would say nothing between them defensively.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    EXCLUSIVE: Period dignity officer Jason Grant sues Tayside employers for sex discrimination… https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/dundee/3960928/jason-grant-tayside-period-dignity-officer-case-sues/?utm_source=twitter via @thecourieruk
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,990
    NHS Lothian, a large NHS board in Scotland, already says it cannot have a policy of guaranteeing female-only care because of the privacy stipulations in the Gender Recognition Act. This will v likely become more common under Sturgeon’s self-ID reforms.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-risk-health-over-trans-nhs-workers-fear-5dvz86f2l

    Sturgeon’s mantra remains no man will abuse the system & an English paediatrician’s evidence review is irrelevant to Scottish children.

    Why she is so wrong to ignore the warnings of the UN Rapporteur about the risks of self-ID for Scottish women & girls

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/27/nicola-sturgeon-will-endanger-women-if-she-opens-single-sex-spaces-almost-everone?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    edited December 2022
    Wind back up to 10.36Gw of power this morning, and with stronger winds forecast for next week that should keep going up.

    We’ve made it through this particular crunch. Now brace for the next one…
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397

    DJ41 said:

    Off-topic: what is Elon Musk up to? Those journalists from the NYT, CNN, the Washington Post, etc., didn't doxx him. He's got both the UN and EU against him now. When has that ever happened before in the whole history of the media? Talk about a provocation job. The Elon Prize Committee are seeking nominations for Musk's "Worst Groveller". There's been a lot of Musk-praise at the Daily Sceptic. It all adds up, but I'm not sure their guys have yet plumbed the same embarrassing depths as US senator John Neely Kennedy who expressed his admiration for the size of Musk's testicles.

    https://twitter.com/elonprizes/status/1603908528359489537

    If we were being generous, one could see it as perhaps an ongoing plan to keep stirring up controversy which we know fuels the twitterati. Basically rehash of the Orange man approach to social media. Keep driving the traffic by saying or doing something outrageous.

    Or he is just a massive bellend, suffering under the new mid-life crisis that turns middle classed men into people who get a hard-on for social media "engagement"...see Lineker, Morgan, Brand, Fox....
    Could be both, of course. After all, only a massive bellend would come up with such a stupid plan.
  • Small changes mean energy advice campaign adds up to big savings

    Government launches ‘It All Adds Up’ campaign with simple actions to cut bills by bringing down the amount of energy needed to keep homes warm and stay safe

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/small-changes-mean-energy-advice-campaign-adds-up-to-big-savings

    Government's energy-saving website:
    https://helpforhouseholds.campaign.gov.uk/energy-saving-advice/

    Timeliness is next to Shappsiness.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,557
    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
  • Led by Donkeys video on Michelle Mone and the PPE scandal
    https://twitter.com/bydonkeys/status/1603366602887536640
  • Scott_xP said:

    EXCLUSIVE: Period dignity officer Jason Grant sues Tayside employers for sex discrimination… https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/news/dundee/3960928/jason-grant-tayside-period-dignity-officer-case-sues/?utm_source=twitter via @thecourieruk

    sums up the nuttiness of the UK today

  • This would certainly explain Kwasi Kwarteng’s bizarre behaviour in Westminster Abbey at HMQ’s funeral service.

    yes quite disrespectful
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,863
    edited December 2022
    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    I tend to agree - tempered a little by the recollection that when the YGMRP came out, everyone used its prediction of a Labour win in Canterbury to rubbish the model, then Labour won Canterbury….and Kensington.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Scott_xP said:

    NHS Lothian, a large NHS board in Scotland, already says it cannot have a policy of guaranteeing female-only care because of the privacy stipulations in the Gender Recognition Act. This will v likely become more common under Sturgeon’s self-ID reforms.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-risk-health-over-trans-nhs-workers-fear-5dvz86f2l

    Sturgeon’s mantra remains no man will abuse the system & an English paediatrician’s evidence review is irrelevant to Scottish children.

    Why she is so wrong to ignore the warnings of the UN Rapporteur about the risks of self-ID for Scottish women & girls

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/27/nicola-sturgeon-will-endanger-women-if-she-opens-single-sex-spaces-almost-everone?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Quite impressed with the Guardian for publishing the second article and their coverage of this issue. Goes against the 'woke' zeitgeist.

    Politically, I find the position of the SNP on this issue to be naive in a lot of ways. They have taken an extremely radical stance on a complex issue with wide ranging societal implications; in a context where there is very little public awareness and understanding. The zeitgeist could easily turn against them in a brutal and existential way.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    Small changes mean energy advice campaign adds up to big savings

    Government launches ‘It All Adds Up’ campaign with simple actions to cut bills by bringing down the amount of energy needed to keep homes warm and stay safe

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/small-changes-mean-energy-advice-campaign-adds-up-to-big-savings

    Government's energy-saving website:
    https://helpforhouseholds.campaign.gov.uk/energy-saving-advice/

    Timeliness is next to Shappsiness.

    This is the thing about the 'inflation' going on at the moment. The impacts can be partially mitigated by just turning down the thermostat from 22 to 18. That is what we have done, our account is £700 in surplus and our monthly bills haven't changed given the government subsidy.
  • Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.
  • IanB2 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    I tend to agree - tempered a little by the recollection that when the YGMRP came out, everyone used its prediction of a Labour win in Canterbury to rubbish the model, then Labour won Canterbury….and Kensington.
    … and affluent Edinburgh South, at a canter.

    What is often forgotten about Ian Murray’s sole SLab seat is that up until his triumph it was that rare beast: a genuine 4-way marginal. It had been widely predicted to be one of SLab’s guaranteed losses, yet turned out to be its only Hold.

    I know the constituency like the back of my hand, and that he managed to get all those wealthy Edinburghers to cast their votes for him is a work of sheer genius.
  • Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    The DNVs and WNVs are high in that poll - and Tories moving into that space won't show up in the figures - and the don't knows on best PM are very high:

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/bvkoymti8d/TheTimes_VI_221215_W.pdf

    A big problem for the Tories is Reform, with 10% of 50-64 and 18% of over 65s now plumping for it.

