Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Punters edging away from the LDs in Mid Beds – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,822
edited September 2023 in General
imagePunters edging away from the LDs in Mid Beds – politicalbetting.com

I find the Mid-Beds by-election hard to read and as yet I have made a bet. We’ve got to see how things develop once the election date is decided – something that can’t happen until Parliament is sitting.

Read the full story here

«13

Comments

  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,781
    edited August 2023
    If the Conservatives win in Mid-Beds after Dorries' tenure, they're blooming miracle workers.

    edit: and first. And they won't win.
  • Options
    "I wonder whether the Tory candidate, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, might be an inspired choice."

    Picking a Black immigrant from Nigeria, certainly nice contrast to notable right-wing racist twits selected by Tory Party for this seat, in the not-so-distant past.
  • Options
    from Previous Thread, in response to Jim Miller noting that state Republican parties in several states, have modified their 2024 primary rules in order to give Trump a boost toward the nomination:

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,144
    I wonder whether the Tory candidate, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, might be an inspired choice.


    Because everyone loves Police & Crime Commissioners, right? The guy round here is a household name and #1 pinup. Dave someone, I think. Or is it Matt. Definitely Matt. Hancock maybe?
  • Options
    Latest Woke outrage . . .

    AP (via Seattle Times) - Ceremony marks start of journey home for Indigenous totem pole taken to Scotland a century ago

    Members of a Canadian First Nation held a spiritual ceremony on Monday at a Scottish museum to begin the homeward journey of a totem pole stolen almost a century ago.

    The 11-meter (36-foot) pole is being restored by the National Museum of Scotland to the Nisga’a Nation in northern British Columbia — one of the first times a British museum has returned artifacts to any of North America’s Indigenous peoples.

    The museum agreed last year to return the pole, which has been on display in the Edinburgh building since 1930. Nisga’a researchers say it was taken without consent in 1929 by an anthropologist who sold it to the museum.

    Chief Earl Stephens, who has the Nisga’a cultural name Sim’oogit Ni’isjoohl, said that “in Nisga’a culture, we believe that this pole is alive with the spirit of our ancestors.”

    “After nearly 100 years, we are finally able to bring our dear relative home to rest on Nisga’a lands,” he said.

    Carved from red cedar in the 1860s, the pole includes family crests and animal and human figures. It commemorates the Nisga’a warrior Ts’aawit and stood outside his relatives’ home for 70 years before being removed while villagers were away for the annual hunting season. . .

    This kind of bareface theft was commonplace in the Pacific Northwest until mid-20th century.

    AND not just re: totem poles, certainly NOT in British Columbia . . .

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_Treaty_Process
  • Options

    I wonder whether the Tory candidate, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, might be an inspired choice.


    Because everyone loves Police & Crime Commissioners, right? The guy round here is a household name and #1 pinup. Dave someone, I think. Or is it Matt. Definitely Matt. Hancock maybe?
    Crucially, though, he's Bedfordshire's Police and Crime Commissioner, rather than Walthamstow's councillor.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,410
    edited August 2023
    FPT (for Josias):



    It's not here that's the matter, it's the voters. Do you have a piccie of the leaflet? For an oldie and baddie, what are the predominant colours on the leaflet?

    It's not a leaflet, just an email to party members.
  • Options

    FPT (for Josias):



    It's not here that's the matter, it's the voters. Do you have a piccie of the leaflet? For an oldie and baddie, what are the predominant colours on the leaflet?

    It's not a leaflet, just an email to party members.
    Like Nick said, a fundraising appeal. Though far cleverer than most.
  • Options

    If the Conservatives win in Mid-Beds after Dorries' tenure, they're blooming miracle workers.

    edit: and first. And they won't win.

    I don't think defending a 25k majority in the face of a potentially split anti-Tory vote would be that much of a miracle.
  • Options

    I wonder whether the Tory candidate, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, might be an inspired choice.


    Because everyone loves Police & Crime Commissioners, right? The guy round here is a household name and #1 pinup. Dave someone, I think. Or is it Matt. Definitely Matt. Hancock maybe?
    Crucially, though, he's Bedfordshire's Police and Crime Commissioner, rather than Walthamstow's councillor.
    And named after (another?) great lawman - "Festus" from "Gunsmoke".
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,144

    I wonder whether the Tory candidate, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, might be an inspired choice.


    Because everyone loves Police & Crime Commissioners, right? The guy round here is a household name and #1 pinup. Dave someone, I think. Or is it Matt. Definitely Matt. Hancock maybe?
    Crucially, though, he's Bedfordshire's Police and Crime Commissioner, rather than Walthamstow's councillor.
    I'll leave it to @SeaShantyIrish2 to do the FDR quote.
  • Options

    I wonder whether the Tory candidate, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, might be an inspired choice.


    Because everyone loves Police & Crime Commissioners, right? The guy round here is a household name and #1 pinup. Dave someone, I think. Or is it Matt. Definitely Matt. Hancock maybe?
    Crucially, though, he's Bedfordshire's Police and Crime Commissioner, rather than Walthamstow's councillor.
    I'll leave it to @SeaShantyIrish2 to do the FDR quote.
    Which one? How's about, "We have nothing to fear, but [Keir] fear itself".
  • Options
    El_CapitanoEl_Capitano Posts: 4,144

    I wonder whether the Tory candidate, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, might be an inspired choice.


    Because everyone loves Police & Crime Commissioners, right? The guy round here is a household name and #1 pinup. Dave someone, I think. Or is it Matt. Definitely Matt. Hancock maybe?
    Crucially, though, he's Bedfordshire's Police and Crime Commissioner, rather than Walthamstow's councillor.
    I'll leave it to @SeaShantyIrish2 to do the FDR quote.
    Which one? How's about, "We have nothing to fear, but [Keir] fear itself".
    Ha! I was thinking more "He may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch..."
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    "but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.'

    UNLESS Ramaswamy's REAL goal is being a player in the (God forbid) NEXT Trump Administration.

