50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
The motorist thing has way further to run. Right now, if you make an honest mistake and kill someone when you're driving, or just have a few too many beers before you get behind the wheel, you can end up in big trouble. How is that fair? Why not allow each motorist one pedestrian fatality a year before the police get involved? This is just common sense and British values.
Can children and pensioners please count as half? They pay much less tax. I would hate to think I would go over my allocation by smearing a couple of low-value people.
I pay a hell of a lot of tax so your ideas are a bit wooly.
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
I'd be as likely to believe Russian data as I would the existence of Father Christmas.
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out. They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia. Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
I'd be as likely to believe Russian data as I would the existence of Father Christmas.
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out. They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia. Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
How are they expecting to raise so much more in taxes, when anyone with the means to do so has left the country? Maybe they’re hoping for inflation of 55% between this year and next.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
The motorist thing has way further to run. Right now, if you make an honest mistake and kill someone when you're driving, or just have a few too many beers before you get behind the wheel, you can end up in big trouble. How is that fair? Why not allow each motorist one pedestrian fatality a year before the police get involved? This is just common sense and British values.
Can children and pensioners please count as half? They pay much less tax. I would hate to think I would go over my allocation by smearing a couple of low-value people.
I pay a hell of a lot of tax so your ideas are a bit wooly.
You're quite right. Some children pay a lot of tax.
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
I'd be as likely to believe Russian data as I would the existence of Father Christmas.
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out. They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia. Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
How are they expecting to raise so much more in taxes, when anyone with the means to do so has left the country? Maybe they’re hoping for inflation of 55% between this year and next.
One way is to steal (tax) it from the oil and gas companies. Which sounds like a wizard wheeze, until you realise the companies use that money for investment...
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
I'd be as likely to believe Russian data as I would the existence of Father Christmas.
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out. They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia. Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
GDP willy waving is all a fiction. PPP is better but not perfect for the reasons you state. What really matters a properly adjusted set of figures looking at mean and median income; and tax take.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
The motorist thing has way further to run. Right now, if you make an honest mistake and kill someone when you're driving, or just have a few too many beers before you get behind the wheel, you can end up in big trouble. How is that fair? Why not allow each motorist one pedestrian fatality a year before the police get involved? This is just common sense and British values.
Can children and pensioners please count as half? They pay much less tax. I would hate to think I would go over my allocation by smearing a couple of low-value people.
I pay a hell of a lot of tax so your ideas are a bit wooly.
Woolly has two ‘l’s.
The boomers nicked the other one. You can rent it back for three likes a day.
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
I'd be as likely to believe Russian data as I would the existence of Father Christmas.
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out. They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia. Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
How are they expecting to raise so much more in taxes, when anyone with the means to do so has left the country? Maybe they’re hoping for inflation of 55% between this year and next.
What models do you use for deciding how much attrition there is for a given pp rise?
Story from @BethRigby: Rishi Sunak is considering removing the winter fuel allowance from all but the poorest pensioners as a way of clawing back some taxpayer funds from the elderly as he prepares to fight the election on a pledge to keep the triple lock.
1) Not everyone is a motorist. Roughly 25% to 33% of households in the the "red wall" don't have access to one at all. I'm not sure if those people are likely swing voters - they tend to be poorer, higher rates of disability, younger or older... dunno.
2) Motorists are also cyclists, pedestrians, users of public transport. The effectiveness of the wedge depends on those who consider themselves primarily or exclusively motorists.
3) The STATS19 data for 2022 just came out. Labour could use that - 30,000 dead or seriously injured on our roads last year. (Plus, sadly, this coach crash)
4) It's a truth universally acknowledged that public transport outside London has seen woeful under-investment, now including HS2. This could be seen as a cheap ploy to distract from that. Most people commute by car by necessity rather than preference, as we see from the popularity of comprehensive public transport networks where they exist.
5) Age. There are stunning breakdowns of just how poorly the Conservatives are doing with under-50s. For young families, there are local concerns about driving around schools that Labour could "weaponise". For younger people, car ownership, licenses etc are at all time low after the pandemic, exacerbating a long-term trend. This policy might work in the short term, but in 2029, 2034?
1) So between two thirds to three quarters are motorists, and many of those in the smaller minority who aren't will be passengers quite often too. So yes by your own figures we should be investing in infrastructure.
2) And by the same logic cyclists, pedestrians and users of public transport are motorists too. So again, invest in infrastructure.
3) Our roads are remarkably safe, as those figures demonstrate. Billions of journeys made annually, but the risk of an accident is thankfully miniscule and has almost never been smaller.
4) It's a truth universally acknowledged that our road infrastructure nationwide has seen woeful under investment. The last major motorways to be built were half a century ago. Most people commute by car by choice as is shown where comprehensive public transport and smooth operating open roads are available, people choose the cars.
5) Yes many young families need to get their kids to school by car. Anyone who took an anti-parent weaponisation seeking to harm bringing kids to school would be on a hiding to nothing.
I always fail to see why so many parents use cars for what, in my youth, was a walk- or cycle-able journey. In our youth both my wife and I, at opposite ends of the country, walked around a mile to primary school. My wife, by the time she was about 7, was considered responsible enough to lead several younger children from the part of the estate where they lived, to school.
For very good reasons. Eg
1: Parents/pupils want a choice to go to good schools, not just be dumped in the closest school they can happen to walk to. If driving past a school you don't like allows you to help your kids education, that's a price well worth paying in my eyes.