    My reading is that if Sunak can rally the recover the economy, get a grip on immigration, and rally his coalition against the threat of Labour, then he should get into the 33-35% space in a GE.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    I'm pleased to see Foakes back, but you have to wonder if England are a bowler light. Pakistan are all over them like a cheap suit at the moment.
  • darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    To what extent would that be offset by the lower heating bills of such a house?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,154

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    The DNVs and WNVs are high in that poll - and Tories moving into that space won't show up in the figures - and the don't knows on best PM are very high:

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/bvkoymti8d/TheTimes_VI_221215_W.pdf

    A big problem for the Tories is Reform, with 10% of 50-64 and 18% of over 65s now plumping for it.

    My reading is that if Sunak can rally the recover the economy, get a grip on immigration, and rally his coalition against the threat of Labour, then he should get into the 33-35% space in a GE.
    I don't think 35-38% - and almost level with Labour - is impossible.

    If the war ends in Ukraine and energy prices come down, and the government can claim success in standing up to Russian aggression, and assuming most of the Reform vote comes home... Then I think 2024/5 could be ok.

    Labour would probably still be the largest party. But it would be far from disastrous for the Conservatives.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,329
    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    The DNVs and WNVs are high in that poll - and Tories moving into that space won't show up in the figures - and the don't knows on best PM are very high:

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/bvkoymti8d/TheTimes_VI_221215_W.pdf

    A big problem for the Tories is Reform, with 10% of 50-64 and 18% of over 65s now plumping for it.

    My reading is that if Sunak can rally the recover the economy, get a grip on immigration, and rally his coalition against the threat of Labour, then he should get into the 33-35% space in a GE.
    I don't think 35-38% - and almost level with Labour - is impossible.

    If the war ends in Ukraine and energy prices come down, and the government can claim success in standing up to Russian aggression, and assuming most of the Reform vote comes home... Then I think 2024/5 could be ok.

    Labour would probably still be the largest party. But it would be far from disastrous for the Conservatives.
    What's the mechanism for the war ending in a way that the rest of the world is happy to buy Russian gas?

    It's one thing to see Ukraine pushing the Russian army off their territory, much harder to see Russia acknowledging the sort of defeat that stops them being seen as an international pariah.

    Not impossible, but I wouldn't want to be a Conservative MP relying on it for my future career.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,900
    edited December 2022
    France's glacial drift continues on Betfair:
    Argentina 1.98
    France 2.02

    ETA and now France is back to 2.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    The DNVs and WNVs are high in that poll - and Tories moving into that space won't show up in the figures - and the don't knows on best PM are very high:

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/bvkoymti8d/TheTimes_VI_221215_W.pdf

    A big problem for the Tories is Reform, with 10% of 50-64 and 18% of over 65s now plumping for it.

    My reading is that if Sunak can rally the recover the economy, get a grip on immigration, and rally his coalition against the threat of Labour, then he should get into the 33-35% space in a GE.
    I don't think 35-38% - and almost level with Labour - is impossible.

    If the war ends in Ukraine and energy prices come down, and the government can claim success in standing up to Russian aggression, and assuming most of the Reform vote comes home... Then I think 2024/5 could be ok.

    Labour would probably still be the largest party. But it would be far from disastrous for the Conservatives.
    Would you want to rely on no fewer than three very large 'ifs' if (sorry) you were an MP?

    Not that there is much they can do about it, of course.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    The DNVs and WNVs are high in that poll - and Tories moving into that space won't show up in the figures - and the don't knows on best PM are very high:

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/bvkoymti8d/TheTimes_VI_221215_W.pdf

    A big problem for the Tories is Reform, with 10% of 50-64 and 18% of over 65s now plumping for it.

    My reading is that if Sunak can rally the recover the economy, get a grip on immigration, and rally his coalition against the threat of Labour, then he should get into the 33-35% space in a GE.
    I don't think 35-38% - and almost level with Labour - is impossible.

    If the war ends in Ukraine and energy prices come down, and the government can claim success in standing up to Russian aggression, and assuming most of the Reform vote comes home... Then I think 2024/5 could be ok.

    Labour would probably still be the largest party. But it would be far from disastrous for the Conservatives.
    Yes, that's very possible.

    Whilst I think a Labour victory is heavily odds-on, at present, I don't expect it to result in an outcome akin to the Battle of Zama, like some do on here.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    edited December 2022
    Babar Azam looking more solid than the Bank of England right now.

    Although as @MaxPB would point out, that's not saying much these days.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    ydoethur said:

    I'm pleased to see Foakes back, but you have to wonder if England are a bowler light. Pakistan are all over them like a cheap suit at the moment.

    It’s the pitch, innit? Nothing there at all for the bowlers.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
    None of these countries has attempted to apply Passivhaus standards to all new build housing, to the best of my knowledge and google research - which is what the Scottish Government seem to be planning on doing; according the post above. It has all the hallmarks of an irresponsible legislature that has departed completely from economic reality. As all the 'grand designs' episodes reveal, it is an extremely detailed technical standard that requires many compromises in other areas of a building project, and adds considerably to build costs. As it is something that has only emerged in the past two decades, there is little research on the longevity of these buildings and the technical measures employed to meet the standard.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
    None of these countries has attempted to apply Passivhaus standards to all new build housing, to the best of my knowledge and google research - which is what the Scottish Government seem to be planning on doing; according the post above. It has all the hallmarks of an irresponsible legislature that has departed completely from economic reality. As all the 'grand designs' episodes reveal, it is an extremely detailed technical standard that requires many compromises in other areas of a building project, and adds considerably to build costs. As it is something that has only emerged in the past two decades, there is little research on the longevity of these buildings and the technical measures employed to meet the standard.
    No issues for me in requiring high standards of insulation, and building ground source heating in from the beginning. Also mandatory solar panels.
    But full passive house is not that easy. And if you have correctly set up ground source, you can heat the house(when needed) with a trickle of electricity. My relatives built a house near Elgin with just this and it’s fab, and very cheap to run.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,154
    ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    The DNVs and WNVs are high in that poll - and Tories moving into that space won't show up in the figures - and the don't knows on best PM are very high:

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/bvkoymti8d/TheTimes_VI_221215_W.pdf

    A big problem for the Tories is Reform, with 10% of 50-64 and 18% of over 65s now plumping for it.