    Either as Vice President or major cabinet secretary.

    Same as for Scott and Burgum methinks.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,270
    Mid Bedfordshire voted Leave and Labour were second there on 2019 not the LDs. It should be a Labour v Conservatives rather than LD v Conservatives battle.

    Labour are also polling higher than at the time of the North Shropshire by election which they could have contested but didn't. The fact the LDs are already attacking the Labour candidate for not being local will likely anger Labour too and they will not give the LDs a clear dum this time
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,270

    "I wonder whether the Tory candidate, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner, might be an inspired choice."

    Picking a Black immigrant from Nigeria, certainly nice contrast to notable right-wing racist twits selected by Tory Party for this seat, in the not-so-distant past.

    Unfortunately if it is the LDs who turn out to be the main opponents for the Tories, Cheltenham 1992 is not a good omen for black Tory candidates in seats the LDs are targeting as Lord Taylor will attest
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,254
    No idea who will win - it's fairly even between the three. Labour are certainly value. LDs certainly not, at the moment.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 21,270
    Clearly being a PCC is such an important role that being a back bench MP takes priority.

    And I imagine that the police won't be getting much oversight when the PCC is too busy campaigning in the by-election.

    It is a non-job. Get rid.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,270

    Clearly being a PCC is such an important role that being a back bench MP takes priority.

    And I imagine that the police won't be getting much oversight when the PCC is too busy campaigning in the by-election.

    It is a non-job. Get rid.

    No it is a job which means the public can elect someone who will hold greater oversight over the police and hold them to account on delivery of what the public want in terms of stopping crime
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,928

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
  • Options
    comic relief . . . sorta

    Marion County Chief of Police refuses to discuss raid on newspaper
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYNTMaqBR0I

    Marion police downloaded, kept copy of raided Kansas newspaper's computers
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QzP11nMLOUg

    Judge who signed Marion Co. Record search warrant has criminal history
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29cOKQrKRzc
  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
  • Options
    I did say on Saturday night I though the value was with Labour.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 50,928

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    No other county is talking about the cost of supporting Ukraine, except the USA.
  • Options
    Well.


  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,270
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    Longer term Europe needs to step up and fund more of its own defence from Russia.

    For the US the trend is towards Asia and containing China as the focus, Russia is more a regional European problem for them
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,589
    edited August 2023

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    Not as lame as the one's his lawyers attempt. Bit early to be throwing in the towell, what if he's not convicted and he stiffs you on the bill since you've admitted you could not adequately represent him?

  • Options
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    No other county is talking about the cost of supporting Ukraine, except the USA.
    Because of Republican pimps for Putin.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 68,384
    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    Not as lame as the one's his lawyers attempt. Bit early to be throwing in the towell, what if he's not convicted and he stiffs you on the bill since you've admitted you could not adequately represent him?

    To be quite truthful,given how bad all his lawyers are I wouldn't have thought their inability to represent him would necessarily hurt the Orange One's prospects.
  • Options
    Labour leads by 16% nationally.

    Westminster VI (27 August):

    Labour 44% (+2)
    Conservative 28% (+1)
    Liberal Democrat 12% (-1)
    Reform UK 7% (–)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 3% (–)
    Other 3% (+2)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Starmer leads Sunak by 10%.

    At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (27 August)

    Keir Starmer 44% (+4)
    Rishi Sunak 34% (+1)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Starmer vs Sunak (27 August):

    Starmer leads Sunak on ALL 17 leadership characteristic polled, including:

    Can bring British people together (48% | 25%)
    Stands up for the interests of the UK (43% | 31%)
    Is a strong leader (39% | 31%)
    Can build a strong economy (39% | 36%)

    Rishi Sunak's approval rating is -15%.

    Rishi Sunak Approval Rating (27 August):

    Disapprove: 45% (-2)
    Approve: 30% (+1)
    Net: -15% (+3)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Keir Starmer's approval rating is +12%.

    Keir Starmer Approval Rating (27 August):

    Approve: 41% (+2)
    Disapprove: 29% (+2)
    Net: +12% (–)

    Changes +/- 20 August


    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 68,384
    edited August 2023
    HYUFD said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    Longer term Europe needs to step up and fund more of its own defence from Russia.

    For the US the trend is towards Asia and containing China as the focus, Russia is more a regional European problem for them
    I don't think the Russians are going to let us fund our defence from Russia.
  • Options
    For any old school rap loving Londoners, The Sugarhill Gang are Isaidahiphopthehippiethehippietothehiphiphopayoudontstoptherockittothebangbangboogiesayupjumptheboogietotherhythmoftheboogiethebeat-ing in Camden next Wednesday at The Forge

  • Options
    boulayboulay Posts: 4,703

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    He’s a classic example of a person who is very successful in an area and then gets high on their own supply and believes they know better on everything. A very successful businessman who thinks that politics, and geopolitics in this case, is a business deal and forgets the fact that when you do a takeover in business the other company you are facing doesn’t ignore their agreements and murder their COO for doing something the CEO doesn’t like.

    Business is enmeshed in laws and Ramaswamy would balk at doing a business deal if he felt that the country the business is based in would turn round a year later and seize the assets. But he believes in his genius because, like he’s a billionaire so he’s brilliant.

    It’s the one thing to say against the argument that we need more people from business in politics because often, the successful ones, aren’t schooled in the realities of the world at large - the good chap fallacy.

    He’s an utter utter arse and more dangerous than Trump as he’s “intelligent” but also stupid.
  • Options
    Note that the date March 4 rings a bell re: presidential history.

    PB Pop Quiz - why is that?
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,589

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    "but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.'

    UNLESS Ramaswamy's REAL goal is being a player in the (God forbid) NEXT Trump Administration.

    Either as Vice President or major cabinet secretary.