2: People are more wary of letting kids be unsupervised in public nowadays, whether justified or not, because of too many stories of people harming kids etc. I wouldn't let my kids walk to or play in the park next to our estate unsupervised which doesn't even involved crossing any roads, let alone much further, to school.
And probably most importantly 3: Both parents in most families nowadays work so can't simply walk to a school and back home, they need to drop the kids off at school then continue their drive to get to their place of work. Dropping kids off at 8:45am and being at work for 9am is easier with a car.
'Back in the day' when mum walked the kids to school is easier if mum didn't have to go to work.
It is not compulsory
Well, it kind of is. Supporting three or four people on a median salary is, I would say, almost impossible.
Choice of lifestyle and location more like or choice of work etc.
Let's say you earn £1500 a month after tax. £800 of that goes in housing, £200 on groceries, £200 on utilities, £100 on transport costs (conservatively) - that leaves you £200 a month on 'lifestyle' - that includes clothing everyone, repairs and replacenents, holidays, rainy day saving, saving for a pension. Feel free to tell me any of my costs are out but I'd argue that managing all this is almost impossible.
That £200/month on groceries for family of three or four seems heroic! We're five, but we spend a hell of a lot more than that, must be more like £500-£600. Bit more on housing, bit more on utilities, bit less on transport. Take home pay (single earner) is about double, but there's still not masses to spare.
Mortgage plus food plus utilities would easily wipe us out on £1500 take home.
Story from @BethRigby: Rishi Sunak is considering removing the winter fuel allowance from all but the poorest pensioners as a way of clawing back some taxpayer funds from the elderly as he prepares to fight the election on a pledge to keep the triple lock.
The winter fuel allowance isn't just about the money, it's also a nudge to persuade stubborn self-denying pensioners to actually turn the heating on - whether they need the allowance financially or not.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
The motorist thing has way further to run. Right now, if you make an honest mistake and kill someone when you're driving, or just have a few too many beers before you get behind the wheel, you can end up in big trouble. How is that fair? Why not allow each motorist one pedestrian fatality a year before the police get involved? This is just common sense and British values.
Can children and pensioners please count as half? They pay much less tax. I would hate to think I would go over my allocation by smearing a couple of low-value people.
I pay a hell of a lot of tax so your ideas are a bit wooly.
You're quite right. Some children pay a lot of tax.
Especially young people who went to University. My grandson, father of our great-grandson, and his wife have what appears to me to be heavy expenses, even though both he and his wife are reasonably experienced teachers. Holidays are, i believe, short or short-ish visits to friends and relations.
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
I'd be as likely to believe Russian data as I would the existence of Father Christmas.
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out. They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia. Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
GDP willy waving is all a fiction. PPP is better but not perfect for the reasons you state. What really matters a properly adjusted set of figures looking at mean and median income; and tax take.
GDP is a useful figure in some corcumstances. I'm very sceptical about the ability of non-democratic countries to anywhere near accurately report economic figures. And some democratic countries, too. It's just too tempting to fudge the figure to make it appear you are stronger than you are.
Which is a mess Russia got itself into in the 70s and 80s, with the economic figures totally detached from reality.
I'm also sceptical about China's GDP figures. Reportedly 30% of China's GDP is in real estate and associated businesses (1), and that market's in a real mess at the moment, with the likes of Evergrande and CountryGarden in real trouble (the latter has $194 billion liabilities).
Story from @BethRigby: Rishi Sunak is considering removing the winter fuel allowance from all but the poorest pensioners as a way of clawing back some taxpayer funds from the elderly as he prepares to fight the election on a pledge to keep the triple lock.
If so, he's gone totally mad
Cutting winter fuel benefits for most pensioners, even if it is inefficient, whilst cuttting inheritance tax which only benefits the most wealthy is going to be yet more ammo for the Labour Party.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
The motorist thing has way further to run. Right now, if you make an honest mistake and kill someone when you're driving, or just have a few too many beers before you get behind the wheel, you can end up in big trouble. How is that fair? Why not allow each motorist one pedestrian fatality a year before the police get involved? This is just common sense and British values.
Can children and pensioners please count as half? They pay much less tax. I would hate to think I would go over my allocation by smearing a couple of low-value people.
I pay a hell of a lot of tax so your ideas are a bit wooly.
Woolly has two ‘l’s.
Uncharacteristic from Malc. He's normally happy to give anyone plenty of 'ell
Story from @BethRigby: Rishi Sunak is considering removing the winter fuel allowance from all but the poorest pensioners as a way of clawing back some taxpayer funds from the elderly as he prepares to fight the election on a pledge to keep the triple lock.
My parents are using their fuel allowance to keep warm this winter - they’ve bought flights to spend Christmas and NY in the sandpit with their son and daughter-in-law.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
One of the oddities of the post 7-bins polls has been a pretty meagre performance by the Greens. Exactly the opposite of what I expected. I thought the salience of net zero as an issue would give them a boost of 2 or 3%.
Rishi Rich needs his own show on GB not-news to reach out to floating voters.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
I'd be as likely to believe Russian data as I would the existence of Father Christmas.
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out. They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia. Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
GDP willy waving is all a fiction. PPP is better but not perfect for the reasons you state. What really matters a properly adjusted set of figures looking at mean and median income; and tax take.
GDP is a useful figure in some corcumstances. I'm very sceptical about the ability of non-democratic countries to anywhere near accurately report economic figures. And some democratic countries, too. It's just too tempting to fudge the figure to make it appear you are stronger than you are.