    My reading is that if Sunak can rally the recover the economy, get a grip on immigration, and rally his coalition against the threat of Labour, then he should get into the 33-35% space in a GE.
    I don't think 35-38% - and almost level with Labour - is impossible.

    If the war ends in Ukraine and energy prices come down, and the government can claim success in standing up to Russian aggression, and assuming most of the Reform vote comes home... Then I think 2024/5 could be ok.

    Labour would probably still be the largest party. But it would be far from disastrous for the Conservatives.
    Would you want to rely on no fewer than three very large 'ifs' if (sorry) you were an MP?

    Not that there is much they can do about it, of course.
    I said 35-38% was not impossible. I didn't say it was likely.


  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,215

    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
    Does this mean that these houses won't have a central heating system?
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,405
    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
    None of these countries has attempted to apply Passivhaus standards to all new build housing, to the best of my knowledge and google research - which is what the Scottish Government seem to be planning on doing; according the post above. It has all the hallmarks of an irresponsible legislature that has departed completely from economic reality. As all the 'grand designs' episodes reveal, it is an extremely detailed technical standard that requires many compromises in other areas of a building project, and adds considerably to build costs. As it is something that has only emerged in the past two decades, there is little research on the longevity of these buildings and the technical measures employed to meet the standard.
    Surely the Scottish govt will have some level of consultation with the housbuilders on the feasibility of this before deciding to implement it. They wouldn’t implement it if it simply meant the supply of new homes would grind to a halt.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    The DNVs and WNVs are high in that poll - and Tories moving into that space won't show up in the figures - and the don't knows on best PM are very high:

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/bvkoymti8d/TheTimes_VI_221215_W.pdf

    A big problem for the Tories is Reform, with 10% of 50-64 and 18% of over 65s now plumping for it.

    My reading is that if Sunak can rally the recover the economy, get a grip on immigration, and rally his coalition against the threat of Labour, then he should get into the 33-35% space in a GE.
    I don't think 35-38% - and almost level with Labour - is impossible.

    If the war ends in Ukraine and energy prices come down, and the government can claim success in standing up to Russian aggression, and assuming most of the Reform vote comes home... Then I think 2024/5 could be ok.

    Labour would probably still be the largest party. But it would be far from disastrous for the Conservatives.
    Yes, that's very possible.

    Whilst I think a Labour victory is heavily odds-on, at present, I don't expect it to result in an outcome akin to the Battle of Zama, like some do on here.
    The bigger problem for the Tories, as we saw with Labour after Brown (or indeed Callaghan and Attlee) is not losing by a moderate margin but finding a way to rebuild their credibility in opposition. That's often much more difficult. Paradoxically, a narrow defeat would be worse for that than a fairly heavy one as it might kid them into thinking they can turn things around without much hard work (Miliband's 35% strategy springs to mind) so they may become more self-indulgent and irrelevant than they were in government.

    After all, once they leave government every single one of their signature policies is suddenly irrelevant. Pensions? The ground will change there as Starmer would undoubtedly look to reform our shambolic pension system. Brexit? Well, they said they got it done, plus people are bored of it. Scotland? Starmer will be dealing with that and whichever way he does unless he grants a Section 30 order, loses the vote and seriously bungles the negotiations (again, three big 'ifs') it's hard to see how that benefits the Tories. Public sector cuts? The question for the next five years will be how on earth we save them. Tax cuts? They're going to have to have a good narrative as to how cutting taxes will not mean cutting public services to fund the enormous debts they've run up. The Woke? Most people are not lunatics on Twitter and don't give a stuff about it except when self-righteous hypocritical fascists are blocking their roads or threatening them with violence.

    So there needs to be some serious, hard thinking. And imagination. Based on the realities of the situation. Not self-indulgent posturing by the likes of Badenoch, Braverman, Mogg and Patel in the search for some mythical right wing utopia.

    And that requires admitting there is a problem.

    Obviously they don't want an ELE like 1997 (or Labour suffered in 1983) but if they were facing a Labour majority of 80 it might actually be better for them than facing a hung Parliament.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,215
    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    I've said few times that the over 65s should have slightly higher income tax rates at each band. I think this would be better than just extending NI. Very difficult to do politically, of course.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,215
    edited December 2022

    France's glacial drift continues on Betfair:
    Argentina 1.98
    France 2.02

    ETA and now France is back to 2.

    Odds were other way round originally. I wonder what is driving this change? I would have France as very slight favourites.
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    Taz said:

    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
    None of these countries has attempted to apply Passivhaus standards to all new build housing, to the best of my knowledge and google research - which is what the Scottish Government seem to be planning on doing; according the post above. It has all the hallmarks of an irresponsible legislature that has departed completely from economic reality. As all the 'grand designs' episodes reveal, it is an extremely detailed technical standard that requires many compromises in other areas of a building project, and adds considerably to build costs. As it is something that has only emerged in the past two decades, there is little research on the longevity of these buildings and the technical measures employed to meet the standard.
    Surely the Scottish govt will have some level of consultation with the housbuilders on the feasibility of this before deciding to implement it. They wouldn’t implement it if it simply meant the supply of new homes would grind to a halt.
    Maybe, but this is possibly the very worst way to introduce any legislation- just accept a 'private members bill'. That way you are not drawing on the expertise of policy makers or stakeholders; you circumvent
    all this and put everyone on the back foot in order to achieve an overriding political objective. It isn't just the Scottish gov't, we are seeing the same thing in Westminster as well. It is a way of dodging the rigour of a proper policy making process.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    edited December 2022
    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    Actually, if Starmer really wanted a policy that would solve a great many problems and injustices, he should look at rebuilding the whole tax system from first principles. Because the current system is so farcically incompetent that even Monty Python would reject it as implausibly silly. It's so embarrassingly easy to evade tax right now if you have even a half-decent accountant that it's not surprising it's difficult to find extra ways of raising revenue. Yet at the same time, trying to manage your tax affairs yourself is a quick way to get into trouble and be fined, not helped by the poor quality of the government's online systems and the inadequacy of their record keeping.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are foolishly putting forward proposals to make it much more complex and expensive.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,154
    Stocky said:

    France's glacial drift continues on Betfair:
    Argentina 1.98
    France 2.02

    ETA and now France is back to 2.