    Same as for Scott and Burgum methinks.
    The antiTrumper Ron Filipkowski speculated Vivek was angling for Treasury (he caveated that he was not suggesting all the people Trump would want would get confirmed)

    https://www.meidastouch.com/news/what-a-2nd-trump-cabinet-would-look-like-picks-at-each-position
    Also, Trump lawyers always seem fairly barmy - what kind of argument for delay on a trial is 'I'm too busy to make time?' Not time to prepare, just too busy to show up.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,270
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    No other county is talking about the cost of supporting Ukraine, except the USA.
    Well France and Germany aren't because they are providing just a tiny fraction of the support for Ukraine the US is giving and are less supportive of Zelensky than Poland and us too
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,589

    Note that the date March 4 rings a bell re: presidential history.

    PB Pop Quiz - why is that?

    It was when Presidents used to take up office, rather than in January?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 68,384

    Note that the date March 4 rings a bell re: presidential history.

    PB Pop Quiz - why is that?

    Until the 1930s it was the date of inauguration.

    With one exception - Zachary Taylor refused to take the oath on a Sunday, so the inauguration for that year (1849) was held on March 5th.
  • Options
    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,589

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    No other county is talking about the cost of supporting Ukraine, except the USA.
    Because of Republican pimps for Putin.
    If he wins, see all those Senate holdout hawks just silence their opinions (except Romney I guess, if he's still there).
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    Not as lame as the one's his lawyers attempt. Bit early to be throwing in the towell, what if he's not convicted and he stiffs you on the bill since you've admitted you could not adequately represent him?

    To be quite truthful,given how bad all his lawyers are I wouldn't have thought their inability to represent him would necessarily hurt the Orange One's prospects.
    Trump really ought to apply for a public defender.

    Especially in what he's labeled the crime-ridden hell-hole (I paraphrase but not much) of Fulton County.

    Seeing as how Atlanta's public defenders have plenty of on-the-job training, assisting other vicious criminals in beating their raps.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,270

    Labour leads by 16% nationally.

    Westminster VI (27 August):

    Labour 44% (+2)
    Conservative 28% (+1)
    Liberal Democrat 12% (-1)
    Reform UK 7% (–)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 3% (–)
    Other 3% (+2)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Starmer leads Sunak by 10%.

    At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (27 August)

    Keir Starmer 44% (+4)
    Rishi Sunak 34% (+1)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Starmer vs Sunak (27 August):

    Starmer leads Sunak on ALL 17 leadership characteristic polled, including:

    Can bring British people together (48% | 25%)
    Stands up for the interests of the UK (43% | 31%)
    Is a strong leader (39% | 31%)
    Can build a strong economy (39% | 36%)

    Rishi Sunak's approval rating is -15%.

    Rishi Sunak Approval Rating (27 August):

    Disapprove: 45% (-2)
    Approve: 30% (+1)
    Net: -15% (+3)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Keir Starmer's approval rating is +12%.

    Keir Starmer Approval Rating (27 August):

    Approve: 41% (+2)
    Disapprove: 29% (+2)
    Net: +12% (–)

    Changes +/- 20 August


    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton

    Sunak polling 6% above his party there as preferred PM, Starmer polling only the same as Labour
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,589

    Clearly being a PCC is such an important role that being a back bench MP takes priority.

    And I imagine that the police won't be getting much oversight when the PCC is too busy campaigning in the by-election.

    It is a non-job. Get rid.

    But you see, it allows people to vote for candidates based on their priorities for local policing, which they totally do, and hold them to account for local police failings, or rather how well they hold to account the Chief Constable whose job it is to oversee the actual operation of the police. And it is not as though in 90% of cases the winner will just be whoever is politically ascendant nationally or regionally at the time regardless of personal worth, covering areas far too large and diverse to get even an MP's level of personal vote. Nossir.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,204

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
  • Options
    mwadamsmwadams Posts: 3,268
    As things stand, I've got a bet on Labour, and a small covering bet on the Tories so I break even if the vote gets split and they come through, which I think is a lot more likely than their current odds.

    The LDs would have to go out a long way before they were anything like value.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 118,270

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 68,384
    edited August 2023
    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    And me, but your comment smacked of this...

    https://youtu.be/oAk03it4Z4Y?si=jjO8f86OPIlvTtQf
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 93,589

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Pick a favourite. I'd recommend ultimogeniture.
  • Options
    rcs1000 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    I don't think you are right.

    Money is the excuse that is being used, but this isn't about money.

    This is about the fact that a substantial minority of Americans see Putin sympathetically. Putin has taken on woke. Putin is a strong leader. Putin is supported by people I support.

    A lot of people and organisations have been bought, in America and elsewhere.

    Schroder in Germany, of course. Sarkozy in France. Salmond in Scotland. And no doubt a fair number of US politicos too.

    Putin has been generous with Russia's money, and people are weak.

    We need to see Putin defeated not only for the people of Ukraine, but because Russia's interference in Western democracies should bot be tolerated. Those that took his shilling need to be exposed.
    Right on.

    Interesting that
    kle4 said:

    Note that the date March 4 rings a bell re: presidential history.

    PB Pop Quiz - why is that?

    It was when Presidents used to take up office, rather than in January?
    Yes. Inauguration Day was advanced from March to January, as response to the financial crisis of early 1933, when the Great Depression hit bottom in US, banks were failing coast-to-coast, and only response of still-President Herbert Hoover was to badger President-elect Franklin Roosevelt into endorsing HH's already-failed policies. Which FDR refused to do.
  • Options

    Labour leads by 16% nationally.

    Westminster VI (27 August):

    Labour 44% (+2)
    Conservative 28% (+1)
    Liberal Democrat 12% (-1)
    Reform UK 7% (–)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 3% (–)
    Other 3% (+2)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton

    Broken, sleazy LibDems and Greens on the slide!
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,209
    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    "I've got mine fuck you"
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    "I've got mine fuck you"
    Motto of today's "Conservative" Party.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
  • Options
    Is the car insurance industry involved in cartel behaviour? Seems that so many people regardless of what they drive and how they drive it are being hit with huge increases.

    My own renewal is a mere 57% increase. The annoying thing is that having shopped around, that appears to be the cheapest!