Which is a mess Russia got itself into in the 70s and 80s, with the economic figures totally detached from reality.
I'm also sceptical about China's GDP figures. Reportedly 30% of China's GDP is in real estate and associated businesses (1), and that market's in a real mess at the moment, with the likes of Evergrande and CountryGarden in real trouble (the latter has $194 billion liabilities).
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
Both of you are deplorably ignorant of Scottish affairs. There are haggis ranches near Edinburgh, for instance.
And where else do you get haggis balls but from the annual sexing and castration of the unwanted males?
The “British values speed limit” thing does carry the strong whiff of decomposition. This is a government rotting in office. Like a dead pilot slumped over the altimeter
As well as that nonsense in the last few weeks we've had a proposed dog breed ban of a breed we can't define, a plan to build not even half but a third of HS2, a plan to allow ICE cars to be sold until 2035 even though manufacturers will effectively be obliged to phase them out before then, and I'm sure I've forgotten some other stupid ideas from No. 10.
*edit* Meat and bin nonsense. Stupid ideas are coming so fast it's hard to keep up.
A year more of this and we will be positively reevaluating Liz Truss's reign.
God knows what is going on in government that this pile of tripe sounds like a good idea to the whiz kids.
By the sound of it, there's a brainstorming whiteboard somewhere in Downing Street, no ideas are bad ideas and all that.
Unfortunately, the contents got leaked to the press before anyone got round to checking with experts (who needs them, eh?) the details of what these ideas involved and whether they were, in fact, bad ideas.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
Well jel of your trip to Korea. I’ve been to Seoul and liked it a lot but never been beyond
Any unexpected highlights? Or indeed expected ones? How did you do it? Hire car?
Six days in Seoul; flew to Jeju for three days; flew back to Seoul, hired car and drove across the country and down the east coast, ending up in Busan - then drove back up to Seoul.
Not enough time anywhere, but got a flavour of the country, and ideas for revisiting.
Don't drive in Seoul unless you really have to, but the rest of the country is pretty easy if you have a functioning satnav.
They are very hospitable folk, and a little Korean goes a long way if you make the effort.
Winters there are bitter, so forget it until next spring.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
Both of you are deplorably ignorant of Scottish affairs. There are haggis ranches near Edinburgh, for instance.
And where else do you get haggis balls but from the annual sexing and castration of the unwanted males?
I think we should agree what 'Labour landslide' means so that punditry can be properly evaluated against the outcome.
For me it means an overall majority of 75 or higher.
For me it's a hundred or more. Blair 2005 at 66 seats was not described as a landslide, Boris 2019 at 80 seats was described as a landslide, so your defn may be the popular one.
Still wrong, tho... 😀
Back in the real world Sir K will probably be under an overall majority, and will hope he only needs LD support and not SNP etc as well.
The Tories lose control of events is they lose 40+ seats. Labour need 123 for a majority. The boggy middle ground is huge. I think there is a 60+% we will be in that area.
Keeping the maths ridiculously simple, if Labour gain 45 seats form the Tories and no other change, the Tories lose control of events (320 seats) but Labour have only 247 seats. This would be fascinating, and some such picture is not impossible.
In that case the DUP becomes important again. A pity. However a few more non-Tory seats and they’ll return to the anonymity they deserve. Trouble is, of course, that Labour will have to rely on a rainbow coalition of support.
Yes. The most interesting element of the 2024 election is how few seats the Tories have to lose to lose control, and how few Labour have to win to have a decent prospect of gaining control.
The Tories lose control, though not all hope, if they lose 41 seats - making them 324. They almost certainly lose all hope if they lose 51 seats, making them 314.
They can lose this number by losing 20 to the LDs and 31 to Labour. Labour then have 233 seats, Tories have 314 and SFAICS Labour would lead the (extremely rainbow) government.
This starkly contrasts with the 123 seats Labour need for an absolute majority.
All my figures can be out by one or two, but the principle remains. I suggest that this element will make the 2024 election particularly fascinating as the polls tighten.
The second scenario of an extremely rainbow coalition that you raise is an intriguing one. It strikes me that it couldn't realistically last more than six months, and I question if either Starmer or Sunak would fight the subsequent election as a party leader. Sunak would have lost the keys to Number 10 and quite a few rivals would fancy taking it on, while Starmer would look like little more than a caretaker and, having fallen significantly short of expectations and of a real mandate, would be under great pressure to make way too.
I don't think the extremely rainbow coalition would happen in practice. It would be an equally unstable Labour-led minority government made up of Lab+Lib+Alliance/SDLP+Green but excluding the SNP and (probably) PC. They would work on the basis the SNP dare not bring the government down for fear of being labelled Tartan Tories again. The Tories would have a field day. There would be another election in a few months, which would quite possibly result in another hung parliament.
I'm not sure there would be any coalition at all in that situation.
Having a coalition is only really worth it if it gives you a working majority (as in 2010). Then the participants can sensibly come up with a coalition agreement where you sketch out a programme for the next four or five years, where you get some of the things you want, and sacrifice other things.
But if the SNP weren't getting involved then, on those numbers, there is no arrangement that would give Labour the sort of numbers to meaningfully offer anything, or any real hope of stumbling on to anything like full term - everything would be subject to a negotiation with the SNP or, less likely, with a group of Tories. Then it's just Labour offering Lib Dems imaginary legislation that can't possibly get through, and Lib Dems offering to support stuff but without anything like the numbers to get it over the line.