    Odds were other way round originally. I wonder what is driving this change? I would have France as very slight favourites.
    There are a number of French players who are sick.
  • ydoethur said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    The DNVs and WNVs are high in that poll - and Tories moving into that space won't show up in the figures - and the don't knows on best PM are very high:

    https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/bvkoymti8d/TheTimes_VI_221215_W.pdf

    A big problem for the Tories is Reform, with 10% of 50-64 and 18% of over 65s now plumping for it.

    My reading is that if Sunak can rally the recover the economy, get a grip on immigration, and rally his coalition against the threat of Labour, then he should get into the 33-35% space in a GE.
    I don't think 35-38% - and almost level with Labour - is impossible.

    If the war ends in Ukraine and energy prices come down, and the government can claim success in standing up to Russian aggression, and assuming most of the Reform vote comes home... Then I think 2024/5 could be ok.

    Labour would probably still be the largest party. But it would be far from disastrous for the Conservatives.
    Yes, that's very possible.

    Whilst I think a Labour victory is heavily odds-on, at present, I don't expect it to result in an outcome akin to the Battle of Zama, like some do on here.
    The bigger problem for the Tories, as we saw with Labour after Brown (or indeed Callaghan and Attlee) is not losing by a moderate margin but finding a way to rebuild their credibility in opposition. That's often much more difficult. Paradoxically, a narrow defeat would be worse for that than a fairly heavy one as it might kid them into thinking they can turn things around without much hard work (Miliband's 35% strategy springs to mind) so they may become more self-indulgent and irrelevant than they were in government.

    After all, once they leave government every single one of their signature policies is suddenly irrelevant. Pensions? The ground will change there as Starmer would undoubtedly look to reform our shambolic pension system. Brexit? Well, they said they got it done, plus people are bored of it. Scotland? Starmer will be dealing with that and whichever way he does unless he grants a Section 30 order, loses the vote and seriously bungles the negotiations (again, three big 'ifs') it's hard to see how that benefits the Tories. Public sector cuts? The question for the next five years will be how on earth we save them. Tax cuts? They're going to have to have a good narrative as to how cutting taxes will not mean cutting public services to fund the enormous debts they've run up. The Woke? Most people are not lunatics on Twitter and don't give a stuff about it except when self-righteous hypocritical fascists are blocking their roads or threatening them with violence.

    So there needs to be some serious, hard thinking. And imagination. Based on the realities of the situation. Not self-indulgent posturing by the likes of Badenoch, Braverman, Mogg and Patel in the search for some mythical right wing utopia.

    And that requires admitting there is a problem.

    Obviously they don't want an ELE like 1997 (or Labour suffered in 1983) but if they were facing a Labour majority of 80 it might actually be better for them than facing a hung Parliament.
    I wonder if different degrees of defeat have a meaningful effect on the complexion of the Conservative party in 2025.

    Guessing, a moderate defeat preferentially takes out the Red Wall Boris'n'Brexit types, a bigger swing eats into the more traditional Tories and a really bad swing leaves them largely a regional party of the English east coast, really cross about immigration.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    edited December 2022
    Brilliant catch by Pope there.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    ydoethur said:

    Brilliant catch by Pope there.

    Very cautious from the umpires. On the replay it was so clearly a catch they must have seen that live. Worried after the dodgy decision in the last match?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,154
    darkage said:

    Taz said:

    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
    None of these countries has attempted to apply Passivhaus standards to all new build housing, to the best of my knowledge and google research - which is what the Scottish Government seem to be planning on doing; according the post above. It has all the hallmarks of an irresponsible legislature that has departed completely from economic reality. As all the 'grand designs' episodes reveal, it is an extremely detailed technical standard that requires many compromises in other areas of a building project, and adds considerably to build costs. As it is something that has only emerged in the past two decades, there is little research on the longevity of these buildings and the technical measures employed to meet the standard.
    Surely the Scottish govt will have some level of consultation with the housbuilders on the feasibility of this before deciding to implement it. They wouldn’t implement it if it simply meant the supply of new homes would grind to a halt.
    Maybe, but this is possibly the very worst way to introduce any legislation- just accept a 'private members bill'. That way you are not drawing on the expertise of policy makers or stakeholders; you circumvent
    all this and put everyone on the back foot in order to achieve an overriding political objective. It isn't just the Scottish gov't, we are seeing the same thing in Westminster as well. It is a way of dodging the rigour of a proper policy making process.
    In the HoC, any Bill - whether private member or government sponsored - still need to go through the committee stage.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397

    ydoethur said:

    Brilliant catch by Pope there.

    Very cautious from the umpires. On the replay it was so clearly a catch they must have seen that live. Worried after the dodgy decision in the last match?
    They may have wanted to double check it hit the bat and pad, not bat and ground given how high it bounced. Clearly it didn't but it's an easy mistake to make and if you have the technology to check, why not use it to be safe?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664

    Led by Donkeys video on Michelle Mone and the PPE scandal
    https://twitter.com/bydonkeys/status/1603366602887536640

    This should get as much air time as possible.

    I hope steps are taken to recover that stolen money. Also, time to deal with tax havens like the IoM that depend on UK protection whilst taking advantage of those too greedy to pay their taxes.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,958
    edited December 2022

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    Yougov also has Reform on 9% and 10% in the South at the Tories expense, way higher than other polls
    and absurd given Reform got just 3% in Thursday's Stretford by election. Yet supposedly that Yougov subsample gives Reform 11% in the North?

    In Scotland the Tories are polling little different to the 14% they got under Cameron in 2015.

    In the bluewall unlike the redwall Sunak also leads Starmer as preferred PM still
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    Actually, if Starmer really wanted a policy that would solve a great many problems and injustices, he should look at rebuilding the whole tax system from first principles. Because the current system is so farcically incompetent that even Monty Python would reject it as implausibly silly. It's so embarrassingly easy to evade tax right now if you have even a half-decent accountant that it's not surprising it's difficult to find extra ways of raising revenue. Yet at the same time, trying to manage your tax affairs yourself is a quick way to get into trouble and be fined, not helped by the poor quality of the government's online systems and the inadequacy of their record keeping.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are foolishly putting forward proposals to make it much more complex and expensive.
    I was talking to this with a friend who is a partner in one of the big accounting firms. The root of the problem is that the tax system has just been made too complicated. Also, too much is subject to legal interpretation where there is no case law. It has got to the point where some major companies circumvent accountants entirely and just go straight to tax barristers to get advice. It is not just the tax system where this problem has arisen, there are other areas as well like the planning system which have gone down the same road.

