Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
To some extent I think this is the cohort of voters who were more left of centre as usual in their 40s but who have not moved to the right as they got older, as was the past pattern. Perhaps because they've not paid off mortgages as much as past generations in the 50+ segment may have done, but also that they are less comfortable with the Tory culture war stuff.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Cameron understood this, the Tories need to go back to the centre ground.
They will be by the time of the next GE perhaps? They have got rid of the Clown and his entourage of right wing loons, so it is entirely possible.
By the way CHB, even though I am not an old person and have no intention of joining the legions of idle early-retirees, it is not a good look for you to be showing prejudice about old people, even if there is a proportion of them who are selfish and idle. They are not all like that.
Not all pensioners are sitting in their mortgage free home on a final salary pension:
Pensioner poverty rates are rising and poverty among older females is rising slightly faster that poverty among older males.
Since 2013/14 when pensioner poverty started rising again, the rise has been from 12% to 16% for males and from 14% to 20% for females.
Older females have higher poverty rates as they generally live longer than males, and more often have a less complete National Insurance contribution history and more gaps in their employment history.
So tackle this with pension credit, not universal bungs to all pensioners.......
I wonder why this never gets a response......
I have some sympathy for this view, but means testing pensions creates some of the same problems (ie high marginal tax rates and adverse incentives) as means testing in work benefits. It's not quite as simple as saying support poor pensioners and let the rich pensioners look after themselves, because there will be fewer rich pensioners if much of what they save for their retirement is clawed back in less state support.
Since there's a lot of negativity today, I just want to end by posting something positive. We got back onto the property ladder after a few years of renting and moved into a new build over Christmas; many people here write negative things about the quality of new builds etc, I have to say one thing I have been very impressed with is the insulation, especially today.
Especially considering its a semi and next door hasn't been sold yet so is still vacant, which in older homes would cause heating problems too. But right now its snowing, negative temperature outside . . . and my heating is off! The heating is all controlled by a smart thermostat and doesn't come on for long, I'm curious to see what my gas bill will be and how that compares to my prior address.
The only negative, and its one I can live with, is that I'm used to drying clothes in winter on the radiator and sometimes that's struggled as the radiator hasn't been on long enough to dry the clothes. As first world problems go, I'll take that one.
A lot of people like to bash the quality of new builds, or only write negatives, so I wanted to share this as a positive, I'm very impressed. And I'll continue to hope much, much more like this gets constructed so others who are currently renting can benefit by getting into a newer, better home of their own.
Finally getting there with isulation levels within building regs. Our extension has been a similar revelation - underfloor heating that fires up early morning and rarely comes on again during the day.
On clothes drying, if you have a small room where you can place an airing horse, a portable dehumifier works wonders. We used to dry all our non-line-dried washing this way (in a room about 2.5m x 2.5m, smaller would be even better) when we had a spare room and it would generally only take a small number of hours at very little cost. We don't have the spare space now, due to expanding family, so it's mostly tumble dried if not on the line (but with a heat-pump dryer which we try to only run when the sun is shining, so with solar panels that's has minimal cost/power draw too)
A different kind of Germanic caution from DasPanzermuseum who I guess know a thing or two about tanks. Actually quite an interesting thread (sorry, it has to be translated tweet by tweet): précis, tanks are good but not a silver HEAT round.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The government decided today to send #Estonia's biggest aid package of heavy weapons so far to #Ukraine.
This takes our total military aid to Ukraine over 1% of our GDP.
Not all pensioners are sitting in their mortgage free home on a final salary pension:
Pensioner poverty rates are rising and poverty among older females is rising slightly faster that poverty among older males.
Since 2013/14 when pensioner poverty started rising again, the rise has been from 12% to 16% for males and from 14% to 20% for females.
Older females have higher poverty rates as they generally live longer than males, and more often have a less complete National Insurance contribution history and more gaps in their employment history.
So tackle this with pension credit, not universal bungs to all pensioners.......
I wonder why this never gets a response......
Because 30% of the old dears would be too confused to apply and collect it. An amazing amount of discretionary bebefit goes unclaimed.
There has to be an element of personal responsibility here. Consider the intense hoops we make the disabled go through to claim benefits, if someone can't be bothered to fill in a form, I really don't see why that means we need to pay billions extra to the richest age cohort in the country.
Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
Inflation. That's what so many people remmber of the 1970s. Permanent damage to savings, and to some extent to wages. They will still be talking of Tory inflation in 2050 and later.
I won't be, not without a seance anyway.
I think from recent remarks of yours you are my age? In which case man up, we will be sprightly youngsters barely into our 90s.
Interesting that the oldies have swung away from the Tories but about half into don't know whereas for the middle aged it seems a much more emphatic swing straight to Labour. I think that makes sense - the Tories are still the Pensioners' party so it's logical their support there might be a bit more fundamentally sticky. They Got Brexit Done and maintained the Triple Lock, the pensioners' priorities. Whereas the poor Gen X working stiffs are really getting nothing from the government at all. Little wonder they are embracing an alternative with growing enthusiasm.
Have a care for younger millennials who largely got shafted by student fees, paying rent to old people and houses being unaffordable. Gen X were still at the tail end of housing being affordable, millennials are completely fucked and as for Gen Z, they seem to think becoming a viral star on TikTok is the only way to succeed.
Yes my preferred analogy for my generation (I'm in my mid to late 40s) is that we're like the last people out of Saigon, clinging to the undercarriage of a US helicopter.
Since there's a lot of negativity today, I just want to end by posting something positive. We got back onto the property ladder after a few years of renting and moved into a new build over Christmas; many people here write negative things about the quality of new builds etc, I have to say one thing I have been very impressed with is the insulation, especially today.
Especially considering its a semi and next door hasn't been sold yet so is still vacant, which in older homes would cause heating problems too. But right now its snowing, negative temperature outside . . . and my heating is off! The heating is all controlled by a smart thermostat and doesn't come on for long, I'm curious to see what my gas bill will be and how that compares to my prior address.
The only negative, and its one I can live with, is that I'm used to drying clothes in winter on the radiator and sometimes that's struggled as the radiator hasn't been on long enough to dry the clothes. As first world problems go, I'll take that one.
A lot of people like to bash the quality of new builds, or only write negatives, so I wanted to share this as a positive, I'm very impressed. And I'll continue to hope much, much more like this gets constructed so others who are currently renting can benefit by getting into a newer, better home of their own.
Quite a few people are finding that radiators are no use for towels in modern houses.
Hence the growing popularity of Heat pump tumble dryers.
A surprising number of people aren't aware you can stack a tumble dryer on top of a washing machine and that the manufacturers actually make a kit to bolt them together, like that.
If you're not 95 why on Earth would you vote Tory? They've fucked us, time to fuck the pensioners too.
Some of us are not old but are old enough to remember that Labour fucked us even more. The problems the young suffer from today like house prices, tuition fees etc were mostly started in Labour's time.
But yes, the Tories don't deserve our votes either.
And the Lib Dems pander to NIMBYs.
There's nobody good to vote for. Almost enough to put you off politics altogether.
I've given up following it except for reading what is posted here. Much easier life
I'm not even reading what is posted here much anymore either. Think this is the first time in a week I've been to the site.
Hard to stay interested when everything sucks and there's nothing to interest you. For me voting is a civil responsibility, but what do you do when there's nobody to vote for?
Think I'll spoil my ballot next time by writing something like "build more houses" on it. None of the parties deserve my vote, but I won't simply not go to the ballot box.
Not all pensioners are sitting in their mortgage free home on a final salary pension:
Pensioner poverty rates are rising and poverty among older females is rising slightly faster that poverty among older males.
Since 2013/14 when pensioner poverty started rising again, the rise has been from 12% to 16% for males and from 14% to 20% for females.
Older females have higher poverty rates as they generally live longer than males, and more often have a less complete National Insurance contribution history and more gaps in their employment history.
So tackle this with pension credit, not universal bungs to all pensioners.......
I wonder why this never gets a response......
Because 30% of the old dears would be too confused to apply and collect it. An amazing amount of discretionary bebefit goes unclaimed.
There has to be an element of personal responsibility here. Consider the intense hoops we make the disabled go through to claim benefits, if someone can't be bothered to fill in a form, I really don't see why that means we need to pay billions extra to the richest age cohort in the country.
Dearie me, one of the cohort of PBers who are not related to anyone old, and have no expectation of becoming old themselves. Can you think of any mental condition which particularly affects the over 65s and to which those most vulnerable are those who were thickest and least educated to start with?
Since there's a lot of negativity today, I just want to end by posting something positive. We got back onto the property ladder after a few years of renting and moved into a new build over Christmas; many people here write negative things about the quality of new builds etc, I have to say one thing I have been very impressed with is the insulation, especially today.
Especially considering its a semi and next door hasn't been sold yet so is still vacant, which in older homes would cause heating problems too. But right now its snowing, negative temperature outside . . . and my heating is off! The heating is all controlled by a smart thermostat and doesn't come on for long, I'm curious to see what my gas bill will be and how that compares to my prior address.
The only negative, and its one I can live with, is that I'm used to drying clothes in winter on the radiator and sometimes that's struggled as the radiator hasn't been on long enough to dry the clothes. As first world problems go, I'll take that one.