I'm not really sure there is a coalition agreement of any kind to be made there with the remaining parties. So Davey and others would most likely just say Starmer can come in as caretaker because the Tories need removing and someone has to do it, but essentially it's a holding position for a fresh election within months.
If, say, Labour won 300 seats, to 30 for the Lib Dems, 30 for the SNP, 2 5for Others, with 265 Conservatives, then SKS could easily form a minority government, because no one would vote with the Conservatives, against him.
In my head the magic number is around 300. Below that and however the balance is made up, you’re in hell as PM because multiple overlapping coalitions outvote you (including bits of your own party) and you can’t please everyone.
There are a number of magic numbers. First off the most important is the number of seats the Tories have to lose to lose control of events. That is about 45-50; theoretically it's 41 (365-41=324, meaning there are 325 non Tory seats +1 Speaker.)
BTW my guess is that if NI seats come into play, the DUP will join their great friends SF in neither supporting nor opposing the Tories or anyone else with their votes. Which would mean the number of seats you are playing with is 650-about 16=634, making a majority 318.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
Not obvious from this picture but it is a wonder of evolution that the males have shorter left legs so run around the hills anti clockwise and the females have shorter right legs so go in the opposite directions ensuring they meet.
I have to admit they all look like trans haggi with what look like equal length legs.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
Both of you are deplorably ignorant of Scottish affairs. There are haggis ranches near Edinburgh, for instance.
And where else do you get haggis balls but from the annual sexing and castration of the unwanted males?
AIUI, during the Chinese property boom, people would put their life savings into buying a property off-plan. The developers would then use that money to finance other schemes, meaning the whole thing was a massive pyramid scheme that left millions with unbuilt or part-built properties.
One of the oddities of the post 7-bins polls has been a pretty meagre performance by the Greens. Exactly the opposite of what I expected. I thought the salience of net zero as an issue would give them a boost of 2 or 3%.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
She makes a lot of valid arguments and good points. The problem with planning is with a lack of strategy and direction on the part of government, not with individual participants in the process.
I read an interesting article the other day, by an economist, who said we have consistently underestimated Russian economic strength - see the PPP data - which has in turn led us to underestimate its military strength. It was quite persuasive
I’ll try and dig out the link
I'd be as likely to believe Russian data as I would the existence of Father Christmas.
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out. They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia. Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
How are they expecting to raise so much more in taxes, when anyone with the means to do so has left the country? Maybe they’re hoping for inflation of 55% between this year and next.
Well the Russians either send good numbers up to the Kremlin, irrespective of the actual numbers, or they have an unfortunate incident involving a 9th floor balcony.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
I think we should agree what 'Labour landslide' means so that punditry can be properly evaluated against the outcome.
For me it means an overall majority of 75 or higher.
For me it's a hundred or more. Blair 2005 at 66 seats was not described as a landslide, Boris 2019 at 80 seats was described as a landslide, so your defn may be the popular one.
Still wrong, tho... 😀
Back in the real world Sir K will probably be under an overall majority, and will hope he only needs LD support and not SNP etc as well.
The Tories lose control of events is they lose 40+ seats. Labour need 123 for a majority. The boggy middle ground is huge. I think there is a 60+% we will be in that area.
Keeping the maths ridiculously simple, if Labour gain 45 seats form the Tories and no other change, the Tories lose control of events (320 seats) but Labour have only 247 seats. This would be fascinating, and some such picture is not impossible.
In that case the DUP becomes important again. A pity. However a few more non-Tory seats and they’ll return to the anonymity they deserve. Trouble is, of course, that Labour will have to rely on a rainbow coalition of support.
Yes. The most interesting element of the 2024 election is how few seats the Tories have to lose to lose control, and how few Labour have to win to have a decent prospect of gaining control.
The Tories lose control, though not all hope, if they lose 41 seats - making them 324. They almost certainly lose all hope if they lose 51 seats, making them 314.
They can lose this number by losing 20 to the LDs and 31 to Labour. Labour then have 233 seats, Tories have 314 and SFAICS Labour would lead the (extremely rainbow) government.
This starkly contrasts with the 123 seats Labour need for an absolute majority.
All my figures can be out by one or two, but the principle remains. I suggest that this element will make the 2024 election particularly fascinating as the polls tighten.
The second scenario of an extremely rainbow coalition that you raise is an intriguing one. It strikes me that it couldn't realistically last more than six months, and I question if either Starmer or Sunak would fight the subsequent election as a party leader. Sunak would have lost the keys to Number 10 and quite a few rivals would fancy taking it on, while Starmer would look like little more than a caretaker and, having fallen significantly short of expectations and of a real mandate, would be under great pressure to make way too.
I don't think the extremely rainbow coalition would happen in practice. It would be an equally unstable Labour-led minority government made up of Lab+Lib+Alliance/SDLP+Green but excluding the SNP and (probably) PC. They would work on the basis the SNP dare not bring the government down for fear of being labelled Tartan Tories again. The Tories would have a field day. There would be another election in a few months, which would quite possibly result in another hung parliament.
I'm not sure there would be any coalition at all in that situation.
Having a coalition is only really worth it if it gives you a working majority (as in 2010). Then the participants can sensibly come up with a coalition agreement where you sketch out a programme for the next four or five years, where you get some of the things you want, and sacrifice other things.