    If you go to other countries then you find that there are just simple rules that everyone has to follow, no one has a personal accountant; people just deal with the tax office directly.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    darkage said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    Actually, if Starmer really wanted a policy that would solve a great many problems and injustices, he should look at rebuilding the whole tax system from first principles. Because the current system is so farcically incompetent that even Monty Python would reject it as implausibly silly. It's so embarrassingly easy to evade tax right now if you have even a half-decent accountant that it's not surprising it's difficult to find extra ways of raising revenue. Yet at the same time, trying to manage your tax affairs yourself is a quick way to get into trouble and be fined, not helped by the poor quality of the government's online systems and the inadequacy of their record keeping.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are foolishly putting forward proposals to make it much more complex and expensive.
    I was talking to this with a friend who is a partner in one of the big accounting firms. The root of the problem is that the tax system has just been made too complicated. Also, too much is subject to legal interpretation where there is no case law. It has got to the point where some major companies circumvent accountants entirely and just go straight to tax barristers to get advice. It is not just the tax system where this problem has arisen, there are other areas as well like the planning system which have gone down the same road.

    If you go to other countries then you find that there are just simple rules that everyone has to follow, no one has a personal accountant; people just deal with the tax office directly.
    You should hear my accountant on the subject!

    As for the Tories' future plans, the politest thing he will say about the proposal for everyone to do quarterly reporting is that it's 'unworkable madness.'
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398
    rcs1000 said:

    darkage said:

    Taz said:

    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
    None of these countries has attempted to apply Passivhaus standards to all new build housing, to the best of my knowledge and google research - which is what the Scottish Government seem to be planning on doing; according the post above. It has all the hallmarks of an irresponsible legislature that has departed completely from economic reality. As all the 'grand designs' episodes reveal, it is an extremely detailed technical standard that requires many compromises in other areas of a building project, and adds considerably to build costs. As it is something that has only emerged in the past two decades, there is little research on the longevity of these buildings and the technical measures employed to meet the standard.
    Surely the Scottish govt will have some level of consultation with the housbuilders on the feasibility of this before deciding to implement it. They wouldn’t implement it if it simply meant the supply of new homes would grind to a halt.
    Maybe, but this is possibly the very worst way to introduce any legislation- just accept a 'private members bill'. That way you are not drawing on the expertise of policy makers or stakeholders; you circumvent
    all this and put everyone on the back foot in order to achieve an overriding political objective. It isn't just the Scottish gov't, we are seeing the same thing in Westminster as well. It is a way of dodging the rigour of a proper policy making process.
    In the HoC, any Bill - whether private member or government sponsored - still need to go through the committee stage.
    Yes... but legislation should be the culmination of the policy making process; not the beginning of it.

    There is another issue as well; and this is the government introducing new policy through 'amendments' at committee stage, which they can then vote through with their parliamentary majority without much attention, possibly buried within more controversial stuff. That is another dubious technique mastered by the current government in Westminster.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,958
    IanB2 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    I tend to agree - tempered a little by the recollection that when the YGMRP came out, everyone used its prediction of a Labour win in Canterbury to rubbish the model, then Labour won Canterbury….and Kensington.
    Canterbury is full of students now, Kensington voted overwhelmingly Remain.

    Sevenoaks has no university and voted Leave
  • ydoethur said:

    Brilliant catch by Pope there.

    Ball thrown by Cardinal Wolsey?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,958

    Ireland will have a new taoiseach (prime minister) later as Micheál Martin and Leo Varadkar swap roles.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63945064

    Latest Irish poll:

    Sinn Féin 34% (nc)
    Fine Gael 23% (+2)
    Fianna Fáil 21% (-2)
    Greens 5% (+1)
    Labour 3% (-2)
    People Before Profit/Solidarity 1% (nc)
    Social Democrats 1% (-1)
    Aontú - (-1)
    others/independents 12% (+3)

    (Behaviour and Attitudes/The Sunday Times; 6 December)
    Or in other words 44% FG and FF, 34% SF
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397

    ydoethur said:

    Brilliant catch by Pope there.

    Ball thrown by Cardinal Wolsey?
    Take it as red.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,269
    darkage said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NHS Lothian, a large NHS board in Scotland, already says it cannot have a policy of guaranteeing female-only care because of the privacy stipulations in the Gender Recognition Act. This will v likely become more common under Sturgeon’s self-ID reforms.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-risk-health-over-trans-nhs-workers-fear-5dvz86f2l

    Sturgeon’s mantra remains no man will abuse the system & an English paediatrician’s evidence review is irrelevant to Scottish children.

    Why she is so wrong to ignore the warnings of the UN Rapporteur about the risks of self-ID for Scottish women & girls

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/27/nicola-sturgeon-will-endanger-women-if-she-opens-single-sex-spaces-almost-everone?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Quite impressed with the Guardian for publishing the second article and their coverage of this issue. Goes against the 'woke' zeitgeist.

    Politically, I find the position of the SNP on this issue to be naive in a lot of ways. They have taken an extremely radical stance on a complex issue with wide ranging societal implications; in a context where there is very little public awareness and understanding. The zeitgeist could easily turn against them in a brutal and existential way.
    Bringing the word “woke” into this strikes me as joining the absolutist idiots on all seventeen sides in the mud.

    What is need needed is a messy compromise. Inconsistent as hell, with a bunch of room for human judgement for individual cases.

    Human stuff, really.

    Anyone who wants simple rules on the back of a playing card is 50% of the way to nut job authoritarian.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397

    darkage said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NHS Lothian, a large NHS board in Scotland, already says it cannot have a policy of guaranteeing female-only care because of the privacy stipulations in the Gender Recognition Act. This will v likely become more common under Sturgeon’s self-ID reforms.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-risk-health-over-trans-nhs-workers-fear-5dvz86f2l

    Sturgeon’s mantra remains no man will abuse the system & an English paediatrician’s evidence review is irrelevant to Scottish children.