A lot of people like to bash the quality of new builds, or only write negatives, so I wanted to share this as a positive, I'm very impressed. And I'll continue to hope much, much more like this gets constructed so others who are currently renting can benefit by getting into a newer, better home of their own.
Congrats, hope it continues to impress. Although reading your post I couldn't help but think of where Brent tells the staff about the redundancies.
Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
Inflation. That's what so many people remmber of the 1970s. Permanent damage to savings, and to some extent to wages. They will still be talking of Tory inflation in 2050 and later.
I won't be, not without a seance anyway.
I think from recent remarks of yours you are my age? In which case man up, we will be sprightly youngsters barely into our 90s.
Unusually optimistic from you? Minimum of 15 years non medical intervention might have taken a bit of a toll by then.
A different kind of Germanic caution from DasPanzermuseum who I guess know a thing or two about tanks. Actually quite an interesting thread (sorry, it has to be translated tweet by tweet): précis, tanks are good but not a silver HEAT round.
Perun sorta dealt with this in his latest video on Infantry Fighting Vehicles. Yes, IFV's are vulnerable to modern weapons. Yes, they are getting knocked out in large numbers. Yet both Ukraine and Russia are not abandoning IFVs, and want them in far greater numbers. Why? Because they're blooming useful and, even you're far more vulnerable without them.
It's the same with tanks. They are vulnerable (and even the C2 and Abrams will be). But you're a heck of a lot better off with them than without them. Especially if used properly.
Review as in we must make CR3 a masterpiece of tankology or we should look at buying something from somewhere else that works?
Probably the K2, from the same place. It's starting to become the new NATO European standard - and we'd probably get a decent deal to build it on licence.
Challenger is obsolete in concept.
That will depend on whether all the "Can't use the bridges in X" stuff turns out to be true.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
Archer is interesting, in that it is a full automated system. No big crew, little setup. Just turn up and fire the magazine at the enemy. So very good at shoot-and-scoot.
Also that this isn't old surplus kit, like a lot of the stuff that's been sent. This is front line inventory that came into service in the last decade.
If you're not 95 why on Earth would you vote Tory? They've fucked us, time to fuck the pensioners too.
Some of us are not old but are old enough to remember that Labour fucked us even more. The problems the young suffer from today like house prices, tuition fees etc were mostly started in Labour's time.
But yes, the Tories don't deserve our votes either.
And the Lib Dems pander to NIMBYs.
There's nobody good to vote for. Almost enough to put you off politics altogether.
I've given up following it except for reading what is posted here. Much easier life
I'm not even reading what is posted here much anymore either. Think this is the first time in a week I've been to the site.
Hard to stay interested when everything sucks and there's nothing to interest you. For me voting is a civil responsibility, but what do you do when there's nobody to vote for?
Think I'll spoil my ballot next time by writing something like "build more houses" on it. None of the parties deserve my vote, but I won't simply not go to the ballot box.
Edit to be less confrontational -> I agree that the last Labour govt dropped the ball on housebuilding. I think Starmer is different to Blair/Brown and is more prepared to do what works to fix this.
The LDs are often more NIMBY than the Tories, especially in the Home counties
Not all pensioners are sitting in their mortgage free home on a final salary pension:
Pensioner poverty rates are rising and poverty among older females is rising slightly faster that poverty among older males.
Since 2013/14 when pensioner poverty started rising again, the rise has been from 12% to 16% for males and from 14% to 20% for females.
Older females have higher poverty rates as they generally live longer than males, and more often have a less complete National Insurance contribution history and more gaps in their employment history.
So tackle this with pension credit, not universal bungs to all pensioners.......
I wonder why this never gets a response......
Because 30% of the old dears would be too confused to apply and collect it. An amazing amount of discretionary bebefit goes unclaimed.
There has to be an element of personal responsibility here. Consider the intense hoops we make the disabled go through to claim benefits, if someone can't be bothered to fill in a form, I really don't see why that means we need to pay billions extra to the richest age cohort in the country.
Dearie me, one of the cohort of PBers who are not related to anyone old, and have no expectation of becoming old themselves. Can you think of any mental condition which particularly affects the over 65s and to which those most vulnerable are those who were thickest and least educated to start with?
Not all pensioners are sitting in their mortgage free home on a final salary pension:
Pensioner poverty rates are rising and poverty among older females is rising slightly faster that poverty among older males.
Since 2013/14 when pensioner poverty started rising again, the rise has been from 12% to 16% for males and from 14% to 20% for females.
Older females have higher poverty rates as they generally live longer than males, and more often have a less complete National Insurance contribution history and more gaps in their employment history.
So tackle this with pension credit, not universal bungs to all pensioners.......
I wonder why this never gets a response......
Because 30% of the old dears would be too confused to apply and collect it. An amazing amount of discretionary bebefit goes unclaimed.
There has to be an element of personal responsibility here. Consider the intense hoops we make the disabled go through to claim benefits, if someone can't be bothered to fill in a form, I really don't see why that means we need to pay billions extra to the richest age cohort in the country.
Dearie me, one of the cohort of PBers who are not related to anyone old, and have no expectation of becoming old themselves. Can you think of any mental condition which particularly affects the over 65s and to which those most vulnerable are those who were thickest and least educated to start with?
Pretty sure that by the time I am that age the universal element of any pension will be minimal. There certainly won't be a triple lock.
I would much rather we spent more on support and care for those with dementia than paying for middle class pensioners to continue voting for a shambolic Tory government, no apologies for that.
A different kind of Germanic caution from DasPanzermuseum who I guess know a thing or two about tanks. Actually quite an interesting thread (sorry, it has to be translated tweet by tweet): précis, tanks are good but not a silver HEAT round.
Perun sorta dealt with this in his latest video on Infantry Fighting Vehicles. Yes, IFV's are vulnerable to modern weapons. Yes, they are getting knocked out in large numbers. Yet both Ukraine and Russia are not abandoning IFVs, and want them in far greater numbers. Why? Because they're blooming useful and, even you're far more vulnerable without them.
It's the same with tanks. They are vulnerable (and even the C2 and Abrams will be). But you're a heck of a lot better off with them than without them. Especially if used properly.
Everything is vulnerable to something. This is why Combined Arms has been the winning move since Cambrai - more than 100 years ago. Tanks support Infantry, who support tanks etc....
Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
Inflation. That's what so many people remmber of the 1970s. Permanent damage to savings, and to some extent to wages. They will still be talking of Tory inflation in 2050 and later.
I won't be, not without a seance anyway.
I think from recent remarks of yours you are my age? In which case man up, we will be sprightly youngsters barely into our 90s.
Unusually optimistic from you? Minimum of 15 years non medical intervention might have taken a bit of a toll by then.
I am adopting a mediterranean diet. With special emphasis on red wine. That should see me through to a century.
Interesting that the oldies have swung away from the Tories but about half into don't know whereas for the middle aged it seems a much more emphatic swing straight to Labour. I think that makes sense - the Tories are still the Pensioners' party so it's logical their support there might be a bit more fundamentally sticky. They Got Brexit Done and maintained the Triple Lock, the pensioners' priorities. Whereas the poor Gen X working stiffs are really getting nothing from the government at all. Little wonder they are embracing an alternative with growing enthusiasm.
Have a care for younger millennials who largely got shafted by student fees, paying rent to old people and houses being unaffordable. Gen X were still at the tail end of housing being affordable, millennials are completely fucked and as for Gen Z, they seem to think becoming a viral star on TikTok is the only way to succeed.
I'm old enough to remember when becoming a viral star on YouTube was the only way to succeed!
Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
More the late middle aged despised Corbyn but don't mind Starmer than anything the Tories did
Since there's a lot of negativity today, I just want to end by posting something positive. We got back onto the property ladder after a few years of renting and moved into a new build over Christmas; many people here write negative things about the quality of new builds etc, I have to say one thing I have been very impressed with is the insulation, especially today.
Especially considering its a semi and next door hasn't been sold yet so is still vacant, which in older homes would cause heating problems too. But right now its snowing, negative temperature outside . . . and my heating is off! The heating is all controlled by a smart thermostat and doesn't come on for long, I'm curious to see what my gas bill will be and how that compares to my prior address.
The only negative, and its one I can live with, is that I'm used to drying clothes in winter on the radiator and sometimes that's struggled as the radiator hasn't been on long enough to dry the clothes. As first world problems go, I'll take that one.
A lot of people like to bash the quality of new builds, or only write negatives, so I wanted to share this as a positive, I'm very impressed. And I'll continue to hope much, much more like this gets constructed so others who are currently renting can benefit by getting into a newer, better home of their own.
Finally getting there with isulation levels within building regs. Our extension has been a similar revelation - underfloor heating that fires up early morning and rarely comes on again during the day.