But if the SNP weren't getting involved then, on those numbers, there is no arrangement that would give Labour the sort of numbers to meaningfully offer anything, or any real hope of stumbling on to anything like full term - everything would be subject to a negotiation with the SNP or, less likely, with a group of Tories. Then it's just Labour offering Lib Dems imaginary legislation that can't possibly get through, and Lib Dems offering to support stuff but without anything like the numbers to get it over the line.
I'm not really sure there is a coalition agreement of any kind to be made there with the remaining parties. So Davey and others would most likely just say Starmer can come in as caretaker because the Tories need removing and someone has to do it, but essentially it's a holding position for a fresh election within months.
If, say, Labour won 300 seats, to 30 for the Lib Dems, 30 for the SNP, 2 5for Others, with 265 Conservatives, then SKS could easily form a minority government, because no one would vote with the Conservatives, against him.
Sure, but I was responding to the original hypothetical situation "Labour then have 233 seats, Tories have 314 and SFAICS Labour would lead the (extremely rainbow) government."
Clearly, there are a wide range of possible results within the overall "hung parliament" result, with a wide range of possible outcomes in terms of government formed.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
Story from @BethRigby: Rishi Sunak is considering removing the winter fuel allowance from all but the poorest pensioners as a way of clawing back some taxpayer funds from the elderly as he prepares to fight the election on a pledge to keep the triple lock.
If so, he's gone totally mad
He sure has. I use mine to buy Bollinger. What's the point of a welfare state if you have to use Lidl champagne?
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
"whiskey"
Many apologies, spelling a bit dodgy as have been drinking bear.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
"whiskey"
Many apologies, spelling a bit dodgy as have been drinking bear.
I think we should agree what 'Labour landslide' means so that punditry can be properly evaluated against the outcome.
For me it means an overall majority of 75 or higher.
For me it's a hundred or more. Blair 2005 at 66 seats was not described as a landslide, Boris 2019 at 80 seats was described as a landslide, so your defn may be the popular one.
Still wrong, tho... 😀
Back in the real world Sir K will probably be under an overall majority, and will hope he only needs LD support and not SNP etc as well.
The Tories lose control of events is they lose 40+ seats. Labour need 123 for a majority. The boggy middle ground is huge. I think there is a 60+% we will be in that area.
Keeping the maths ridiculously simple, if Labour gain 45 seats form the Tories and no other change, the Tories lose control of events (320 seats) but Labour have only 247 seats. This would be fascinating, and some such picture is not impossible.
In that case the DUP becomes important again. A pity. However a few more non-Tory seats and they’ll return to the anonymity they deserve. Trouble is, of course, that Labour will have to rely on a rainbow coalition of support.
Yes. The most interesting element of the 2024 election is how few seats the Tories have to lose to lose control, and how few Labour have to win to have a decent prospect of gaining control.
The Tories lose control, though not all hope, if they lose 41 seats - making them 324. They almost certainly lose all hope if they lose 51 seats, making them 314.
They can lose this number by losing 20 to the LDs and 31 to Labour. Labour then have 233 seats, Tories have 314 and SFAICS Labour would lead the (extremely rainbow) government.
This starkly contrasts with the 123 seats Labour need for an absolute majority.
All my figures can be out by one or two, but the principle remains. I suggest that this element will make the 2024 election particularly fascinating as the polls tighten.
The second scenario of an extremely rainbow coalition that you raise is an intriguing one. It strikes me that it couldn't realistically last more than six months, and I question if either Starmer or Sunak would fight the subsequent election as a party leader. Sunak would have lost the keys to Number 10 and quite a few rivals would fancy taking it on, while Starmer would look like little more than a caretaker and, having fallen significantly short of expectations and of a real mandate, would be under great pressure to make way too.
I don't think the extremely rainbow coalition would happen in practice. It would be an equally unstable Labour-led minority government made up of Lab+Lib+Alliance/SDLP+Green but excluding the SNP and (probably) PC. They would work on the basis the SNP dare not bring the government down for fear of being labelled Tartan Tories again. The Tories would have a field day. There would be another election in a few months, which would quite possibly result in another hung parliament.
I'm not sure there would be any coalition at all in that situation.
Having a coalition is only really worth it if it gives you a working majority (as in 2010). Then the participants can sensibly come up with a coalition agreement where you sketch out a programme for the next four or five years, where you get some of the things you want, and sacrifice other things.
But if the SNP weren't getting involved then, on those numbers, there is no arrangement that would give Labour the sort of numbers to meaningfully offer anything, or any real hope of stumbling on to anything like full term - everything would be subject to a negotiation with the SNP or, less likely, with a group of Tories. Then it's just Labour offering Lib Dems imaginary legislation that can't possibly get through, and Lib Dems offering to support stuff but without anything like the numbers to get it over the line.
I'm not really sure there is a coalition agreement of any kind to be made there with the remaining parties. So Davey and others would most likely just say Starmer can come in as caretaker because the Tories need removing and someone has to do it, but essentially it's a holding position for a fresh election within months.
If, say, Labour won 300 seats, to 30 for the Lib Dems, 30 for the SNP, 2 5for Others, with 265 Conservatives, then SKS could easily form a minority government, because no one would vote with the Conservatives, against him.
Sure, but I was responding to the original hypothetical situation "Labour then have 233 seats, Tories have 314 and SFAICS Labour would lead the (extremely rainbow) government."