    Why she is so wrong to ignore the warnings of the UN Rapporteur about the risks of self-ID for Scottish women & girls

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/27/nicola-sturgeon-will-endanger-women-if-she-opens-single-sex-spaces-almost-everone?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Quite impressed with the Guardian for publishing the second article and their coverage of this issue. Goes against the 'woke' zeitgeist.

    Politically, I find the position of the SNP on this issue to be naive in a lot of ways. They have taken an extremely radical stance on a complex issue with wide ranging societal implications; in a context where there is very little public awareness and understanding. The zeitgeist could easily turn against them in a brutal and existential way.
    Bringing the word “woke” into this strikes me as joining the absolutist idiots on all seventeen sides in the mud.

    What is need needed is a messy compromise. Inconsistent as hell, with a bunch of room for human judgement for individual cases.

    Human stuff, really.

    Anyone who wants simple rules on the back of a playing card is 50% of the way to nut job authoritarian.
    You think Sturgeon is only 50% of the way there?
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Hoping this audit, ordered by Sunak, on Ukraine and the war does not come to be the start of a scaling back of support.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64006121
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,840
    Taz said:

    darkage said:

    darkage said:

    Great to see a Scottish Labour legislator being constructive:

    Delighted @scotgov have accepted my Members’ Bill proposal to introduce a Scottish equivalent of passivhaus standards for all new build housing in Scotland. This will help future proof housing stock, save people money and tackle our climate emergency - a very welcome move!



    https://twitter.com/alexrowleyfife/status/1603723322755518465?s=46&t=5w0IJA8dRa9neBgLtjgXPw

    The passivhaus standard originated from a conversation in 1988 between Bo Adamson of Lund University, in Sweden, and Wolfgang Feist of the Institut für Wohnen und Umwelt, in Darmstadt, Germany. Later, their concept was further developed through a number of research projects, aided by financial assistance from the German state of Hessen.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_house

    This is the type of initiative that will completely ruin the construction industry in Scotland, where house prices are already low compared with the rest of the UK and there are relatively few problems of undersupply.
    Please explain your thinking. That it would “completely ruin” an entire industry seems unlikely. Has it done so in Germany, Ireland or the United States?
    None of these countries has attempted to apply Passivhaus standards to all new build housing, to the best of my knowledge and google research - which is what the Scottish Government seem to be planning on doing; according the post above. It has all the hallmarks of an irresponsible legislature that has departed completely from economic reality. As all the 'grand designs' episodes reveal, it is an extremely detailed technical standard that requires many compromises in other areas of a building project, and adds considerably to build costs. As it is something that has only emerged in the past two decades, there is little research on the longevity of these buildings and the technical measures employed to meet the standard.
    Surely the Scottish govt will have some level of consultation with the housbuilders on the feasibility of this before deciding to implement it. They wouldn’t implement it if it simply meant the supply of new homes would grind to a halt.
    SNP don't have much choice - they are a minority government on issue X if the Greens don't agree on issue X. And the Greens will approve of insulation etc. Better to adopt and control a private Labour member's bill and modify it than have something atrocious dumped on them by the Greens + Unionists - the classic example being the Edinburgh Trams which the SNP opposed and which buggered up the transport budget for the SG for years.

    And in this case there is real sense in improving standards (which need to be different and higher in Scotland because of the weather anyway, especially in the west and north).

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,840
    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NHS Lothian, a large NHS board in Scotland, already says it cannot have a policy of guaranteeing female-only care because of the privacy stipulations in the Gender Recognition Act. This will v likely become more common under Sturgeon’s self-ID reforms.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-risk-health-over-trans-nhs-workers-fear-5dvz86f2l

    Sturgeon’s mantra remains no man will abuse the system & an English paediatrician’s evidence review is irrelevant to Scottish children.

    Why she is so wrong to ignore the warnings of the UN Rapporteur about the risks of self-ID for Scottish women & girls

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/27/nicola-sturgeon-will-endanger-women-if-she-opens-single-sex-spaces-almost-everone?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Quite impressed with the Guardian for publishing the second article and their coverage of this issue. Goes against the 'woke' zeitgeist.

    Politically, I find the position of the SNP on this issue to be naive in a lot of ways. They have taken an extremely radical stance on a complex issue with wide ranging societal implications; in a context where there is very little public awareness and understanding. The zeitgeist could easily turn against them in a brutal and existential way.
    Bringing the word “woke” into this strikes me as joining the absolutist idiots on all seventeen sides in the mud.

    What is need needed is a messy compromise. Inconsistent as hell, with a bunch of room for human judgement for individual cases.

    Human stuff, really.

    Anyone who wants simple rules on the back of a playing card is 50% of the way to nut job authoritarian.
    You think Sturgeon is only 50% of the way there?
    How very odd that our PBers never mention the *other* UN rapporteur who is basically telling them to get on with the trans law changes.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,840
    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    Actually, if Starmer really wanted a policy that would solve a great many problems and injustices, he should look at rebuilding the whole tax system from first principles. Because the current system is so farcically incompetent that even Monty Python would reject it as implausibly silly. It's so embarrassingly easy to evade tax right now if you have even a half-decent accountant that it's not surprising it's difficult to find extra ways of raising revenue. Yet at the same time, trying to manage your tax affairs yourself is a quick way to get into trouble and be fined, not helped by the poor quality of the government's online systems and the inadequacy of their record keeping.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are foolishly putting forward proposals to make it much more complex and expensive.
    I was talking to this with a friend who is a partner in one of the big accounting firms. The root of the problem is that the tax system has just been made too complicated. Also, too much is subject to legal interpretation where there is no case law. It has got to the point where some major companies circumvent accountants entirely and just go straight to tax barristers to get advice. It is not just the tax system where this problem has arisen, there are other areas as well like the planning system which have gone down the same road.

    If you go to other countries then you find that there are just simple rules that everyone has to follow, no one has a personal accountant; people just deal with the tax office directly.
    You should hear my accountant on the subject!