On clothes drying, if you have a small room where you can place an airing horse, a portable dehumifier works wonders. We used to dry all our non-line-dried washing this way (in a room about 2.5m x 2.5m, smaller would be even better) when we had a spare room and it would generally only take a small number of hours at very little cost. We don't have the spare space now, due to expanding family, so it's mostly tumble dried if not on the line (but with a heat-pump dryer which we try to only run when the sun is shining, so with solar panels that's has minimal cost/power draw too)
Seconded on using a dehumidifier - for towels after they’ve dried I usually chuck them in the tumble drier for a bit just to soften them slightly. Also a fan of smart thermostats (Google Nest) - turns heating off when I go out too. Combined with a smart meter which gives daily energy usage I could measure the effect of turning the thermostat down.
On energy bills EDF last spring told me I should increase my monthly payment from £108 to £256. I asked them to “show me your working” - they couldn’t. So I agreed to an increase to £168. Just had my bill - in credit by £192. If I’d followed their advice they’d owe me £720…..
Wonder what the weighted average age is on here? By 'weighted' I mean taking into account frequency of posting not just number of posters. I reckon 53.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
Wonder what the weighted average age is on here? By 'weighted' I mean taking into account frequency of posting not just number of posters. I reckon 53.
On that metric, it will be more or less Bart's age, I should think (although he has been somewhat less prolific recently)
Review as in we must make CR3 a masterpiece of tankology or we should look at buying something from somewhere else that works?
Probably the K2, from the same place. It's starting to become the new NATO European standard - and we'd probably get a decent deal to build it on licence.
Challenger is obsolete in concept.
That will depend on whether all the "Can't use the bridges in X" stuff turns out to be true.
We will be finding out fairly shortly.
We need something that works, and gets made on budget. Build a proven design under licence, and that's (providing the MoD don't re-spec it) nearly a given.
We don't need, and can't afford, another Ajax. Bollocks to national pride; we need some pragmatism.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
Wonder what the weighted average age is on here? By 'weighted' I mean taking into account frequency of posting not just number of posters. I reckon 53.
I'll play the overs and not just because of Leons multiple IDs...
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The Swedish support just announced is broadly equivalent to the Marder IFVs already announced by Germany, and the 155mm SPGs supplied by Germany and France for so long that there was an argument over where the German SPGs would be repaired.
It's very welcome support from Sweden, but it's odd to use this announcement as evidence of German reluctance.
Not all pensioners are sitting in their mortgage free home on a final salary pension:
Pensioner poverty rates are rising and poverty among older females is rising slightly faster that poverty among older males.
Since 2013/14 when pensioner poverty started rising again, the rise has been from 12% to 16% for males and from 14% to 20% for females.
Older females have higher poverty rates as they generally live longer than males, and more often have a less complete National Insurance contribution history and more gaps in their employment history.
So tackle this with pension credit, not universal bungs to all pensioners.......
I wonder why this never gets a response......
Because 30% of the old dears would be too confused to apply and collect it. An amazing amount of discretionary bebefit goes unclaimed.
There has to be an element of personal responsibility here. Consider the intense hoops we make the disabled go through to claim benefits, if someone can't be bothered to fill in a form, I really don't see why that means we need to pay billions extra to the richest age cohort in the country.
Dearie me, one of the cohort of PBers who are not related to anyone old, and have no expectation of becoming old themselves. Can you think of any mental condition which particularly affects the over 65s and to which those most vulnerable are those who were thickest and least educated to start with?
Pretty sure that by the time I am that age the universal element of any pension will be minimal. There certainly won't be a triple lock.
I would much rather we spent more on support and care for those with dementia than paying for middle class pensioners to continue voting for a shambolic Tory government, no apologies for that.
Yes, but get with the program. look at the header. All these greedy old buggers who continue to vote tory come what may, are actually deserting them in droves.
I don't know about that I think Savlon on it would be enough but if it grows hard then you could go to the chemist and see if it goes away and then you might need an avocado and liver and rub it all over, all over, rub rub rub, and then put it in a bucket ahhhh nice!
An insane number of my friends are giving up booze altogether. I now try only to drink on Saturday during winter and Friday and Saturday otherwise (1x bottle per night). And the very, very occasional (because I feel worse on T+1) strong gin on those nights.
And although I bloody love drinking a decent rouge of an evening, nevertheless even one bottle gives me a fuzzy head the next day I don't like. I really like the feeling of clarity and sharpness, today for example, when I haven't drunk anything for a few days.
Given the PB demographic of mainly old white blokes I am genuinely surprised that people here drink 1x bottle/day. That is a lot and each morning must feel a struggle. I don't like that struggle.
Plus the docs (what do they know) say give it a few alcohol-free days per week and who's to say they aren't right in this instance.
But I simply don’t get that fuzzy head. I don’t get hangovers (they stopped about 20 years ago). This might be a sign I am about to die of cirrhosis, but it hasn’t happened yet. I have to drink TWO bottles of red (and I rarely go that far) before I start to feel a bit shit next day
Otherwise, I feel fine when I wake. No struggle at alll
Truly a gift.
No wonder you are so carefree about the wine you try out.
That is 30 cases a year of wine you are drinking.
Yes, I drink a FUCK of a lot of wine, so I like to vary it, and the exploration is fun. If I was more like you and having one bottle every now and then I would probably retreat to guaranteed quality
This does not apply in Thailand however. Here I drink 19 Crimes - Red Blend,Shiraz. Malbec, Cab Sauv. It’s perfectly acceptable and…. It does not cost £40 a bottle like every other red wine. Taxes on wine here are insane
How sad that you need alcohol - you'll feel so much better if you quit
Er, with all due respect, how the fuck do you know? We’ve never met
I ENJOY drinking. Indeed I love it. I love the buzz of that first cracking gin and tonic. I love the discovery of a new red from some mad place. I love the mouthfeel of an excellent margarita, the salt on the lips, crunchy, and intoxicating. MMMMMM. I love a picnic in sunny English countryside knowing there’s a chilled bottle of Nyetimber or Meursault waiting to go with the cheese and strawberries and jamon iberica de bellota
It also makes meals much more enjoyable, it makes socialising smoother and happier, it gives the day a delicious structure. You work hard, you go the gym, you meet and you greet, and then there is your reward. BOOZE
God would not have made wine so enjoyable if he did not want us to get rat faced
Alcohol is a good social lubricant. I drink if I go out but almost never drink at home, I just don't see the point. I didn't drink any alcohol on our recent two week holiday because we were with my in-laws who don't drink, and it had no detrimental effect on my enjoyment of the holiday whatsoever. As a parent one difficulty I have is knowing precisely how to navigate the situation around alcohol as our kids approach 18. Legally the situation is basically nothing until your 18th birthday, then go ahead and knock yourself out. It seems to me that it's better to give them some leeway for underage drinking in their late teens so that it's a more gradual transition under a degree of parental supervision and they know how to handle it when they leave home - de facto this is what my parents did and I was a much more sensible drinker at Uni than the kids who hadn't been allowed to drink. But I've run into problems with that approach, eg my 16yo daughter had a party, we bought some 4% beer and cider, but some of the kids turned up with bottles of vodka and some of them ended up dangerously drunk (not my daughter, she was fine). I don't think it's reasonable (or even right) to expect them not to drink at all but it's a bit of a minefield both legally and morally.
Are teenagers no longer allowed alcohol with meals? That would be the obvious preparation.
Up to a point, although when they turn 18 and leave home they won't typically be going to a lot of dinner parties.
My son seems to be establishing himself as teetotal, which is a bit of a shame given his father is now a vigneron but certainly means there's less of a fear around teenage parties.
From the point of view of my vineyard the trend I really need is for people to drink less often, but mainly at home or with meals in restaurants, and to spend more per bottle. Treat themselves, rather than bingeing on prosecco and pinot grigio or sticking to beer. The less but better trend seems to have been happening with Millennials. The younger generation though seem to be skipping the booze altogether, which is worrying for long term viability.
The pendulum will swing. This generation rising is puritan, judgmental and sober. Woke. Earnest and a bit humourless. if you are mean they are boring gits, if you approve they are upstanding citizens
THEIR kids will probably be the most hellraising foul mouthed taboo-busting bunch of drunken druggies you can imagine. Like the 60s kids after the straightlaced 50s
1. Smartphones. Today's children are just as addicted to these devices as their parents. Today's 15-30s are conformist but that doesn't stop them being addicts. There's more addictive behaviour today than there ever was. Smartphone use has billions of addicts in its thrall. The general response when someone expresses anti-smartphone opinion is to denounce them as stupid or insane or anti-social. Most smartphone addicts don't really know they're addicted, even if they might agree with the proposition. More exactly, they don't know how to think about it.
I doubt the children of todays 15-30s will acquire enough sense to realise that smartphones are ball-and-chain devices in the hands of The Man. If they rebel, it's much more likely to be by topping themselves on TikTok. Nobody around them will care much, because THEY will be picking their smartphones all the time too.
Human life is getting devalued.
2. Technological revolution It says a great deal that ChatGPT and Neuralink from the same stable.
Listen to Elon Musk: "What is death? Death is the loss of the information associated with that individual."
That is a view. I mean that non-sarcastically. It is a view. It is absolutely not a humane or humanitarian view. It's the view of a superc*nt. Superc*nts rule.
3. Rationality/irrationality THIS is how the pendulum will swing. It will swing against the "0s and 1s are where it's at" bullsh*t. What is an "IT type" other than a glorified accountant?