    Two things appear to have sent my quotes into the stratosphere. One, its a company car (though I own the company). Two, I had a not my fault accident with a scrote nearly 4 years ago. So far that has been an annoyance rather than an outrage, but this year it is sending quotes crazy. I took it off a comparison website to compare. On the same insurer (and others copied the behaviour:

    No accident: £960
    Accident other driver's fault: £2,700

    Have they all forgotten how to manage risk?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,204

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,209

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    They won't vote Tory anyway so who cares
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,112
    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    Missing the point. Where's your inheritance going to come from, then? You can't have it both ways as that study shows.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 26,117
    HYUFD said:

    Labour leads by 16% nationally.

    Westminster VI (27 August):

    Labour 44% (+2)
    Conservative 28% (+1)
    Liberal Democrat 12% (-1)
    Reform UK 7% (–)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 3% (–)
    Other 3% (+2)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Starmer leads Sunak by 10%.

    At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (27 August)

    Keir Starmer 44% (+4)
    Rishi Sunak 34% (+1)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Starmer vs Sunak (27 August):

    Starmer leads Sunak on ALL 17 leadership characteristic polled, including:

    Can bring British people together (48% | 25%)
    Stands up for the interests of the UK (43% | 31%)
    Is a strong leader (39% | 31%)
    Can build a strong economy (39% | 36%)

    Rishi Sunak's approval rating is -15%.

    Rishi Sunak Approval Rating (27 August):

    Disapprove: 45% (-2)
    Approve: 30% (+1)
    Net: -15% (+3)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Keir Starmer's approval rating is +12%.

    Keir Starmer Approval Rating (27 August):

    Approve: 41% (+2)
    Disapprove: 29% (+2)
    Net: +12% (–)

    Changes +/- 20 August


    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton

    Sunak polling 6% above his party there as preferred PM, Starmer polling only the same as Labour
    If the parties were neck and neck I would understand your assertion. But as Sunak's party is16 points adrift, not so much.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,777

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    Do you really believe it would be better for Ukraine if Trump won?
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    Labour leads by 16% nationally.

    Westminster VI (27 August):

    Labour 44% (+2)
    Conservative 28% (+1)
    Liberal Democrat 12% (-1)
    Reform UK 7% (–)
    Green 4% (-2)
    Scottish National Party 3% (–)
    Other 3% (+2)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Starmer leads Sunak by 10%.

    At this moment, which of the following do Britons think would be the better Prime Minister for the UK? (27 August)

    Keir Starmer 44% (+4)
    Rishi Sunak 34% (+1)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Starmer vs Sunak (27 August):

    Starmer leads Sunak on ALL 17 leadership characteristic polled, including:

    Can bring British people together (48% | 25%)
    Stands up for the interests of the UK (43% | 31%)
    Is a strong leader (39% | 31%)
    Can build a strong economy (39% | 36%)

    Rishi Sunak's approval rating is -15%.

    Rishi Sunak Approval Rating (27 August):

    Disapprove: 45% (-2)
    Approve: 30% (+1)
    Net: -15% (+3)

    Changes +/- 20 August

    Keir Starmer's approval rating is +12%.

    Keir Starmer Approval Rating (27 August):

    Approve: 41% (+2)
    Disapprove: 29% (+2)
    Net: +12% (–)

    Changes +/- 20 August


    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton

    Sunak polling 6% above his party there as preferred PM, Starmer polling only the same as Labour
    If the parties were neck and neck I would understand your assertion. But as Sunak's party is16 points adrift, not so much.
    And surely the ideal is that party and leader are polling very close to each other. If not then you have the risk of people liking the party but not being willing to vote for the leader or liking the leader but no being willing to vote for the party. I think I would much rather be in Starmer's position right now than Sunak's even if the polls were closer.
  • Options
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    Missing the point. Where's your inheritance going to come from, then? You can't have it both ways as that study shows.
    Perhaps the old-and-in-the-way, can ease the burden on their youngers-and-betters, by emigrating overseas somewhere where cost of living is much lower?

    Rwanda springs to mind for some reason!
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    I count my lucky stars that I was raised by parents who were prepared to make sacrifices for my benefits.

    The thing that keeps me awake at night is that this generation of young people will be faced with the prospect of having to work until they die in their 80s to keep paying their rent as they could never afford to get on to the property ladder.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,112
    edited August 2023
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,204

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
    Trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as the other side of Trump's propaganda is extremely cynical. I can cite plenty of actual Ukrainians making the same point, so for you to dismiss it makes it sound like you see them as mere pawns in your domestic political game.
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 26,117

    Is the car insurance industry involved in cartel behaviour? Seems that so many people regardless of what they drive and how they drive it are being hit with huge increases.

    My own renewal is a mere 57% increase. The annoying thing is that having shopped around, that appears to be the cheapest!

    Two things appear to have sent my quotes into the stratosphere. One, its a company car (though I own the company). Two, I had a not my fault accident with a scrote nearly 4 years ago. So far that has been an annoyance rather than an outrage, but this year it is sending quotes crazy. I took it off a comparison website to compare. On the same insurer (and others copied the behaviour:

    No accident: £960
    Accident other driver's fault: £2,700

    Have they all forgotten how to manage risk?

    My son, no points, 9 year NCB on a 1.0 Skoda Fabia (one of the lowest groups available) went from just over £300 in 2022 to over £500 this year with Admiral. He checked out the Meerkats and it was no better with them. A genuine p*** take.

    Director bonuses don't pay for themselves.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    In terms of actions, I'm fully with you.

    But.

    We're heading for a country where access to family wealth basically decides whether you can begin to buy a home in parts of the country. And without a place to live near London, you can forget a career in some of the more interesting and powerful professions.

    I caught a bit of an interview with Melvin Bragg on Saturday. Could someone have his life path (Carlisle pub to Oxford to the BBC) now? I'm pretty sure that it would be much less likely, and Britain in 2050 will be worse for that.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,523
    kle4 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    Not as lame as the one's his lawyers attempt. Bit early to be throwing in the towell, what if he's not convicted and he stiffs you on the bill since you've admitted you could not adequately represent him?