    As for the Tories' future plans, the politest thing he will say about the proposal for everyone to do quarterly reporting is that it's 'unworkable madness.'
    Quarterly reporting, please?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,269
    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    Actually, if Starmer really wanted a policy that would solve a great many problems and injustices, he should look at rebuilding the whole tax system from first principles. Because the current system is so farcically incompetent that even Monty Python would reject it as implausibly silly. It's so embarrassingly easy to evade tax right now if you have even a half-decent accountant that it's not surprising it's difficult to find extra ways of raising revenue. Yet at the same time, trying to manage your tax affairs yourself is a quick way to get into trouble and be fined, not helped by the poor quality of the government's online systems and the inadequacy of their record keeping.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are foolishly putting forward proposals to make it much more complex and expensive.
    I was talking to this with a friend who is a partner in one of the big accounting firms. The root of the problem is that the tax system has just been made too complicated. Also, too much is subject to legal interpretation where there is no case law. It has got to the point where some major companies circumvent accountants entirely and just go straight to tax barristers to get advice. It is not just the tax system where this problem has arisen, there are other areas as well like the planning system which have gone down the same road.

    If you go to other countries then you find that there are just simple rules that everyone has to follow, no one has a personal accountant; people just deal with the tax office directly.
    You should hear my accountant on the subject!

    As for the Tories' future plans, the politest thing he will say about the proposal for everyone to do quarterly reporting is that it's 'unworkable madness.'
    Tax law is written by tax lawyers. Who then tell us that all simplification is evil madness.

    When several former fucked up countries (several former East Bloc counties included), flattened tax systems to make them simple and clear, I recall articles forecast Armageddon.

    Afterwards the story changed - “obviously it can work in a completely destroyed economy. But an advanced economy needs a complex tax system….”
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664

    Good morning, everyone.

    Hoping this audit, ordered by Sunak, on Ukraine and the war does not come to be the start of a scaling back of support.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64006121

    Fearing it will, more like.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    Ye gods! Temperature has gone above freezing outside.

    Winter's over - rejoice!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103
    Carnyx said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NHS Lothian, a large NHS board in Scotland, already says it cannot have a policy of guaranteeing female-only care because of the privacy stipulations in the Gender Recognition Act. This will v likely become more common under Sturgeon’s self-ID reforms.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/women-risk-health-over-trans-nhs-workers-fear-5dvz86f2l

    Sturgeon’s mantra remains no man will abuse the system & an English paediatrician’s evidence review is irrelevant to Scottish children.

    Why she is so wrong to ignore the warnings of the UN Rapporteur about the risks of self-ID for Scottish women & girls

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/nov/27/nicola-sturgeon-will-endanger-women-if-she-opens-single-sex-spaces-almost-everone?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Quite impressed with the Guardian for publishing the second article and their coverage of this issue. Goes against the 'woke' zeitgeist.

    Politically, I find the position of the SNP on this issue to be naive in a lot of ways. They have taken an extremely radical stance on a complex issue with wide ranging societal implications; in a context where there is very little public awareness and understanding. The zeitgeist could easily turn against them in a brutal and existential way.
    Bringing the word “woke” into this strikes me as joining the absolutist idiots on all seventeen sides in the mud.

    What is need needed is a messy compromise. Inconsistent as hell, with a bunch of room for human judgement for individual cases.

    Human stuff, really.

    Anyone who wants simple rules on the back of a playing card is 50% of the way to nut job authoritarian.
    You think Sturgeon is only 50% of the way there?
    How very odd that our PBers never mention the *other* UN rapporteur who is basically telling them to get on with the trans law changes.
    I hadn't seen that one, but it did feel like a likely danger, as UN rapporteurs have often been known to make silly interventions.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    Actually, if Starmer really wanted a policy that would solve a great many problems and injustices, he should look at rebuilding the whole tax system from first principles. Because the current system is so farcically incompetent that even Monty Python would reject it as implausibly silly. It's so embarrassingly easy to evade tax right now if you have even a half-decent accountant that it's not surprising it's difficult to find extra ways of raising revenue. Yet at the same time, trying to manage your tax affairs yourself is a quick way to get into trouble and be fined, not helped by the poor quality of the government's online systems and the inadequacy of their record keeping.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are foolishly putting forward proposals to make it much more complex and expensive.
    I was talking to this with a friend who is a partner in one of the big accounting firms. The root of the problem is that the tax system has just been made too complicated. Also, too much is subject to legal interpretation where there is no case law. It has got to the point where some major companies circumvent accountants entirely and just go straight to tax barristers to get advice. It is not just the tax system where this problem has arisen, there are other areas as well like the planning system which have gone down the same road.

    If you go to other countries then you find that there are just simple rules that everyone has to follow, no one has a personal accountant; people just deal with the tax office directly.
    You should hear my accountant on the subject!

    As for the Tories' future plans, the politest thing he will say about the proposal for everyone to do quarterly reporting is that it's 'unworkable madness.'
    Tax law is written by tax lawyers. Who then tell us that all simplification is evil madness.

    When several former fucked up countries (several former East Bloc counties included), flattened tax systems to make them simple and clear, I recall articles forecast Armageddon.

    Afterwards the story changed - “obviously it can work in a completely destroyed economy. But an advanced economy needs a complex tax system….”
    In that case, maybe the Tories have done us a favour in completely destroying the economy.

    (And I still can't get fecking Babar Azam!)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,103

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    Actually, if Starmer really wanted a policy that would solve a great many problems and injustices, he should look at rebuilding the whole tax system from first principles. Because the current system is so farcically incompetent that even Monty Python would reject it as implausibly silly. It's so embarrassingly easy to evade tax right now if you have even a half-decent accountant that it's not surprising it's difficult to find extra ways of raising revenue. Yet at the same time, trying to manage your tax affairs yourself is a quick way to get into trouble and be fined, not helped by the poor quality of the government's online systems and the inadequacy of their record keeping.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are foolishly putting forward proposals to make it much more complex and expensive.
    I was talking to this with a friend who is a partner in one of the big accounting firms. The root of the problem is that the tax system has just been made too complicated. Also, too much is subject to legal interpretation where there is no case law. It has got to the point where some major companies circumvent accountants entirely and just go straight to tax barristers to get advice. It is not just the tax system where this problem has arisen, there are other areas as well like the planning system which have gone down the same road.

    If you go to other countries then you find that there are just simple rules that everyone has to follow, no one has a personal accountant; people just deal with the tax office directly.
    You should hear my accountant on the subject!

    As for the Tories' future plans, the politest thing he will say about the proposal for everyone to do quarterly reporting is that it's 'unworkable madness.'
    Tax law is written by tax lawyers. Who then tell us that all simplification is evil madness.