Clearly, there are a wide range of possible results within the overall "hung parliament" result, with a wide range of possible outcomes in terms of government formed.
if there was ever a true statement, the italicised bit above it it. Bet the farm on its truth.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
"whiskey"
Many apologies, spelling a bit dodgy as have been drinking bear.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
"whiskey"
Many apologies, spelling a bit dodgy as have been drinking bear.
I'm just having a little whine
Could be worse, Tony Blair is on Cherie right now.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
Both of you are deplorably ignorant of Scottish affairs. There are haggis ranches near Edinburgh, for instance.
And where else do you get haggis balls but from the annual sexing and castration of the unwanted males?
I think we should agree what 'Labour landslide' means so that punditry can be properly evaluated against the outcome.
For me it means an overall majority of 75 or higher.
For me it's a hundred or more. Blair 2005 at 66 seats was not described as a landslide, Boris 2019 at 80 seats was described as a landslide, so your defn may be the popular one.
Still wrong, tho... 😀
Back in the real world Sir K will probably be under an overall majority, and will hope he only needs LD support and not SNP etc as well.
The Tories lose control of events is they lose 40+ seats. Labour need 123 for a majority. The boggy middle ground is huge. I think there is a 60+% we will be in that area.
Keeping the maths ridiculously simple, if Labour gain 45 seats form the Tories and no other change, the Tories lose control of events (320 seats) but Labour have only 247 seats. This would be fascinating, and some such picture is not impossible.
In that case the DUP becomes important again. A pity. However a few more non-Tory seats and they’ll return to the anonymity they deserve. Trouble is, of course, that Labour will have to rely on a rainbow coalition of support.
Yes. The most interesting element of the 2024 election is how few seats the Tories have to lose to lose control, and how few Labour have to win to have a decent prospect of gaining control.
The Tories lose control, though not all hope, if they lose 41 seats - making them 324. They almost certainly lose all hope if they lose 51 seats, making them 314.
They can lose this number by losing 20 to the LDs and 31 to Labour. Labour then have 233 seats, Tories have 314 and SFAICS Labour would lead the (extremely rainbow) government.
This starkly contrasts with the 123 seats Labour need for an absolute majority.
All my figures can be out by one or two, but the principle remains. I suggest that this element will make the 2024 election particularly fascinating as the polls tighten.
The second scenario of an extremely rainbow coalition that you raise is an intriguing one. It strikes me that it couldn't realistically last more than six months, and I question if either Starmer or Sunak would fight the subsequent election as a party leader. Sunak would have lost the keys to Number 10 and quite a few rivals would fancy taking it on, while Starmer would look like little more than a caretaker and, having fallen significantly short of expectations and of a real mandate, would be under great pressure to make way too.
I don't think the extremely rainbow coalition would happen in practice. It would be an equally unstable Labour-led minority government made up of Lab+Lib+Alliance/SDLP+Green but excluding the SNP and (probably) PC. They would work on the basis the SNP dare not bring the government down for fear of being labelled Tartan Tories again. The Tories would have a field day. There would be another election in a few months, which would quite possibly result in another hung parliament.
I'm not sure there would be any coalition at all in that situation.
Having a coalition is only really worth it if it gives you a working majority (as in 2010). Then the participants can sensibly come up with a coalition agreement where you sketch out a programme for the next four or five years, where you get some of the things you want, and sacrifice other things.
But if the SNP weren't getting involved then, on those numbers, there is no arrangement that would give Labour the sort of numbers to meaningfully offer anything, or any real hope of stumbling on to anything like full term - everything would be subject to a negotiation with the SNP or, less likely, with a group of Tories. Then it's just Labour offering Lib Dems imaginary legislation that can't possibly get through, and Lib Dems offering to support stuff but without anything like the numbers to get it over the line.
I'm not really sure there is a coalition agreement of any kind to be made there with the remaining parties. So Davey and others would most likely just say Starmer can come in as caretaker because the Tories need removing and someone has to do it, but essentially it's a holding position for a fresh election within months.
If, say, Labour won 300 seats, to 30 for the Lib Dems, 30 for the SNP, 2 5for Others, with 265 Conservatives, then SKS could easily form a minority government, because no one would vote with the Conservatives, against him.
Sure, but I was responding to the original hypothetical situation "Labour then have 233 seats, Tories have 314 and SFAICS Labour would lead the (extremely rainbow) government."
Clearly, there are a wide range of possible results within the overall "hung parliament" result, with a wide range of possible outcomes in terms of government formed.
Thanks. Yes. However while alliances and coalitions etc are another matter, it still seems to me possible that Labour could have hugely fewer seats than the Tories, and still be the only outfit that could possibly win a vote in the HoC and therefore be the government. No-one (not even the DUP??) is going to vote to keep the Tories in if Tories don't have the seats and votes to beat the others without help.
AIUI, during the Chinese property boom, people would put their life savings into buying a property off-plan. The developers would then use that money to finance other schemes, meaning the whole thing was a massive pyramid scheme that left millions with unbuilt or part-built properties.
Very communist. They are, at least, all in it together.
AIUI, during the Chinese property boom, people would put their life savings into buying a property off-plan. The developers would then use that money to finance other schemes, meaning the whole thing was a massive pyramid scheme that left millions with unbuilt or part-built properties.
An obvious solution to the migration crisis presents itself.
AIUI, during the Chinese property boom, people would put their life savings into buying a property off-plan. The developers would then use that money to finance other schemes, meaning the whole thing was a massive pyramid scheme that left millions with unbuilt or part-built properties.