It won't swing in the intellosphere, the sphere of written debate. It will swing otherhow.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
It's fair to provide a bit of balance in the debate. Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
A thread on why I’m bullish about UK/Fr relations. The point-scoring has stopped. Ministers are working well across the board. In March, Sunak and Macron hold the first summit since 2018, and The King’s first State Visit will be to France. Signals don’t get bigger than that! 1/11
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
Cameron understood this, the Tories need to go back to the centre ground.
They will be by the time of the next GE perhaps? They have got rid of the Clown and his entourage of right wing loons, so it is entirely possible.
By the way CHB, even though I am not an old person and have no intention of joining the legions of idle early-retirees, it is not a good look for you to be showing prejudice about old people, even if there is a proportion of them who are selfish and idle. They are not all like that.
One day, if you are fortunate, you will be one.
Yes, and become less popular as a result.
I agree on the last bit though - to be fair CHB isn't the only one who does it.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
So you can't think of any reasons for the US to refuse tanks, except that it isn't in Europe? Come on, humour me and do the thought experiment.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
Wonder what the weighted average age is on here? By 'weighted' I mean taking into account frequency of posting not just number of posters. I reckon 53.
I'll play the overs and not just because of Leons multiple IDs...
Actually I'll revise. Leon is old and posts like a dervish - so yes higher. 58.
I don't know about that I think Savlon on it would be enough but if it grows hard then you could go to the chemist and see if it goes away and then you might need an avocado and liver and rub it all over, all over, rub rub rub, and then put it in a bucket ahhhh nice!
Review as in we must make CR3 a masterpiece of tankology or we should look at buying something from somewhere else that works?
Probably the K2, from the same place. It's starting to become the new NATO European standard - and we'd probably get a decent deal to build it on licence.
Challenger is obsolete in concept.
That will depend on whether all the "Can't use the bridges in X" stuff turns out to be true.
We will be finding out fairly shortly.
We need something that works, and gets made on budget. Build a proven design under licence, and that's (providing the MoD don't re-spec it) nearly a given.
We don't need, and can't afford, another Ajax. Bollocks to national pride; we need some pragmatism.
Could we sell Ajax to Russia? Or would that be a war crime?
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
Certainly there's a myriad of problems and no one universal solution, on that I agree with you.
Though given the topic of conversation we were having was the workforce for building houses, then I think the private sector not the public sector is where to look at.
I'm not sure many electricians, plumbers and the rest of the building trade are retiring young because of their state-funded 22% employer contribution.
For the NHS it certainly is an issue. Even Foxy unironically references how many colleagues are considering retirement without considering that other people don't have that as an option.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The government decided today to send #Estonia's biggest aid package of heavy weapons so far to #Ukraine.
This takes our total military aid to Ukraine over 1% of our GDP.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
It's fair to provide a bit of balance in the debate. Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
That's true, I just find JJ's posts somewhat unbalanced.
As I've said, the fastest way to get Leopard's to Ukraine is to get Biden to announce that the US will supply Abrams tanks, something they could have done months ago.
And yes I do know the US isn't in Europe, but the US is by far the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine, I think it's fair to say without US support Ukraine wouldn't be able to continue fighting.
Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
Inflation. That's what so many people remmber of the 1970s. Permanent damage to savings, and to some extent to wages. They will still be talking of Tory inflation in 2050 and later.
I won't be, not without a seance anyway.
I think from recent remarks of yours you are my age? In which case man up, we will be sprightly youngsters barely into our 90s.
Unusually optimistic from you? Minimum of 15 years non medical intervention might have taken a bit of a toll by then.
I am adopting a mediterranean diet. With special emphasis on red wine. That should see me through to a century.
Jon Snow is currently doing a tv on longevity, possibly due to being 75. Bit flimsy so far, Greek islands and faith being all I took from an admittedly perfunctory watch.
Review as in we must make CR3 a masterpiece of tankology or we should look at buying something from somewhere else that works?
Probably the K2, from the same place. It's starting to become the new NATO European standard - and we'd probably get a decent deal to build it on licence.
Challenger is obsolete in concept.
That will depend on whether all the "Can't use the bridges in X" stuff turns out to be true.
We will be finding out fairly shortly.
We need something that works, and gets made on budget. Build a proven design under licence, and that's (providing the MoD don't re-spec it) nearly a given.
We don't need, and can't afford, another Ajax. Bollocks to national pride; we need some pragmatism.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The government decided today to send #Estonia's biggest aid package of heavy weapons so far to #Ukraine.
This takes our total military aid to Ukraine over 1% of our GDP.
I don't know about that I think Savlon on it would be enough but if it grows hard then you could go to the chemist and see if it goes away and then you might need an avocado and liver and rub it all over, all over, rub rub rub, and then put it in a bucket ahhhh nice!
ChatGPT giving you advice after last night ?
Is that the ChatGPT blow-up doll with real hair and gripping hands? The ultimate in AI
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The Swedish support just announced is broadly equivalent to the Marder IFVs already announced by Germany, and the 155mm SPGs supplied by Germany and France for so long that there was an argument over where the German SPGs would be repaired.
It's very welcome support from Sweden, but it's odd to use this announcement as evidence of German reluctance.
Not really. The Marders are old - last produced in 1975, albeit there have been upgrades. The CV90 was first built in 1993, and is still made to this day.
And again, their position over Leopard 2's owned by other countries seems perverse.
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
You seem to be comparing fat cat public sector professionals with the whole of the private sector. Choose a private company and look up what their directors pay themselves and their professional staff.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
It's fair to provide a bit of balance in the debate. Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
That's true, I just find JJ's posts somewhat unbalanced.
As I've said, the fastest way to get Leopard's to Ukraine is to get Biden to announce that the US will supply Abrams tanks, something they could have done months ago.
And yes I do know the US isn't in Europe, but the US is by far the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine, I think it's fair to say without US support Ukraine wouldn't be able to continue fighting.
Someone came up with an interesting suggestion. That the US will, if/when sending Leopards is OK'd by Germany, sell M1s to the donating European nations at a rate of knots. The German government would see this a wiping out a potential export market.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The government decided today to send #Estonia's biggest aid package of heavy weapons so far to #Ukraine.
This takes our total military aid to Ukraine over 1% of our GDP.
Whatever else it is or isn't doing, the SMO is disarming Europe at quite a rate.
In the short term. But as others are pointing out, it's disarming Russia much faster. In addition, I can't see military spending going any way other than up after this little mess is over, and especially if it does not end soon.
Military spending in Europe will be appreciably higher in 2025 than it was in 2020.
Meghan Markle is now less popular than Queen Camilla in America, even after Prince Harry has made searing criticisms of his stepmother, according to exclusive polling for Newsweek.
Review as in we must make CR3 a masterpiece of tankology or we should look at buying something from somewhere else that works?
Probably the K2, from the same place. It's starting to become the new NATO European standard - and we'd probably get a decent deal to build it on licence.
Challenger is obsolete in concept.
That will depend on whether all the "Can't use the bridges in X" stuff turns out to be true.
We will be finding out fairly shortly.
We need something that works, and gets made on budget. Build a proven design under licence, and that's (providing the MoD don't re-spec it) nearly a given.
We don't need, and can't afford, another Ajax. Bollocks to national pride; we need some pragmatism.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The Swedish support just announced is broadly equivalent to the Marder IFVs already announced by Germany, and the 155mm SPGs supplied by Germany and France for so long that there was an argument over where the German SPGs would be repaired.
It's very welcome support from Sweden, but it's odd to use this announcement as evidence of German reluctance.
I think we are at the Materialschlacht phase of the Russo-Ukranian war, with heavy weapons being destroyed faster than they are built, repaired or imported by each side. In particular the number of differing systems must be giving the Ukranian equivalent of REME nightmares over parts and repairs.
This sort of attrition will probably favour Russia as when it comes down to conscripts with assault rifles only, then they have the numerical advantage, though neither side seems to be down to that yet.
Not all pensioners are sitting in their mortgage free home on a final salary pension:
Pensioner poverty rates are rising and poverty among older females is rising slightly faster that poverty among older males.
Since 2013/14 when pensioner poverty started rising again, the rise has been from 12% to 16% for males and from 14% to 20% for females.
Older females have higher poverty rates as they generally live longer than males, and more often have a less complete National Insurance contribution history and more gaps in their employment history.
So tackle this with pension credit, not universal bungs to all pensioners.......
I wonder why this never gets a response......
Because 30% of the old dears would be too confused to apply and collect it. An amazing amount of discretionary bebefit goes unclaimed.
Ending the NIC criterion for pensions would, first, allow paying full pensions to women with patchy records cited upthread, and second, enable NI to be folded into income tax which would mean fat cat pensioners pay more (since pensions are taxable), thus solving the pension problem from both ends.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The government decided today to send #Estonia's biggest aid package of heavy weapons so far to #Ukraine.
This takes our total military aid to Ukraine over 1% of our GDP.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
It's fair to provide a bit of balance in the debate. Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
That's true, I just find JJ's posts somewhat unbalanced.
As I've said, the fastest way to get Leopard's to Ukraine is to get Biden to announce that the US will supply Abrams tanks, something they could have done months ago.