    That second sentence is probably true.
    But nothing to do with the trial date.
  • Options

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
    Trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as the other side of Trump's propaganda is extremely cynical. I can cite plenty of actual Ukrainians making the same point, so for you to dismiss it makes it sound like you see them as mere pawns in your domestic political game.
    I am NOT "trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as other side of Trump's propaganda".

    That is YOUR typical twisting sophistry.

    What I am doing, is saying that YOU are the other side of Trump's progaganda on UKR.

    As you well know.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,112

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    In terms of actions, I'm fully with you.

    But.

    We're heading for a country where access to family wealth basically decides whether you can begin to buy a home in parts of the country. And without a place to live near London, you can forget a career in some of the more interesting and powerful professions.

    I caught a bit of an interview with Melvin Bragg on Saturday. Could someone have his life path (Carlisle pub to Oxford to the BBC) now? I'm pretty sure that it would be much less likely, and Britain in 2050 will be worse for that.
    Add - or rather deduct - student tuition fees and maintenance grants, and the problem is worsened.

    Of course, some of us on PB think that that's just dandy and right and proper, maintainiong and worsening educational inequality for a particular political party's benefit.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,523

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
    Trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as the other side of Trump's propaganda is extremely cynical. I can cite plenty of actual Ukrainians making the same point, so for you to dismiss it makes it sound like you see them as mere pawns in your domestic political game.
    I am NOT "trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as other side of Trump's propaganda".

    That is YOUR typical twisting sophistry.

    What I am doing, is saying that YOU are the other side of Trump's progaganda on UKR.

    As you well know.
    I see Vivek has been saying that the US should be using the arms they’ve sent to Ukraine to ‘protect’ the border with Mexico.

    Which almost makes sense in the context of DeSantis saying he’d invade the place ‘on day one’ of his presidency…
  • Options

    Well.


    More importantly, it is the week before Cheltenham, which starts on Tuesday, 12 March.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    In terms of actions, I'm fully with you.

    But.

    We're heading for a country where access to family wealth basically decides whether you can begin to buy a home in parts of the country. And without a place to live near London, you can forget a career in some of the more interesting and powerful professions.

    I caught a bit of an interview with Melvin Bragg on Saturday. Could someone have his life path (Carlisle pub to Oxford to the BBC) now? I'm pretty sure that it would be much less likely, and Britain in 2050 will be worse for that.
    But what you are saying has always been the way with the exception of perhaps a 40 year period post WW2. Most people of my grandparents generation rented and many, if not most, lived in multi-generational households. We moved away from that after WW2 partly because of improving economic circumstances, partly because of the growth of the welfare state and partly, but connectedly, because of social changes. In the process we have become more fractured and relied more and more on the state to do the things that we would have done ourselves only a couple of generations ago.

    And I see no professions where it is vital to live in or near London, all the more so with the way we are going with communications.

    It is still the case that you can choose to live just over an hour from London and buy a house for half the price of the home counties and probably a third of the price of a simlar house in London itself.
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,927
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    In terms of actions, I'm fully with you.

    But.

    We're heading for a country where access to family wealth basically decides whether you can begin to buy a home in parts of the country. And without a place to live near London, you can forget a career in some of the more interesting and powerful professions.

    I caught a bit of an interview with Melvin Bragg on Saturday. Could someone have his life path (Carlisle pub to Oxford to the BBC) now? I'm pretty sure that it would be much less likely, and Britain in 2050 will be worse for that.
    Add - or rather deduct - student tuition fees and maintenance grants, and the problem is worsened.

    Of course, some of us on PB think that that's just dandy and right and proper, maintainiong and worsening educational inequality for a particular political party's benefit.
    I saw that interest rates on student loans today are 13.5% (CPI plus 3%)
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,204

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
    Trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as the other side of Trump's propaganda is extremely cynical. I can cite plenty of actual Ukrainians making the same point, so for you to dismiss it makes it sound like you see them as mere pawns in your domestic political game.
    I am NOT "trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as other side of Trump's propaganda".

    That is YOUR typical twisting sophistry.

    What I am doing, is saying that YOU are the other side of Trump's progaganda on UKR.

    As you well know.
    If your hatred for Trump twists you into arguing that to claim that the US can do more for Ukraine is to be a "Putin pimp", then you risk becoming the very definition of a useful idiot.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    In terms of actions, I'm fully with you.

    But.

    We're heading for a country where access to family wealth basically decides whether you can begin to buy a home in parts of the country. And without a place to live near London, you can forget a career in some of the more interesting and powerful professions.

    I caught a bit of an interview with Melvin Bragg on Saturday. Could someone have his life path (Carlisle pub to Oxford to the BBC) now? I'm pretty sure that it would be much less likely, and Britain in 2050 will be worse for that.
    Melvyn Bragg went from Oxford University to the BBC, which is hardly remarkable.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,254

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    In terms of actions, I'm fully with you.

    But.

    We're heading for a country where access to family wealth basically decides whether you can begin to buy a home in parts of the country. And without a place to live near London, you can forget a career in some of the more interesting and powerful professions.

    I caught a bit of an interview with Melvin Bragg on Saturday. Could someone have his life path (Carlisle pub to Oxford to the BBC) now? I'm pretty sure that it would be much less likely, and Britain in 2050 will be worse for that.
    Wigton pub, not Carlisle. BTW his recent memoir on his early life, 'Back in the Day' is a classic, among the finest things he has ever written. Anyone reading it will discern how and why north Cumberland, outside Carlisle and the lake district, is quite special even though it remains almost entirely unknown in the wider world.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,638
    On topic.
    The LD's can't win this seat if Labour chooses to play.
    In poker terms, they are the short stack.
  • Options
    Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 2,845
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
    Trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as the other side of Trump's propaganda is extremely cynical. I can cite plenty of actual Ukrainians making the same point, so for you to dismiss it makes it sound like you see them as mere pawns in your domestic political game.
    I am NOT "trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as other side of Trump's propaganda".