Perhaps we could do some sort of trade deal with them.
50-60 million new properties is exactly what we need over here. Wonder how much they'd take for them as a job lot?
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
"whiskey"
Many apologies, spelling a bit dodgy as have been drinking bear.
I'm just having a little whine
I think i'm listing to port. Or maybe it's my haggis legs.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
National parks would be more likely - he doesn't want to touch anything close to actual economics.
Since he's concentrating on absolute trivia, perhaps there might be something around dogshit? Funding a national squad of Dogshit Detectives to go after people who don't pick up after their pets?
Or go the other way and appeal to boomer nostalgia: vote Tory to bring back white dogshit.
I must admit I was amused by the concept of Sunak making hard decisions.
But I think it's going to be pretty hard for him to carry on coming up with a dog-whistle gimmick a week between now and the election - whenever it is.
Some further constraints.
Any announcements can't cost actual money, because the whole narrative is that the government doesn't have any money.
Furthermore, the UK can blow rasperries at the EU, but can't do anything substantively Brexity/ECHRxity. Windsor Agreement has seen to that.
That rules out a lot, and the things it leaves risk becoming very samey after a while.
Still, perhaps the public chess board initiative can be extended to other games - draughts being an obvious one to combat accusations of elitism. Backgammon, Mahjong (if he can get anything so unBritish past the Home Secretary), dominoes, Monopoly, Cluedo (obviously dependent on negotiations with the rights holders), Royal Game of Ur and so on.
I've just been looking at Parish Council responsibilities to see if there's anything there that Rishi might want to stick his nose into.
Allotments - discounts for pensioners? Burial Grounds - ditto. Challenge Labour to match the pledge, scream about death taxes if they don't Bus Shelters - get rid Clocks - levelling-up funds to be diverted to paying for new town clocks in every marginal constituency Footpaths - ignore Gifts - yes please Litter - national litter-picking service, with all 16-25 year olds required to spend 4 hours each week picking litter. No expenses to be paid Postal and Telecommunication facilities - Internet providers will be required to sponsor red telephone boxes in every Tory-voting village Public conveniences - ban trans and non-binary people Rights of way - abolish Seats (public) - national campaign to increase sponsorship. Require that they all incorporate anti-loitering features. Traffic calming - concentrate on traffic enragement instead War memorials - make poppies compulsory for all
And ban white poppies.
And a £100 fine for anyone saying “our NHS” instead of “the NHS”. The national debt cleared in a year.
Surely it’s rNHS ?
The Royal National Health Service?
The Scouse R. As in (our) rAdrian and (our) rLianne and (our) rOwen. If you say the word "our" in certain accents it comes out as "r".
The underground plays a jingle before each train arrives, which sounds a bit like the public announcement music from The Village in The Prisoner. (The one in Busan consists of a ship's foghorn and seagull cries.)
The “British values speed limit” thing does carry the strong whiff of decomposition. This is a government rotting in office. Like a dead pilot slumped over the altimeter
Did we find out if teh 16 year old tree feller was anti-pensioners and just wanted to build a house.
He sounds like the kind of small person who would also take your winter fuel allowance away.
Sunak says imposing a blanket 20mph limit is not right. The interviewer points out its not blanket. Sunak ignores him & repeats it. The interviewer again says its not a blanket ban. Sunak says thats not quite right. The interviewer points out language is important. Not to Sunak!
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
Both of you are deplorably ignorant of Scottish affairs. There are haggis ranches near Edinburgh, for instance.
And where else do you get haggis balls but from the annual sexing and castration of the unwanted males?
Sunak says imposing a blanket 20mph limit is not right. The interviewer points out its not blanket. Sunak ignores him & repeats it. The interviewer again says its not a blanket ban. Sunak says thats not quite right. The interviewer points out language is important. Not to Sunak!
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
Both of you are deplorably ignorant of Scottish affairs. There are haggis ranches near Edinburgh, for instance.
And where else do you get haggis balls but from the annual sexing and castration of the unwanted males?
If the lower end estimate of the cost of HS2 is £72bn then that represents 0.38% of the total cost, max. That strikes me as quite a low percentage for a major complex project like this, but presumably doesn't include engineering or planning consultancy.
Sunak says imposing a blanket 20mph limit is not right. The interviewer points out its not blanket. Sunak ignores him & repeats it. The interviewer again says its not a blanket ban. Sunak says thats not quite right. The interviewer points out language is important. Not to Sunak!
Winter fuel allowance could change and apparently no 10 is also looking at cutting working age benefits so that they can dish out tax cuts .
Rob from the poorest to give tax cuts . What an absolute cesspit this government is .
There is scope with winter fuel allowance - why do my parents get it? Dad, after 30 years police service and retirement nearly thirty years ago, is taking home almost as much as me when you add police pension and state pension. He has no mortgage.
They use the money to fund watching rugby. They. Do Not. Need. It.
You can argue that making it means tested is inefficient, but I think it needs to happen.
The basis of the answer is to charge pensioners full NI, and manoeuvre the tax rate to reclaim this stuff that way. But it’s politically toxic to do so.
Ha Ha Ha , the losers on here always blame everything on pensioners. Poor sods paid 50 years to get a pittance yet the lazy young would hav ethem beggared.
Well my first idea was to just take the cash from Scotland, but apparently there are no golden geese left up there.