And yes I do know the US isn't in Europe, but the US is by far the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine, I think it's fair to say without US support Ukraine wouldn't be able to continue fighting.
Someone came up with an interesting suggestion. That the US will, if/when sending Leopards is OK'd by Germany, sell M1s to the donating European nations at a rate of knots. The German government would see this a wiping out a potential export market.
Possibly, although according to the Americans their own tanks are virtually unusable.
Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
Inflation. That's what so many people remmber of the 1970s. Permanent damage to savings, and to some extent to wages. They will still be talking of Tory inflation in 2050 and later.
I won't be, not without a seance anyway.
I think from recent remarks of yours you are my age? In which case man up, we will be sprightly youngsters barely into our 90s.
Unusually optimistic from you? Minimum of 15 years non medical intervention might have taken a bit of a toll by then.
I am adopting a mediterranean diet. With special emphasis on red wine. That should see me through to a century.
Jon Snow is currently doing a tv on longevity, possibly due to being 75. Bit flimsy so far, Greek islands and faith being all I took from an admittedly perfunctory watch.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
So you can't think of any reasons for the US to refuse tanks, except that it isn't in Europe? Come on, humour me and do the thought experiment.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
"You might want to check on a map" really?
It's called sarcasm.
There are many potential reasons for the US's reluctance, few good. Internal politics. Fears of cost. Fears that stronk equipment might not be as stronk as they think (as the Russians have discovered). Memories of the Iraq debacle. Fears of Russia's reaction. Fears the US will not be left with enough kit.
The same sort of thinking that kept the US out of WWII until far too late is still all too common, especially after Iraq. The tragedy is that this is a very 'cheap' war for the US and other countries, especially compared to if they had to get involved directly.
As for finding my position unbalanced: perhaps you should consider whether your position is also unbalanced?
I'll just say what I've been saying all along, and please tell me why you think it is unbalanced: Germany is doing more than people think. They are doing less than they say. They are doing less than they should.
I have said this many times in the past. What's wrong with that?
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
The dual nature of the "health" system in Britain was always part and parcel of the post-WW2 "cradle to grave" deal. This is the reason why there ARE waiting lists for routine operations in the state sector - if the ops ever get done at all. The term "NHS" which wasn't used in such a big and Capitalised way in the first few years of the said arrangement's existence, is a classic piece of propaganda to distract from the INTRINSICALLY dual nature of the set-up.
"Glasgow City Council plan to shed 800 teaching jobs and close schools early to help slash budget
EXCLUSIVE: Scotland's biggest local authority is weighing up plans for primary schools to close early on Fridays to help slash £51 million from its budget.
More than 800 teaching posts could be axed under a "shocking" cuts plan drawn up by officials in SNP-run Glasgow City Council.
Primary schools would also close early on Fridays to help slash £51m from the education budget on Scotland's largest local authority."
Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
Inflation. That's what so many people remmber of the 1970s. Permanent damage to savings, and to some extent to wages. They will still be talking of Tory inflation in 2050 and later.
I won't be, not without a seance anyway.
I think from recent remarks of yours you are my age? In which case man up, we will be sprightly youngsters barely into our 90s.
Unusually optimistic from you? Minimum of 15 years non medical intervention might have taken a bit of a toll by then.
I am adopting a mediterranean diet. With special emphasis on red wine. That should see me through to a century.
Jon Snow is currently doing a tv on longevity, possibly due to being 75. Bit flimsy so far, Greek islands and faith being all I took from an admittedly perfunctory watch.
He knows nothing. Red wine and σαλάτα χωριάτικη is all you need.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The Swedish support just announced is broadly equivalent to the Marder IFVs already announced by Germany, and the 155mm SPGs supplied by Germany and France for so long that there was an argument over where the German SPGs would be repaired.
It's very welcome support from Sweden, but it's odd to use this announcement as evidence of German reluctance.
I think we are at the Materialschlacht phase of the Russo-Ukranian war, with heavy weapons being destroyed faster than they are built, repaired or imported by each side. In particular the number of differing systems must be giving the Ukranian equivalent of REME nightmares over parts and repairs.
This sort of attrition will probably favour Russia as when it comes down to conscripts with assault rifles only, then they have the numerical advantage, though neither side seems to be down to that yet.
When it comes to mass production, fortune favours the people with an advance industrial base. Russia doesn't have that.
So far, one country, Estonia, has reached 1% of GDP spent in a year of supporting Ukraine. Most have spent 0.5% or similar.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The Swedish support just announced is broadly equivalent to the Marder IFVs already announced by Germany, and the 155mm SPGs supplied by Germany and France for so long that there was an argument over where the German SPGs would be repaired.
It's very welcome support from Sweden, but it's odd to use this announcement as evidence of German reluctance.
I think we are at the Materialschlacht phase of the Russo-Ukranian war, with heavy weapons being destroyed faster than they are built, repaired or imported by each side. In particular the number of differing systems must be giving the Ukranian equivalent of REME nightmares over parts and repairs.
This sort of attrition will probably favour Russia as when it comes down to conscripts with assault rifles only, then they have the numerical advantage, though neither side seems to be down to that yet.
The Russians were forced to use a lot of T-62s in their failed defence of Kherson, because of previous losses. If the major engagements of the spring involve NATO tanks and IFVs going up against T-62s and BMP-1s, then I don't see that favouring Russia.
I am concerned that there haven't been much in the way of efforts to boost European production of armoured vehicles, but unless China starts to supply Russia with equipment the attrition certainly doesn't favour them.
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
Certainly there's a myriad of problems and no one universal solution, on that I agree with you.
Though given the topic of conversation we were having was the workforce for building houses, then I think the private sector not the public sector is where to look at.
I'm not sure many electricians, plumbers and the rest of the building trade are retiring young because of their state-funded 22% employer contribution.
For the NHS it certainly is an issue. Even Foxy unironically references how many colleagues are considering retirement without considering that other people don't have that as an option.
To your final point, yes indeed.
An NHS consultant is a very responsible job, but that is balanced by it being one of the safest jobs in terms of job security in the world. Add to that that many are earning (not including private practice) £120k. This means that on 22% employer pension contribution the taxpayer is paying £26k in pension contributions. the average salary in this country is just over £27k
Teachers start on a salary of £28k, which in fact equates to £34608 when pension is added in. Not a bad starting salary, particularly when considering they get 40 days paid holiday compared to between 20 and 25 in the private sector
The highest paid headteachers get £83k. Their employer pension contribution paid by the taxpayer is £19588 pa.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
It's fair to provide a bit of balance in the debate. Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
That's true, I just find JJ's posts somewhat unbalanced.
As I've said, the fastest way to get Leopard's to Ukraine is to get Biden to announce that the US will supply Abrams tanks, something they could have done months ago.
And yes I do know the US isn't in Europe, but the US is by far the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine, I think it's fair to say without US support Ukraine wouldn't be able to continue fighting.
Someone came up with an interesting suggestion. That the US will, if/when sending Leopards is OK'd by Germany, sell M1s to the donating European nations at a rate of knots. The German government would see this a wiping out a potential export market.
Possibly, although according to the Americans their own tanks are virtually unusable.
You mean the requirements for maintenance? - this doesn't seem to have stopped a fair number of foreign sales to date
Meghan Markle is now less popular than Queen Camilla in America, even after Prince Harry has made searing criticisms of his stepmother, according to exclusive polling for Newsweek.
"The Duchess of Sussex had a net approval rating of -13 and Camilla is at -8 following a survey of 2,000 eligible U.S. voters by Redfield & Wilton on Monday. The data was collected six days after the publication of Prince Harry's memoir, Spare.
The Duke of Sussex was not far behind, at -7, after his book publicity tour and the couple's recent Netflix docuseries, Harry & Meghan, appeared to collapse their U.S. popularity.
As recently as December 5, Harry was at +38 and Meghan at +23, far outstripping Camilla, who was at -2, according to Redfield & Wilton's polling."
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The government decided today to send #Estonia's biggest aid package of heavy weapons so far to #Ukraine.
This takes our total military aid to Ukraine over 1% of our GDP.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
It's fair to provide a bit of balance in the debate. Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
That's true, I just find JJ's posts somewhat unbalanced.
As I've said, the fastest way to get Leopard's to Ukraine is to get Biden to announce that the US will supply Abrams tanks, something they could have done months ago.
And yes I do know the US isn't in Europe, but the US is by far the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine, I think it's fair to say without US support Ukraine wouldn't be able to continue fighting.
Someone came up with an interesting suggestion. That the US will, if/when sending Leopards is OK'd by Germany, sell M1s to the donating European nations at a rate of knots. The German government would see this a wiping out a potential export market.
Possibly, although according to the Americans their own tanks are virtually unusable.
There was a post here just the other day, can't recall who by, totting up the number of MBTs that could be brought to bear by the West. The poster assumed that whatever Europe could raise would be matched by the US, and this went unchallenged. So it is a little surprising to discover that this is not after all the case, and it certainly goes someway towards explaining Scholz's reluctance to commit.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
The government decided today to send #Estonia's biggest aid package of heavy weapons so far to #Ukraine.
This takes our total military aid to Ukraine over 1% of our GDP.