    That is YOUR typical twisting sophistry.

    What I am doing, is saying that YOU are the other side of Trump's progaganda on UKR.

    As you well know.
    I see Vivek has been saying that the US should be using the arms they’ve sent to Ukraine to ‘protect’ the border with Mexico.

    Which almost makes sense in the context of DeSantis saying he’d invade the place ‘on day one’ of his presidency…
    Perhaps the USA should annex Mexico? Can't believe there'd be much resistance south of the border.
  • Options

    Is the car insurance industry involved in cartel behaviour? Seems that so many people regardless of what they drive and how they drive it are being hit with huge increases.

    My own renewal is a mere 57% increase. The annoying thing is that having shopped around, that appears to be the cheapest!

    Two things appear to have sent my quotes into the stratosphere. One, its a company car (though I own the company). Two, I had a not my fault accident with a scrote nearly 4 years ago. So far that has been an annoyance rather than an outrage, but this year it is sending quotes crazy. I took it off a comparison website to compare. On the same insurer (and others copied the behaviour:

    No accident: £960
    Accident other driver's fault: £2,700

    Have they all forgotten how to manage risk?

    It's a no claims bonus, not a no fault bonus.
  • Options
    pingping Posts: 3,804
    edited August 2023

    Is the car insurance industry involved in cartel behaviour? Seems that so many people regardless of what they drive and how they drive it are being hit with huge increases.

    My own renewal is a mere 57% increase. The annoying thing is that having shopped around, that appears to be the cheapest!

    Two things appear to have sent my quotes into the stratosphere. One, its a company car (though I own the company). Two, I had a not my fault accident with a scrote nearly 4 years ago. So far that has been an annoyance rather than an outrage, but this year it is sending quotes crazy. I took it off a comparison website to compare. On the same insurer (and others copied the behaviour:

    No accident: £960
    Accident other driver's fault: £2,700

    Have they all forgotten how to manage risk?

    My son, no points, 9 year NCB on a 1.0 Skoda Fabia (one of the lowest groups available) went from just over £300 in 2022 to over £500 this year with Admiral. He checked out the Meerkats and it was no better with them. A genuine p*** take.

    Director bonuses don't pay for themselves.
    As I posted before, I’m pretty sure the main factor is the rise in interest rates.

    Blame Truss/Sunak/Covid/Central Banks (delete as appropriate).

    The low interest rate world was a mad world. Interest rates have basically been declining since the beginning of the 80’s. The new normal of 5%+ will seem very weird to most working age people.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,112
    ping said:

    Is the car insurance industry involved in cartel behaviour? Seems that so many people regardless of what they drive and how they drive it are being hit with huge increases.

    My own renewal is a mere 57% increase. The annoying thing is that having shopped around, that appears to be the cheapest!

    Two things appear to have sent my quotes into the stratosphere. One, its a company car (though I own the company). Two, I had a not my fault accident with a scrote nearly 4 years ago. So far that has been an annoyance rather than an outrage, but this year it is sending quotes crazy. I took it off a comparison website to compare. On the same insurer (and others copied the behaviour:

    No accident: £960
    Accident other driver's fault: £2,700

    Have they all forgotten how to manage risk?

    My son, no points, 9 year NCB on a 1.0 Skoda Fabia (one of the lowest groups available) went from just over £300 in 2022 to over £500 this year with Admiral. He checked out the Meerkats and it was no better with them. A genuine p*** take.

    Director bonuses don't pay for themselves.
    As I posted before, I’m pretty sure the main factor is the rise in interest rates.

    Blame Truss/Sunak/Covid/Central Banks (delete as appropriate).
    Er, why would it be? It's car insurance, not life assurance?
  • Options
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    In terms of actions, I'm fully with you.

    But.

    We're heading for a country where access to family wealth basically decides whether you can begin to buy a home in parts of the country. And without a place to live near London, you can forget a career in some of the more interesting and powerful professions.

    I caught a bit of an interview with Melvin Bragg on Saturday. Could someone have his life path (Carlisle pub to Oxford to the BBC) now? I'm pretty sure that it would be much less likely, and Britain in 2050 will be worse for that.
    Add - or rather deduct - student tuition fees and maintenance grants, and the problem is worsened.

    Of course, some of us on PB think that that's just dandy and right and proper, maintainiong and worsening educational inequality for a particular political party's benefit.
    Good evening

    In some ways I do understand resentment against the older generation, as it is true that, notwithstanding working hard and experiencing their own very difficult times, over the years their mortgages have paid off and in retirement they are mortgage free with a substantial capital asset, and many with private pensions to top up the state pension

    The problems facing the younger generation seem insurmountable, and I really fear for those renting with no prospects of owning their property mortgage free going into retirement in the decades to come

    Of course building more homes would be of great help, but frankly for all politicians promises I just do not see sufficient being built to meet the ongoing demand

    I am very surprised that Starmer and Reeves have rejected any form of wealth tax going forward, as many in the labour party and beyond, including myself, consider some form of wealth tax as an integral part of future taxes

  • Options

    Is the car insurance industry involved in cartel behaviour? Seems that so many people regardless of what they drive and how they drive it are being hit with huge increases.

    My own renewal is a mere 57% increase. The annoying thing is that having shopped around, that appears to be the cheapest!

    Two things appear to have sent my quotes into the stratosphere. One, its a company car (though I own the company). Two, I had a not my fault accident with a scrote nearly 4 years ago. So far that has been an annoyance rather than an outrage, but this year it is sending quotes crazy. I took it off a comparison website to compare. On the same insurer (and others copied the behaviour:

    No accident: £960
    Accident other driver's fault: £2,700

    Have they all forgotten how to manage risk?