    When several former fucked up countries (several former East Bloc counties included), flattened tax systems to make them simple and clear, I recall articles forecast Armageddon.

    Afterwards the story changed - “obviously it can work in a completely destroyed economy. But an advanced economy needs a complex tax system….”
    It really doesn't seem necessary for many things in life to be so complicated. Tax, corporate structuring (the two are probably connected), the only benefit to the complexity seems to be for lawyers and those who wish to dodge accountability or transparency. It cannot make things easier.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,664
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IanB2 said:

    YouGov, the only pollster to correctly weigh geographical sub-samples:

    London
    Lab 57%
    Con 19%
    Ref 7%
    LD 7%
    Grn 4%

    Rest of South
    Lab 42%
    Con 26%
    LD 12%
    Ref 10%
    Grn 9%

    Midlands and Wales
    Lab 52%
    Con 29%
    Ref 8%
    LD 5%
    Grn 3%
    PC 2%

    North
    Lab 57%
    Con 20%
    Ref 11%
    Grn 6%
    LD 5%

    Scotland
    SNP 46%
    Lab 27%
    Con 12%
    LD 7%
    Ref 5%

    (YouGov / The Times; sample size: 1,690; fieldwork: 14-15 December 2022)

    The Tories at just 26% in southern England. Never mind the Red Wall, the story of the next GE looks like being the collapse of the Blue Wall. The extinction of the Scottish Tories, again, won’t even make page 10.

    I know, I was looking at the Savanta MRP for my old home seat of Sevenoaks, rock solid safe Tory for generations, and it has the Tories just squeaking home there.
    Not very realistic. The Tories will win Sevenoaks with a huge majority when the election arrives.
    I tend to agree - tempered a little by the recollection that when the YGMRP came out, everyone used its prediction of a Labour win in Canterbury to rubbish the model, then Labour won Canterbury….and Kensington.
    Canterbury is full of students now, Kensington voted overwhelmingly Remain.

    Sevenoaks has no university and voted Leave
    1. What proportion of those Sevenoaks Leave voters have passed away since 2016?
    2. Why would Leave voters fear voting for Labour?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397
    If Babar Azam doesn't get a century here he should kick himself very hard.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    ydoethur said:

    If Babar Azam doesn't get a century here he should kick himself very hard.

    You trying for a wicket?😀
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,397

    ydoethur said:

    If Babar Azam doesn't get a century here he should kick himself very hard.

    You trying for a wicket?😀
    I've been trying all morning!
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,405
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    If Babar Azam doesn't get a century here he should kick himself very hard.

    You trying for a wicket?😀
    I've been trying all morning!
    Well you’ve got five so far then !
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,994

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    ydoethur said:

    darkage said:

    malcolmg said:

    darkage said:

    I had dinner with a friend yesterday who is a retired civil servant and on his pension. He worked for nearly 50 years; I would guess that he is getting about 50k per year in his various pensions, so he is paying about 15% income tax and no National Insurance.

    He said that he has a great deal, he expects that the chancellor is hoping he will vote conservative - but he won't. He will be voting labour. However, his son is a doctor and is hoping to send his children to private school; I think the prospective rise in school fees is a bit more of a concern.

    I think that, from a political point of view, Labour would be much better off taxing wealthy pensioners; rather than aspirational parents sending their children to private school. Wealthy pensioners already vote conservative, those who don't are unlikely to be bothered by additional taxes as long as they are seen to be fair. I don't think there is a big market for this type of 'class war' politics.

    Another clown who wants to grift people who worked all their lives for some lazy greedy young people. Many many more pensioners are poor or have nothing more than their house and pension. Get out and earn your own money you greedy git.
    You keep reflexively replying in these terms but you aren't engaging with the issue. No one suggests pensioners on low to moderate incomes should be paying more tax, it is those on large incomes where the problem arises - there is a massive disparity between the combined tax (income tax and NI) you pay as a pensioner and that which you pay whilst in work; as acknowledged by my friend yesterday.
    Actually, if Starmer really wanted a policy that would solve a great many problems and injustices, he should look at rebuilding the whole tax system from first principles. Because the current system is so farcically incompetent that even Monty Python would reject it as implausibly silly. It's so embarrassingly easy to evade tax right now if you have even a half-decent accountant that it's not surprising it's difficult to find extra ways of raising revenue. Yet at the same time, trying to manage your tax affairs yourself is a quick way to get into trouble and be fined, not helped by the poor quality of the government's online systems and the inadequacy of their record keeping.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are foolishly putting forward proposals to make it much more complex and expensive.
    I was talking to this with a friend who is a partner in one of the big accounting firms. The root of the problem is that the tax system has just been made too complicated. Also, too much is subject to legal interpretation where there is no case law. It has got to the point where some major companies circumvent accountants entirely and just go straight to tax barristers to get advice. It is not just the tax system where this problem has arisen, there are other areas as well like the planning system which have gone down the same road.

    If you go to other countries then you find that there are just simple rules that everyone has to follow, no one has a personal accountant; people just deal with the tax office directly.
    You should hear my accountant on the subject!

    As for the Tories' future plans, the politest thing he will say about the proposal for everyone to do quarterly reporting is that it's 'unworkable madness.'
    Tax law is written by tax lawyers. Who then tell us that all simplification is evil madness.

    When several former fucked up countries (several former East Bloc counties included), flattened tax systems to make them simple and clear, I recall articles forecast Armageddon.

    Afterwards the story changed - “obviously it can work in a completely destroyed economy. But an advanced economy needs a complex tax system….”
    Actually most people in HMRC and the wider tax world would love some tax simplification. The trouble is more an editorial one. It’s easier to design a simple tax system from nothing than unravel an existing complex one. Like it’s easier to write a 500 word article from scratch than try to edit down a 2,000 word one because you’re always worried about “killing your darlings”.

    The other issue with tax simplification is political, because it usually involves:

    - rationalising bandings and thresholds, where there will always be noisy losers
    - removing special reliefs and incentives, which someone will always claim will destroy an industry
    - reducing or increasing the overall take: gard to make it tax neutral

    It's certainly doable but the trouble is government and opposition are now terrified of radical tax reform after the Truss debacle.
This discussion has been closed.