Much of the equipment sent to Ukraine is obsolete or nearly obsolete equipment - it has been suggested that part of the enthusiasm of various militaries is the idea of forcing through upgrades and new purchase that they have long needed/wanted.
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
Certainly there's a myriad of problems and no one universal solution, on that I agree with you.
Though given the topic of conversation we were having was the workforce for building houses, then I think the private sector not the public sector is where to look at.
I'm not sure many electricians, plumbers and the rest of the building trade are retiring young because of their state-funded 22% employer contribution.
For the NHS it certainly is an issue. Even Foxy unironically references how many colleagues are considering retirement without considering that other people don't have that as an option.
To your final point, yes indeed.
An NHS consultant is a very responsible job, but that is balanced by it being one of the safest jobs in terms of job security in the world. Add to that that many are earning (not including private practice) £120k. This means that on 22% employer pension contribution the taxpayer is paying £26k in pension contributions. the average salary in this country is just over £27k
Teachers start on a salary of £28k, which in fact equates to £34608 when pension is added in. Not a bad starting salary, particularly when considering they get 40 days paid holiday compared to between 20 and 25 in the private sector
The highest paid headteachers get £83k. Their employer pension contribution paid by the taxpayer is £19588 pa.
How much are doctors paid in the private sector? How much are teachers paid in the private sector?
Lee Anderson MP @LeeAndersonMP_ Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
So you can't think of any reasons for the US to refuse tanks, except that it isn't in Europe? Come on, humour me and do the thought experiment.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
"You might want to check on a map" really?
The problem with that argument is that you need to invert it to explain the position of the string of countries in between Germany and Russia.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
So you can't think of any reasons for the US to refuse tanks, except that it isn't in Europe? Come on, humour me and do the thought experiment.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
"You might want to check on a map" really?
It's called sarcasm.
There are many potential reasons for the US's reluctance, few good. Internal politics. Fears of cost. Fears that stronk equipment might not be as stronk as they think (as the Russians have discovered). Memories of the Iraq debacle. Fears of Russia's reaction. Fears the US will not be left with enough kit.
The same sort of thinking that kept the US out of WWII until far too late is still all too common, especially after Iraq. The tragedy is that this is a very 'cheap' war for the US and other countries, especially compared to if they had to get involved directly.
As for finding my position unbalanced: perhaps you should consider whether your position is also unbalanced?
I'll just say what I've been saying all along, and please tell me why you think it is unbalanced: Germany is doing more than people think. They are doing less than they say. They are doing less than they should.
I have said this many times in the past. What's wrong with that?
Yes I understood it was sarcasm, I just thought it was a bit beneath you.
"Germany is doing more than people think. They are doing less than they say. They are doing less than they should." Is fair comment as far as it goes.
But, for example, claiming Sweden's announcement today "shames" Germany does seem a bit unbalanced to me.
What specifically do you find unbalanced in my position?
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
Certainly there's a myriad of problems and no one universal solution, on that I agree with you.
Though given the topic of conversation we were having was the workforce for building houses, then I think the private sector not the public sector is where to look at.
I'm not sure many electricians, plumbers and the rest of the building trade are retiring young because of their state-funded 22% employer contribution.
For the NHS it certainly is an issue. Even Foxy unironically references how many colleagues are considering retirement without considering that other people don't have that as an option.
To your final point, yes indeed.
An NHS consultant is a very responsible job, but that is balanced by it being one of the safest jobs in terms of job security in the world. Add to that that many are earning (not including private practice) £120k. This means that on 22% employer pension contribution the taxpayer is paying £26k in pension contributions. the average salary in this country is just over £27k
Teachers start on a salary of £28k, which in fact equates to £34608 when pension is added in. Not a bad starting salary, particularly when considering they get 40 days paid holiday compared to between 20 and 25 in the private sector
The highest paid headteachers get £83k. Their employer pension contribution paid by the taxpayer is £19588 pa.
HYUFD doesn't agree with you re head teachers. His firgures the other day were of the order of twice as much for the sensible bit, 5 x if you are not sensible and include company chief execs of whole academy chains.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
It's fair to provide a bit of balance in the debate. Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
That's true, I just find JJ's posts somewhat unbalanced.
As I've said, the fastest way to get Leopard's to Ukraine is to get Biden to announce that the US will supply Abrams tanks, something they could have done months ago.
And yes I do know the US isn't in Europe, but the US is by far the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine, I think it's fair to say without US support Ukraine wouldn't be able to continue fighting.
Someone came up with an interesting suggestion. That the US will, if/when sending Leopards is OK'd by Germany, sell M1s to the donating European nations at a rate of knots. The German government would see this a wiping out a potential export market.
Possibly, although according to the Americans their own tanks are virtually unusable.
You mean the requirements for maintenance? - this doesn't seem to have stopped a fair number of foreign sales to date
Different maintenance requirements, different logistical support requirements, different fuel and too heavy, according to Max Bergmann of the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
You seem to be comparing fat cat public sector professionals with the whole of the private sector. Choose a private company and look up what their directors pay themselves and their professional staff.
You are missing the point (possibly deliberately) . Those companies do not pay their directors from taxpayers pockets and most of them are sacked if they underperform.
I don't object to public sector staff being paid well, but that also has to be looked at in the context of some of the outstanding benefits they get, particularly job security and pension contributions. Do you want to tell me that a graduate getting £28k plus a further 6K pension contribution and 40 days holiday is a bad package? Try telling that to many other grads starting on a great deal less than that.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
So you can't think of any reasons for the US to refuse tanks, except that it isn't in Europe? Come on, humour me and do the thought experiment.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
"You might want to check on a map" really?
It's called sarcasm.
There are many potential reasons for the US's reluctance, few good. Internal politics. Fears of cost. Fears that stronk equipment might not be as stronk as they think (as the Russians have discovered). Memories of the Iraq debacle. Fears of Russia's reaction. Fears the US will not be left with enough kit.
The same sort of thinking that kept the US out of WWII until far too late is still all too common, especially after Iraq. The tragedy is that this is a very 'cheap' war for the US and other countries, especially compared to if they had to get involved directly.
As for finding my position unbalanced: perhaps you should consider whether your position is also unbalanced?
I'll just say what I've been saying all along, and please tell me why you think it is unbalanced: Germany is doing more than people think. They are doing less than they say. They are doing less than they should.
I have said this many times in the past. What's wrong with that?
Yes I understood it was sarcasm, I just thought it was a bit beneath you.
"Germany is doing more than people think. They are doing less than they say. They are doing less than they should." Is fair comment as far as it goes.
But, for example, claiming Sweden's announcement today "shames" Germany does seem a bit unbalanced to me.
What specifically do you find unbalanced in my position?
Well, the fact you agreed with my position above "is fair comment as far as it goes", yet you seem to think Germany is above criticism on this matter.
Germany sees itself as a leader in Europe. It often acts as if it is a leader in Europe. Yet when it comes to a place where real leadership is needed, they're all over the place, and worse, preventing others from doing the right thing.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
I'd also add that Sweden only reversed its policy of not supplying weapons to Ukraine after Germany did. Similarly, they are only promising these CV90 armored vehicles after Germany promised to supply Marders.
It's fair to provide a bit of balance in the debate. Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
That's true, I just find JJ's posts somewhat unbalanced.
As I've said, the fastest way to get Leopard's to Ukraine is to get Biden to announce that the US will supply Abrams tanks, something they could have done months ago.
And yes I do know the US isn't in Europe, but the US is by far the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine, I think it's fair to say without US support Ukraine wouldn't be able to continue fighting.
Someone came up with an interesting suggestion. That the US will, if/when sending Leopards is OK'd by Germany, sell M1s to the donating European nations at a rate of knots. The German government would see this a wiping out a potential export market.
Possibly, although according to the Americans their own tanks are virtually unusable.
There was a post here just the other day, can't recall who by, totting up the number of MBTs that could be brought to bear by the West. The poster assumed that whatever Europe could raise would be matched by the US, and this went unchallenged. So it is a little surprising to discover that this is not after all the case, and it certainly goes someway towards explaining Scholz's reluctance to commit.
That was me. I think it's a fair assumption based on previous experience of donations of military hardware - IFVs, HIMARS, 155mm artillery systems, etc.
There clearly appears to be some complicated diplomatic choreography going on in relation to the timing of announcing who is sending what tanks when. It might also be a matter of talking about it in public for ages to get the public used to the idea before announcing that it's happening, and there's likely to be a lot of behind-the-scenes diplomacy with China too, while also allowing time for quiet training of Ukrainian personnel, so that the time between announcement and deployment is reduced.
I think people are over-analysing and overreacting to the latest public announcements, without realising that they represent only the tip of the iceberg of the discussions that are happening, and ignoring the evidence of the actual weapons deliveries that have happened to date.
If tomorrow doesn't see an announcement on a number of Leopard and Abrams tanks being sent to Ukraine then I will be very surprised, and I would assume that somebody messed up the diplomacy at some point.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
So you can't think of any reasons for the US to refuse tanks, except that it isn't in Europe? Come on, humour me and do the thought experiment.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
"You might want to check on a map" really?
It's called sarcasm.