    It's a no claims bonus, not a no fault bonus.
    Indeed - and I now have 8 years of no claims. Not that it makes a difference. Pay to protect NCD and pay lots extra anyway.
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,638

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    Sadly.
    I was talking last week with someone aged 70 whose daughter asked for help with a deposit a few years ago.
    He refused. So they had a row, he cut her off and is going to leave the house to an animal charity.
    He didn't seem to think that was at all an overreaction to her "cheek".
  • Options
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    Sadly.
    I was talking last week with someone aged 70 whose daughter asked for help with a deposit a few years ago.
    He refused. So they had a row, he cut her off and is going to leave the house to an animal charity.
    He didn't seem to think that was at all an overreaction to her "cheek".
    I really cannot imagine any parent behaving in such a callous manner against their own daughter
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,638

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
    Trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as the other side of Trump's propaganda is extremely cynical. I can cite plenty of actual Ukrainians making the same point, so for you to dismiss it makes it sound like you see them as mere pawns in your domestic political game.
    I am NOT "trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as other side of Trump's propaganda".

    That is YOUR typical twisting sophistry.

    What I am doing, is saying that YOU are the other side of Trump's progaganda on UKR.

    As you well know.
    I see Vivek has been saying that the US should be using the arms they’ve sent to Ukraine to ‘protect’ the border with Mexico.

    Which almost makes sense in the context of DeSantis saying he’d invade the place ‘on day one’ of his presidency…
    Perhaps the USA should annex Mexico? Can't believe there'd be much resistance south of the border.
    They've already done the northern half, so why not?
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 41,112
    algarkirk said:

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    In terms of actions, I'm fully with you.

    But.

    We're heading for a country where access to family wealth basically decides whether you can begin to buy a home in parts of the country. And without a place to live near London, you can forget a career in some of the more interesting and powerful professions.

    I caught a bit of an interview with Melvin Bragg on Saturday. Could someone have his life path (Carlisle pub to Oxford to the BBC) now? I'm pretty sure that it would be much less likely, and Britain in 2050 will be worse for that.
    Wigton pub, not Carlisle. BTW his recent memoir on his early life, 'Back in the Day' is a classic, among the finest things he has ever written. Anyone reading it will discern how and why north Cumberland, outside Carlisle and the lake district, is quite special even though it remains almost entirely unknown in the wider world.
    Is that Brampton and the western Wall country?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 68,384

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
    Trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as the other side of Trump's propaganda is extremely cynical. I can cite plenty of actual Ukrainians making the same point, so for you to dismiss it makes it sound like you see them as mere pawns in your domestic political game.
    I am NOT "trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as other side of Trump's propaganda".

    That is YOUR typical twisting sophistry.

    What I am doing, is saying that YOU are the other side of Trump's progaganda on UKR.

    As you well know.
    I see Vivek has been saying that the US should be using the arms they’ve sent to Ukraine to ‘protect’ the border with Mexico.

    Which almost makes sense in the context of DeSantis saying he’d invade the place ‘on day one’ of his presidency…
    Perhaps the USA should annex Mexico? Can't believe there'd be much resistance south of the border.
    I think they'd have a hard time with the drug cartels.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 64,523

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic: Trump supporters are rigging rules in some states to give him a better chance to win the nomination. For example: "Donald Trump’s presidential campaign notched a major victory Saturday when members of the California Republican executive committee voted to parcel out convention delegates based on the statewide vote next year — doing away with the state’s longtime system of awarding them by congressional district, which had been perceived as a more level playing field for lower-tiered candidates.

    The new rules give Trump a shot at clinching all of the state’s 169 delegates — more than any other state — while at the same time making it harder for a challenger like Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) to make it a two-person race."
    souce$: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/30/trump-republican-delegates-primary/

    There have been other rule changes that appear intended to help Trump in other states, including Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota, and Idaho.

    (As almost all of you grasped immediately, these rule changes make estimating the nomination odds, even more difficult, without a state-by-state analysis.)

    North Dakota is interesting. AND confirms my strong suspicion, that alleged 2024 candidate for GOP POTUS nomination, ND Gov. Doug Burgum, is just (another) shill pimping for Trump by helping further fractionate the Republican vote.

    Which is also the effective role being played by Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

    And also, ironically (or maybe not) by Mike Pence and Chris Christie.

    Which does NOT preclude these "hopefuls" from having other agendas, notably for Scott and Ramaswamy anyway, the traditional prospect of VP pick OR cabinet OR other federal appointment under Trump's Second Cumming.

    As for Pence and Christie, methinks that ego is bigger drive than any anti-Trumpism.

    > Mike Pence thought (like some PBers) that being Trump's VP would make him the GOP's next-in-line for POTUS nomination; a 3rd-millennium version of Bush the Elder 1988 and Bob Dole 1996, albeit without a hint of the quality or ability of either.

    > Chris Christie just likes basking his blimp-sized body AND ego in as much news coverage as he can generate.

    Both of these being busted flushes whose achievements can only be discerned using a microscope.
    They are - but they’re not the worst of the field.

    I see Ramaswamy is already planning to hand over half of Ukraine.

    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4174713-ramaswamy-unveils-foreign-policy-platform-we-will-be-uncle-sucker-no-more/
    .. Ramaswamy said he similarly would plan to visit Moscow as president in 2025 to negotiate terms to end the war between Russia and Ukraine. He said he would “accept” Russian control of the territories that its forces have taken and promise to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO in exchange for Russia ending its military alliance with China.
    He said he would also end sanctions that have been placed on Russia and return it to the global market….


    To call him naive would be overly generous.
    Bloody Hell!

    He’s gone from being a sensible candidate to a total idiot, in the last fortnight.
    Glad to hear you say that. Unfortunately I hadn't really followed him until the last couple of days, so his view on Ukraine was the first thing I saw and an immediate deal-breaker.

    He sounds intelligent, and can communicate well, but what he's saying absolutely isn't smart.

    Hopefully whoever wins next year is someone that will unambiguously continue to support Ukraine..
    The problem is that US politics is now running on the “cost” of supporting Ukraine.

