Categories
Starmer has a net approval lead of 17% over Sunak – politicalbetting.com
Starmer has a net approval lead of 17% over Sunak – politicalbetting.com
0
This discussion has been closed.
Starmer has a net approval lead of 17% over Sunak – politicalbetting.com
Comments
And that’s not Best PM judgement of voters where Starmer is only 1% ahead having but just taken the lead.
Downward direction of travel don’t look so great for Starmer either.
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk
What's blandest's net approval rating, Ed Davey?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_ys6lGuPeI
Maybe he should predict some things and get it right? Sunak was dire in campaign against Truss, but one exchange where he said go ahead with that and the markets will react against you seems to have got him the top job.
The process was -
* Olive oil in 7 inch frying pan
* Chopped a couple of shallots* and chucked the in the pan on a medium high heat
* While this is cooking, beat five eggs. Add pepper. Add salt and vinegar crisps.
* Stir the egg and potato mix into the shallots
* Cook on medium high for ten minutes
* Chuck under the grill for two minutes to make sure the top is set
* Flip omelet
* Cook for a further four minutes
Serve
Verdict: not as good as my slow cooked Spanish omelet. But, on the other hand, I was able to rustle up something 85% as good in one fifth of the time. It may well become a weekend staple.
* I didn't have onions.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64253708
Of course, the root problem is actually the same one that the Conservatives have. A vast proportion of the nation's wealth is now locked up in property, there's no way to address income inequalities, lack of opportunity for the young and the enormous burden of elderly health and social care without extracting some of that wealth - and voters (especially the vast and growing legion of pensioners) will scream blue murder the nanosecond that a politician suggests that they be parted from some of the value of their house. Exhibit A: the Dementia Tax.
People want nice stuff (such as ambulances that aren't so catastrophically late that they don't turn up until after the patient's funeral,) but they expect someone else to pay for it. It was ever thus.
It'll give journos a nice focus too. More interesting than writing about Harry's thoughts on his knob.
PS. Now I come to think of it, the B company merged with Paddy Power...so creating such markets might not exactly stick in their throats and could be a case of Tiocfaidh ár lá and "FTK" :-) @Dura_Ace
I think we are going to see exactly the same in the area of LLMs, but unlike training an object classifier, you can't just retrain models revolving around this in a day or two.
Also, not sure I agree that studying all the past papers (knowing there are limited variations) for the test means you know the subject...it means you know how to pass the test, which I would argue isn't the same thing.
If a King stepped out of line and refused to abdicate, Parliament would switch en masse to republicanism overnight.
No, that's not a dodge either, we vote for MPs then trust them to do things for us, and if they don't we vote against them, that's how it works unless you think we've done everything by referendum before.
Funnily enough it's the sort of thing Rishi probably would have supported were he not a candidate himself, given his belief that appointing someone who resigned/sacked days earlier is totally fine.
Just tax wealth and consolidate NI and income tax.
The intent to balance things out is a good one, but doing so in this way would cause harm to those who cannot take it, as well as those who could. More targeted options are needed.
"Cut the state pension" is an angry response to a desperate situation, which is that the young are being suffocated by the accumulated financial burden of astronomical housing costs and the care of the old. I don't think it's the right solution - that, of course, is taxing homeowners, including well-to-do pensioners, a lot more, so that we can start to tackle the immense problems of housing-as-investment-opportunity and looking after old people at the same time - but you can see where the frustration comes from.
You think that is too much for 35 odd years contributions to it?
The king is due to hold the office until he passes, unlike a politician who is subject to the whims of his constituents and party for the office he holds.
Boris Johnson just beat that in a SINGLE donation 🤯
https://twitter.com/TomLarkinSky/status/1613615157636173835
And whilst I wouldn't want to go too far with this, there is something awkward about the way that a generation who have tended to vote for low taxes and frugal services and benefits through their working lives are now shocked and appalled at the frugality of pensions and creakyness of health and social care now they are using them more.
Better to just equalise taxation in retirement when earning by getting pensioners to pay NI.
Another aspect was the GFC and the introduction of ultra-low interest rates in 2009. As I've said here before, Mrs Stodge and I found ourselves paying 0.99% interest on the mortgage so paying it off became easy and indeed we've funded home improvements (accentuating the wealth of the property) based on being able to borrow against that mortgage.
The old days of moving up the property and career ladder living in more expensive houses but being able to afford the mortgage as the career progressed are over for a generation. With the mortgage clear, sell the house and it's all profit - downsize to a smaller venue without a mortgage and if you can afford to, it's a decent lifestyle. Indeed, it's the Dream for many but for those on the ladder now, probably unachievable.
If you wanted a money making essay writer you would offer such options. Tune for age, tune for dialect, tune for ability, allow the users to incrementally improve rather than show sudden jumps in performance. And you would definitely do adversarial training against the best detectors, to get your input to produce false negatives.