There are many potential reasons for the US's reluctance, few good. Internal politics. Fears of cost. Fears that stronk equipment might not be as stronk as they think (as the Russians have discovered). Memories of the Iraq debacle. Fears of Russia's reaction. Fears the US will not be left with enough kit.
The same sort of thinking that kept the US out of WWII until far too late is still all too common, especially after Iraq. The tragedy is that this is a very 'cheap' war for the US and other countries, especially compared to if they had to get involved directly.
As for finding my position unbalanced: perhaps you should consider whether your position is also unbalanced?
I'll just say what I've been saying all along, and please tell me why you think it is unbalanced: Germany is doing more than people think. They are doing less than they say. They are doing less than they should.
I have said this many times in the past. What's wrong with that?
Germany isn't threatened territorially.
WW2 analogies welcome so long as it's understood that Britain and the US are backing the other side from the one they allied with before.
Biggest swing here is those who are late middle aged. So not retired, and some way off retirement. If they were going to buy a house, they've started by now. Not particularly woke...
What has the government done to hack them off? (Apart from generally being rubbish, natch.) Some of it will be that there are more 2019 Conservative voters who can shift, but surely not all of it is that
More the late middle aged despised Corbyn but don't mind Starmer than anything the Tories did
I also suspect that is part of it. Although as I mentioned earlier, as a % of the existing Tory vote it was younger voters who deserted them more.
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
The dual nature of the "health" system in Britain was always part and parcel of the post-WW2 "cradle to grave" deal. This is the reason why there ARE waiting lists for routine operations in the state sector - if the ops ever get done at all. The term "NHS" which wasn't used in such a big and Capitalised way in the first few years of the said arrangement's existence, is a classic piece of propaganda to distract from the INTRINSICALLY dual nature of the set-up.
"Comprehensive", as in schools, was another one.
The dual system was a way of mitigating disruption to the formation of the NHS from a very greedy BMA, and they have continued to milk that position ever since. The differential between doctors and other health professionals is astonishing. Do they ever volunteer to close the gap by reigning in their demands? No chance.
Sweden will send about 50 IFV CV90 tracked vehicles and Archer artillery systems to Ukraine. The CV90 is used to transport up to 8 infantry troops and is equipped with a 40mm Bofors automatic gun. The package is worth SEK 4.3 billion ($419 million) https://twitter.com/RyszardJonski/status/1616025419693670405
The northern and eastern European countries get it. By their own words, Russia wants dominion over much of Europe. We can choose to stop it now, or in five or ten years, when it will be much, much more expensive.
This means we don't talk about giving Ukraine help. We don't equivocate. We don't do an "after-you" gambit. We give them what they need ASAP, so they can win this war.
The actions of the smaller nations - Sweden, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland etc - shame the larger ones such as Germany (and yes, @kamski, France and Italy).
I can understand Germany's reluctance, given their history. But they were in the wrong then. That doesn't mean they need to do wrong today.
What about the even larger one - the US?
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
Here's a fact that you may not have noticed, as it's quite a subtle one.
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
So you can't think of any reasons for the US to refuse tanks, except that it isn't in Europe? Come on, humour me and do the thought experiment.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
"You might want to check on a map" really?
The only way that Germany is different from the other countries already helping out more is that its forefathers were Nazis who raped Ukraine
People without a home of their own vote Labour, as a class.
People with a home owned outright vote Tory, as a class.
People with a mortgage are the swing voters, as a class.
The young are struggling to get on the property ladder, they're voting Labour anyway so will struggle to see much swing anyway.
The elderly have paid off their mortgages and have a triple locked pension and no mortgage to worry about.
The middle aged are seeing their wages go up by less than inflation while their mortgage costs shoot up, so swing voters are going to do what they do and swing.
It was after the incredibly NIMBYISH Lib Dem by election win in Chesham and Amersham that the Tories rolled back their plans to liberalise planning laws to increase housing supply.
We are not building enough homes. I cannot see that changing.
If we really wanted to build enough new homes over say the next 5-7 years then forgetting everything else presumably we would need a very big number of immigrant builders and trades? Which is not going to be popular either.
Why would we?
I have no objection to that, but the alternative is that we could pay a good wage to people with skills, or apprentices to those jobs too.
In any industry the overwhelming majority of people working in the sector are UK nationals and immigrants make a small proportion, if you want to attract a lot of people to work for you then paying a good wage is the best starting point. If you're paying a good wage and attracting migrants as well as UK nationals, then there's nothing wrong with that - if you want to only attract migrants as you can't hire UK nationals for minimum wage, then that's a you problem.
We need a quarter of a million extra for the current level of construction. To double new houses is going to take a lot of extra workers.
Lots of sectors are short of workers, we can't just offer good wages and conditions and fill them all, the numbers don't add up.
Sure we can.
There's lots of people working unproductive jobs. There's lots of unproductive businesses.
Pay goes up, the productive jobs do well, then unproductive jobs die. Those who were working in unproductive jobs get freed up to do more productive ones.
That's how competition works. We need to let unproductive jobs die and good pay rises for the productive businesses outcompeting the unproductive ones is a part of that.
Sorry but the real world is rather more complex than that. Worker shortages are not simply about wages or even conditions. The real challenge is workforce mobility versus workforce stability. The media is fixated with the idea that putting up wages waves a magic wand and removes labour shortage. It does not. Every sector, private and public is experiencing similar challenges.
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
Certainly there's a myriad of problems and no one universal solution, on that I agree with you.
Though given the topic of conversation we were having was the workforce for building houses, then I think the private sector not the public sector is where to look at.
I'm not sure many electricians, plumbers and the rest of the building trade are retiring young because of their state-funded 22% employer contribution.
For the NHS it certainly is an issue. Even Foxy unironically references how many colleagues are considering retirement without considering that other people don't have that as an option.
To your final point, yes indeed.
An NHS consultant is a very responsible job, but that is balanced by it being one of the safest jobs in terms of job security in the world. Add to that that many are earning (not including private practice) £120k. This means that on 22% employer pension contribution the taxpayer is paying £26k in pension contributions. the average salary in this country is just over £27k
Teachers start on a salary of £28k, which in fact equates to £34608 when pension is added in. Not a bad starting salary, particularly when considering they get 40 days paid holiday compared to between 20 and 25 in the private sector
The highest paid headteachers get £83k. Their employer pension contribution paid by the taxpayer is £19588 pa.
How much are doctors paid in the private sector? How much are teachers paid in the private sector?
Prep school teachers start on £25k
Average private school Maths or English teacher earns between £25 to 42k
Comments
You understand Germany's reluctance. Here's a thought experiment - what do you think are the reasons and arguments behind the US refusing (so far) to supply Ukraine with tanks?
By the way CHB, even though I am not an old person and have no intention of joining the legions of idle early-retirees, it is not a good look for you to be showing prejudice about old people, even if there is a proportion of them who are selfish and idle. They are not all like that.
One day, if you are fortunate, you will be one.
On clothes drying, if you have a small room where you can place an airing horse, a portable dehumifier works wonders. We used to dry all our non-line-dried washing this way (in a room about 2.5m x 2.5m, smaller would be even better) when we had a spare room and it would generally only take a small number of hours at very little cost. We don't have the spare space now, due to expanding family, so it's mostly tumble dried if not on the line (but with a heat-pump dryer which we try to only run when the sun is shining, so with solar panels that's has minimal cost/power draw too)
https://twitter.com/daspanzermuseum/status/1615994314001190913?s=61&t=5M24x3kPzFJxZ8J90TJUWA
This takes our total military aid to Ukraine over 1% of our GDP.
The package includes howitzers, grenade launchers and ammunition - what Ukraine has asked us for.
https://twitter.com/kajakallas/status/1615991102779101185
Hence the growing popularity of Heat pump tumble dryers.
A surprising number of people aren't aware you can stack a tumble dryer on top of a washing machine and that the manufacturers actually make a kit to bolt them together, like that.
"But the good news is I'm getting promoted."
It's the same with tanks. They are vulnerable (and even the C2 and Abrams will be). But you're a heck of a lot better off with them than without them. Especially if used properly.
We sill be finding out fairly shortly.
I would much rather we spent more on support and care for those with dementia than paying for middle class pensioners to continue voting for a shambolic Tory government, no apologies for that.
On energy bills EDF last spring told me I should increase my monthly payment from £108 to £256. I asked them to “show me your working” - they couldn’t. So I agreed to an increase to £168. Just had my bill - in credit by £192. If I’d followed their advice they’d owe me £720…..
(although he has been somewhat less prolific recently)
Build a proven design under licence, and that's (providing the MoD don't re-spec it) nearly a given.
We don't need, and can't afford, another Ajax. Bollocks to national pride; we need some pragmatism.
Sunak is probably the most centrist Tory leader you are going to get for the next decade
The USA is not in Europe. Germany is. The USA is not threatened territorially by Russia. They are not part of a massive economic bloc that is threatened by Russia's westwards expansion. Germany is.
You might want to check on a map.
Germany should do the right thing without such pathetic excuses. Other countries are not waiting for the US.
And why is Germany apparently stopping other countries from sending their Leopard tanks to Ukraine?
It's very welcome support from Sweden, but it's odd to use this announcement as evidence of German reluctance.