    Which is utterly disengenuous on the part of Biden. The objection to Ukraine in the US, is mostly centered around the cost of the war set against domestic priorities.

    The problem is that the cost of the war isn’t the cost of the war. Biden’s saying that donating a bunch of missiles that were about to be retired, and cost $100m two decades ago, are now “$5bn in aid to Ukraine”, suggesting that he’s making a choice between spending the $5bn in Ukraine and $5bn domestically. When there’s never anything close to actually $5bn going to Ukraine, the marginal cost is no more than the cost of transport planes between the US and Poland.
    So Joe Biden is the problem here? Pretty fucking lame, even for a Trump talking point!
    It's a Trump talking point that Biden is overstating how much he's given to Ukraine?
    It's a Trump talking point to say that, and also to talk about how much aid to UKR is costing USA.

    As you well know.
    To be fair, Trump has threatened Putin with an ultimatum that he will give much more to Ukraine than Biden has done if Putin doesn't agree to a deal.

    Biden's slow-walking of military aid hasn't gone unnoticed in Ukraine.
    To be fair, Trump tried to blackmail Zelenskyy with the help of Rudi Giulianni among others.

    "Slow-walking" and "over-spending" re: Biden > UKR being two-sides of Trump's current propaganda.

    As you well know.
    Trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as the other side of Trump's propaganda is extremely cynical. I can cite plenty of actual Ukrainians making the same point, so for you to dismiss it makes it sound like you see them as mere pawns in your domestic political game.
    I am NOT "trying to paint the anti-Russian Cold Warrior faction of the Republicans as other side of Trump's propaganda".

    That is YOUR typical twisting sophistry.

    What I am doing, is saying that YOU are the other side of Trump's progaganda on UKR.

    As you well know.
    I see Vivek has been saying that the US should be using the arms they’ve sent to Ukraine to ‘protect’ the border with Mexico.

    Which almost makes sense in the context of DeSantis saying he’d invade the place ‘on day one’ of his presidency…
    Perhaps the USA should annex Mexico? Can't believe there'd be much resistance south of the border.
    Like Russia and Afghanistan ?
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,638

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    Sadly.
    I was talking last week with someone aged 70 whose daughter asked for help with a deposit a few years ago.
    He refused. So they had a row, he cut her off and is going to leave the house to an animal charity.
    He didn't seem to think that was at all an overreaction to her "cheek".
    I really cannot imagine any parent behaving in such a callous manner against their own daughter
    Nor could I.
    He seemed to think it was only right and proper. I did try to probe if she had done anything else, or reacted really abusively or violently. But it seems not.
    Folk, eh?
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,994

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    Sadly.
    I was talking last week with someone aged 70 whose daughter asked for help with a deposit a few years ago.
    He refused. So they had a row, he cut her off and is going to leave the house to an animal charity.
    He didn't seem to think that was at all an overreaction to her "cheek".
    I really cannot imagine any parent behaving in such a callous manner against their own daughter
    Arguing about inheritances is sadly very common I think. Money + grief makes it a tough subject to handle well I guess.
  • Options
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    This isn't sustainable.

    Parents and grandparents are facing a retirement cash crunch as they prepare to contribute a record £8.1bn towards younger buyers’ house purchases this year, a report has warned.

    Money from relatives will help fund close to half of all purchases by under-55s in 2023, according to research by Legal & General and the Centre for Economics and Business Research (Cebr).

    It is a significant jump from 35pc in 2020, when the research was last carried out. For under-35s, the share is expected to jump from just under half in 2020 to 57pc this year as rising interest rates push up mortgage payments.

    The Bank of England has raised interest rates 14 consecutive times since December 2021 to 5.25pc, wiping tens of thousands of pounds off what the average borrower can afford.

    The average amount of financial support from relatives is expected to hit £25,600 this year, L&G’s research found.

    Bernie Hickman, chief executive of Legal & General Retail, which has 12 million policyholders, warned the record sums put many older people at risk of running out of money later in life.

    He said: “Our research clearly shows that gifting or lending money to loved ones to get on the property ladder has noticeably impacted [the givers’] finances.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/08/28/families-fund-record-8bn-family-buy-first-time-house/

    Well it helped you get on the property ladder and me
    I repaid my parents their deposit and other support within 5 years.

    The reality was their intervention allowed me to get on the property aged 21 before I had even started work.

    I'm an only child, what do parents do if they have more than one child.
    Save.

    The moment my daughter was born I started putting away £100 a month in an ISA with Skandia (later Old Mutual) . When she turned 18 we gave her the choice of using it for paying her University fees or having it for a deposit on a house. In the end she took out the student loan for the tuition fees but nothing for the additional support/living loan. It means she still has a good deposit on a house left over.

    We have done the same with my son who is 7 years younger. To pay for it we simply didn't have or do a lot of the things other people do. No fancy holidays, always had second hand cars, no expensive habits.
    That's splendid, if you can do that.

    What about people whose parents don't have £100 a month to spare?
    Then they don't do it. Or they do a lesser amount.

    The trouble is that having kids is about making sacrifices and whilst there are many people who are genuinely unable to do that there are also many more who are not willing. They would not sacrifice their holiday in the sun each year or their new car every two years simply to ensure their kids had some support to start them in adult life. And too often these have been people of my age and my 'class' who had all the benefits and are now unwilling to pass them on.

    As I say this obviously doesn't apply to everyone, or perhaps even the majority. But if you can afford a foreign holiday every year then you can afford to put something by for your kids' future.
    Sadly.
    I was talking last week with someone aged 70 whose daughter asked for help with a deposit a few years ago.
    He refused. So they had a row, he cut her off and is going to leave the house to an animal charity.
    He didn't seem to think that was at all an overreaction to her "cheek".
    I turn 45 in a few weeks time and my parents still think it is their obligation to fund my life.

    I am glad the only arguments I've ever had with my parents over money is when they yell at me for spending money on them.
This discussion has been closed.