Edit: Or maybe not when I look at the correct months! Q3 was a particularly low wind quarter.
I've just finished the audible audiobook version of "Spare" by Prince Harry.
Whatever your opinion of Harry, Meg and the monarchy, whatever "side" you're on, its a profoundly important historical document.
Thoughts;
1. Small point, i know, but important - the audiobook version is really excellent. Harry has a gift for narration, probably borne of his public speaking training/experience. Absolutely fantastic narration.
2. Right at the end, it all makes sense. Why he's published the book. It really is laid out in black and white. He needs security. It costs loads (he was quoted $6m/yr). He feels entitled to it because he had no choice about his profile. Prince Andrew gets security, despite his shameful behaviour. Given what happened to his mum, it should be his right.
The family chose to withdraw his security. They must suffer the consequences.
What else is a man to do, but to wash his dirty linen in public in exchange for a hefty paycheque, in such a scenario?
It does start to sound a bit like borderline blackmail. That is clearly how the institution works. Both Harry and the institution were playing the game. The institution assumed he would fall back into line. Harry called their bluff. It's all got out of hand. That is, basically, the reason why we are reading this extraordinary book.
3. His early life stuff reaffirms every stereotype us state school kids had/have about public school pricks. I've met lots of people who are some degree of Harry, in their mannerisms, outlook, biases etc. We all have. After reading Spare, I' be embarrassed to send my kid to one of the posher private schools. It doesn't produce normal people, Eton. All the other "top" schools ape it. Why? I get the impression Harry left a lot out about his school days, but from what he did include... well...
4. Drug use. He's pretty open about this and it, frankly, should be shocking. It's blindingly obvious people knew, including his taxpayer funded security - and probably the police. It really is one rule for them, one for the rest of us. I know this is a fairly liberal site where a lot of posters either don't care, or actively abuse drugs, but it's an issue I personally care a lot about. Andrew Sullivan's most recent podcast on Fentanyl is just shocking. This shit is poision, and it's coming our way. I'm probably even further to the right than Priti Patel on drugs, in stark contrast to most of the rest of my politics. The fact Harry is able to be completely open about his hard drug use indicates how much of a non-issue it is in mainstream culture. I think our society is heading in a disasterous directon and few seem to care.
Anyway, that's all for now. I have a few other thoughts, but those are my main takeaways that haven't been majored on by the media. Yet.
What do PB'ers recon? I've been away from PB for a couple of weeks, so have missed the threads where posters chewed the fat on "Spare"
a 75 year old today would first have been eligible to vote in an election in 1965
Since then the country has voted 5 times for Labour, 7 times for the Tories and 3 times for a minority or coalition.
And in how many of those elections were people voting for or against taxes. Certainly not in 1979 (winter of Discontent). Nor 1997 (Tory sleaze and ineptitude) or 2019 (Brexit), which are three of the most obvious examples. Indeed the only one I could say for sure where people were voting specifically on a tax policy was May in 2017 where she freaked people out with her 'Death tax'.
The state pension isn’t much. Not is the other forgotten bit of of the Triple Lock - benefits.
It’s altruism - If the poor are all starving, I won’t get much for selling them for spare parts.
I’m perfectly serious. A “let the old fucks die” party might easily win an election. No more help from the state after the age of 80. Nothing. Just a big jug of morphine sulphate and a church hall to sleep in
We simply can’t afford to look after zillions of old people any more. And trying to do that is ruining the future of the young
And I speak as someone much nearer old age than youth
5. He REALLY hates the media. Doesn't pull his punches on Murdoch and Rothermere. In his own narrative of his life, he's in a constant battle with these people. I do wonder if they've sent him slightly mad. At times it seems like he's fighting ghosts. "Ignore them, dear boy" seems to be his father's advice. Charles is probably right.
Social mobility, however, is largely a thing of the past in such a system. The bulk of people from less well-off families - those who don't manage to get a toehold in casino banking or professional football - are totally stuffed. If you're poor in your youth you'll probably be poor in mid-life and poor in your old age as well.
My wife - fwiw - just pronounced it "delicious".
If you don't have leftover potatoes it's because you didn't cook enough potatoes.
*discounting the 1918 election where all ex-servicemen regardless of age were enfranchised.
Rather self centered certainly, and he very much has his mother on a pedestal, but it is a good production on Audible.
If we choose to leave the EU because we no longer wish to suffer the restrictions, burdens and responsibilities that membership places upon us then we cannot expect to continue to receive the associated benefits - especially when they are paid for by the taxpayers of the member countries.
Harry and Meghan chose to leave the family business. They did not have to. No one in the family kicked them out. They left of their own free will. Why therefore should they expect to continue to receive the benefits of being members of the Royal Family - especially when those benefits are being paid for by the British taxpayer?