You are missing three big things here.
1. Smartphones. Today's children are just as addicted to these devices as their parents. Today's 15-30s are conformist but that doesn't stop them being addicts. There's more addictive behaviour today than there ever was. Smartphone use has billions of addicts in its thrall. The general response when someone expresses anti-smartphone opinion is to denounce them as stupid or insane or anti-social. Most smartphone addicts don't really know they're addicted, even if they might agree with the proposition. More exactly, they don't know how to think about it.
I doubt the children of todays 15-30s will acquire enough sense to realise that smartphones are ball-and-chain devices in the hands of The Man. If they rebel, it's much more likely to be by topping themselves on TikTok. Nobody around them will care much, because THEY will be picking their smartphones all the time too.
Human life is getting devalued.
2. Technological revolution
It says a great deal that ChatGPT and Neuralink from the same stable.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKdFYGTg3nU
Listen to Elon Musk: "What is death? Death is the loss of the information associated with that individual."
That is a view. I mean that non-sarcastically. It is a view. It is absolutely not a humane or humanitarian view. It's the view of a superc*nt. Superc*nts rule.
3. Rationality/irrationality
THIS is how the pendulum will swing. It will swing against the "0s and 1s are where it's at" bullsh*t. What is an "IT type" other than a glorified accountant?
It won't swing in the intellosphere, the sphere of written debate. It will swing otherhow.
Point is, though, that this spring is (probably) going to be the decisive phase of the war, in the context of Russia's plans to remobilise. Decision time on weapons supplies is now.
https://twitter.com/LordRickettsP/status/1616044528825139201
One of the possibilities is to look at the western obsession with laziness, sorry, I mean retirement. People seem to think that inactivity at a relatively young age is something to aspire to.
We are also told that teachers are underpaid. They now have an employer contribution of 23.6% into their pension, which they can top up even further. We are encouraging them to retire early through culture and monetary incentive.
Similarly NHS employees are getting 22% employer contribution. That means that a hospital consultant who gets a handsome base salary (plus the strange entitlement to do private practice on the side) gets pension contributions by the taxpayer that are almost equivalent of the annual average salary
Contrast these "fat cat" pension arrangements with the average private sector worker: 4%
I agree on the last bit though - to be fair
CHB isn't the only one who does it.
You say you understand German reluctance but you are asking me for the reason. I'd be genuinely interested to hear what you think the reasons for German reluctance are.
"You might want to check on a map" really?
Though given the topic of conversation we were having was the workforce for building houses, then I think the private sector not the public sector is where to look at.
I'm not sure many electricians, plumbers and the rest of the building trade are retiring young because of their state-funded 22% employer contribution.
For the NHS it certainly is an issue. Even Foxy unironically references how many colleagues are considering retirement without considering that other people don't have that as an option.
As I've said, the fastest way to get Leopard's to Ukraine is to get Biden to announce that the US will supply Abrams tanks, something they could have done months ago.
And yes I do know the US isn't in Europe, but the US is by far the biggest supplier of weapons to Ukraine, I think it's fair to say without US support Ukraine wouldn't be able to continue fighting.
Jericho 3 for Ukraine.....
And the West/NATO has far superior logistics to manufacture replacements than sanctioned Russia does.
And again, their position over Leopard 2's owned by other countries seems perverse.
Military spending in Europe will be appreciably higher in 2025 than it was in 2020.
Meghan Markle is now less popular than Queen Camilla in America, even after Prince Harry has made searing criticisms of his stepmother, according to exclusive polling for Newsweek.
https://www.newsweek.com/meghan-markle-less-popular-us-queen-camilla-polling-1774669
Even dropped the “Consort”….
This sort of attrition will probably favour Russia as when it comes down to conscripts with assault rifles only, then they have the numerical advantage, though neither side seems to be down to that yet.
https://nypost.com/2023/01/18/kim-kardashian-gives-herself-british-chav-makeover/
There are many potential reasons for the US's reluctance, few good. Internal politics. Fears of cost. Fears that stronk equipment might not be as stronk as they think (as the Russians have discovered). Memories of the Iraq debacle. Fears of Russia's reaction. Fears the US will not be left with enough kit.
The same sort of thinking that kept the US out of WWII until far too late is still all too common, especially after Iraq. The tragedy is that this is a very 'cheap' war for the US and other countries, especially compared to if they had to get involved directly.
As for finding my position unbalanced: perhaps you should consider whether your position is also unbalanced?
I'll just say what I've been saying all along, and please tell me why you think it is unbalanced: Germany is doing more than people think. They are doing less than they say. They are doing less than they should.
I have said this many times in the past. What's wrong with that?
"Comprehensive", as in schools, was another one.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/glasgow-city-council-plan-shed-28988908
"Glasgow City Council plan to shed 800 teaching jobs and close schools early to help slash budget
EXCLUSIVE: Scotland's biggest local authority is weighing up plans for primary schools to close early on Fridays to help slash £51 million from its budget.
More than 800 teaching posts could be axed under a "shocking" cuts plan drawn up by officials in SNP-run Glasgow City Council.
Primary schools would also close early on Fridays to help slash £51m from the education budget on Scotland's largest local authority."
So far, one country, Estonia, has reached 1% of GDP spent in a year of supporting Ukraine. Most have spent 0.5% or similar.
I am concerned that there haven't been much in the way of efforts to boost European production of armoured vehicles, but unless China starts to supply Russia with equipment the attrition certainly doesn't favour them.
An NHS consultant is a very responsible job, but that is balanced by it being one of the safest jobs in terms of job security in the world. Add to that that many are earning (not including private practice) £120k. This means that on 22% employer pension contribution the taxpayer is paying £26k in pension contributions. the average salary in this country is just over £27k
Teachers start on a salary of £28k, which in fact equates to £34608 when pension is added in. Not a bad starting salary, particularly when considering they get 40 days paid holiday compared to between 20 and 25 in the private sector
The highest paid headteachers get £83k. Their employer pension contribution paid by the taxpayer is £19588 pa.
https://levellingup.campaign.gov.uk/projects-near-me/
"The Duchess of Sussex had a net approval rating of -13 and Camilla is at -8 following a survey of 2,000 eligible U.S. voters by Redfield & Wilton on Monday. The data was collected six days after the publication of Prince Harry's memoir, Spare.
The Duke of Sussex was not far behind, at -7, after his book publicity tour and the couple's recent Netflix docuseries, Harry & Meghan, appeared to collapse their U.S. popularity.
As recently as December 5, Harry was at +38 and Meghan at +23, far outstripping Camilla, who was at -2, according to Redfield & Wilton's polling."
Dunno if it's any of their business though.
And it's also led to Europe starting to re-arm at a faster rate.
The purpose of the special military operation is to end the war we started which isn't a war.
https://twitter.com/DarthPutinKGB/status/1616033480743215104
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64315562
Netflix & Germany's anti-war film leads the Bafta film nominations.
Lee Anderson MP
@LeeAndersonMP_
Katy works for me. She is single & earns less than 30k, rents a room for £775pcm in Central London, has student debt, £120 a month on travelling to work saves money every month, goes on foreign holidays & does not need to use a foodbank.
Katy makes my point really well.
https://twitter.com/LeeAndersonMP_/status/1616005190036987906
ETA: Well, Doncaster, Leeds, I guess. Not very near.
"Germany is doing more than people think. They are doing less than they say. They are doing less than they should." Is fair comment as far as it goes.
But, for example, claiming Sweden's announcement today "shames" Germany does seem a bit unbalanced to me.
What specifically do you find unbalanced in my position?
I thought Chav was a portmanteau of Cheltenham Average. As in the girls at the ladies college would refer to the locals as the Cheltenham Average.
https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/amerika/usa-waffenlieferungen-ukraine-101.html
I don't object to public sector staff being paid well, but that also has to be looked at in the context of some of the outstanding benefits they get, particularly job security and pension contributions. Do you want to tell me that a graduate getting £28k plus a further 6K pension contribution and 40 days holiday is a bad package? Try telling that to many other grads starting on a great deal less than that.
Germany sees itself as a leader in Europe. It often acts as if it is a leader in Europe. Yet when it comes to a place where real leadership is needed, they're all over the place, and worse, preventing others from doing the right thing.
There clearly appears to be some complicated diplomatic choreography going on in relation to the timing of announcing who is sending what tanks when. It might also be a matter of talking about it in public for ages to get the public used to the idea before announcing that it's happening, and there's likely to be a lot of behind-the-scenes diplomacy with China too, while also allowing time for quiet training of Ukrainian personnel, so that the time between announcement and deployment is reduced.
I think people are over-analysing and overreacting to the latest public announcements, without realising that they represent only the tip of the iceberg of the discussions that are happening, and ignoring the evidence of the actual weapons deliveries that have happened to date.
If tomorrow doesn't see an announcement on a number of Leopard and Abrams tanks being sent to Ukraine then I will be very surprised, and I would assume that somebody messed up the diplomacy at some point.
WW2 analogies welcome so long as it's understood that Britain and the US are backing the other side from the one they allied with before.
Why should that stop them sending tanks?
Average private school Maths or English teacher earns between £25 to
42k
https://www.educationtay.com/private-independent-school/