Maybe not golden geese but golden haggis. If they introduce mass Haggis farming there will be a huge economic and environmental benefit. They don’t produce methane but are high in nutrition and low maintenance. I found a photo of the last Haggis farmers on the Isle of Jura who sadly lost their livelihoods to intensive whiskey farming but I think their legacy can be revived.
Both of you are deplorably ignorant of Scottish affairs. There are haggis ranches near Edinburgh, for instance.
And where else do you get haggis balls but from the annual sexing and castration of the unwanted males?
I am a fully paid up driving gloves and tartan rug motorist, and none of Rishi Rich's old nonsense gels with me. £1 tax reduction per litre on fuel duty and VAT and I'm on side.
Sunak says imposing a blanket 20mph limit is not right. The interviewer points out its not blanket. Sunak ignores him & repeats it. The interviewer again says its not a blanket ban. Sunak says thats not quite right. The interviewer points out language is important. Not to Sunak!
"I will deliver on (our manifesto's) promise. A stronger NHS, better schools, safer streets, control of our borders, protecting our environment, supporting our armed forces, levelling up, and building an economy that embraces the opportunities of Brexit where businesses invest, innovate and create jobs.”
So we have:
Weaker NHS with longer queues and striking and resigning staff Schools closed out of fear of them crumbling down because he didnt want to spend money to repair them Against the measures for safer streets More failure on border Given up on environment Armed forces? Levelling up only as far as Birmingham Opportunities of Brexit......
Now this crazy government is trying to abolish the winter fuel allowance for pensioners to pay towards or significantly for the Triple Lock. I think they have finally lost their minds. What a rabble. What world do they live in!!! How to lose the Old vote and an election. I give up.
1/ Greetings chums. Straight down to business this week – Labour has re-established a 20-point lead over the Tories in our latest voter intention tracker...
🔴 Lab 47% (+2) 🔵 Con 27% (-1) 🟠 LD 10% (+1) ⚪ Ref 7% (+1) 🟢 Green 5% (-1) 🟡 SNP 3% (NC)
We were in Northumberland this week, the Heatherslaw to Etal line. Narrow gauge. Small carriages.
Have you been ?
No I haven't, but sounds interesting!
It’s a beautiful part of the north east. The towns of Ford and Etal are close to each other and in between them is heatherslaw that runs a train, alongside the river till, to Etal. Must only be a few minutes but it’s lovely and it really feels like going back in time.
1/ Greetings chums. Straight down to business this week – Labour has re-established a 20-point lead over the Tories in our latest voter intention tracker...
🔴 Lab 47% (+2) 🔵 Con 27% (-1) 🟠 LD 10% (+1) ⚪ Ref 7% (+1) 🟢 Green 5% (-1) 🟡 SNP 3% (NC)
Given @theakes comment above, how long before the LibDems catch up with the Tories. That WOULD be fun.
1/ Greetings chums. Straight down to business this week – Labour has re-established a 20-point lead over the Tories in our latest voter intention tracker...
🔴 Lab 47% (+2) 🔵 Con 27% (-1) 🟠 LD 10% (+1) ⚪ Ref 7% (+1) 🟢 Green 5% (-1) 🟡 SNP 3% (NC)
Here's a reliable prediction for you.
Over the next 12 months or so:
(a) Every poll showing Tories up a couple of pp will be greeted with grandiose statements of how Sunak has cracked the formula at last, we all knew Starmer's lead was wide but shallow etc.
(b) Every poll showing Labour up a couple of pp will be greeted with equally grandiose statements of Tory meltdown, Sunak facing a challenge by next Tuesday, Labour heading for a landslide etc.
(c) We'll look back over it all at the end of the period, and basically f*** all will have shifted materially - all noise, no signal to speak of.
1/ Greetings chums. Straight down to business this week – Labour has re-established a 20-point lead over the Tories in our latest voter intention tracker...
🔴 Lab 47% (+2) 🔵 Con 27% (-1) 🟠 LD 10% (+1) ⚪ Ref 7% (+1) 🟢 Green 5% (-1) 🟡 SNP 3% (NC)
Here's a reliable prediction for you.
Over the next 12 months or so:
(a) Every poll showing Tories up a couple of pp will be greeted with grandiose statements of how Sunak has cracked the formula at last, we all knew Starmer's lead was wide but shallow etc.
(b) Every poll showing Labour up a couple of pp will be greeted with equally grandiose statements of Tory meltdown, Sunak facing a challenge by next Tuesday, Labour heading for a landslide etc.
(c) We'll look back over it all at the end of the period, and basically f*** all will have shifted materially - all noise, no signal to speak of.
One caveat to that.
20 points behind with 12-15 months to go is bad.
20 points behind with 12 weeks or 12 days to go is really bad.
Well jel of your trip to Korea. I’ve been to Seoul and liked it a lot but never been beyond
Any unexpected highlights? Or indeed expected ones?
짜장면 (jJajangmyeon) as ubiquitous fast food. Love it. Old fashioned food markets - a hangover from before the economy became first world. The guys in the bulgogi restaurants agreeing to prep vegetarian dishes for my wife (after initial bemusement). An AirBnb with roof terrace in Seoul. The cheerful septuagenarians overtaking us on the way up Hallasan. Laundrette ajuma discussing 90s K-folk music with my wife...
Lots of inconsequential stuff that was as interesting as the museums; palaces; temples etc.
1/ Greetings chums. Straight down to business this week – Labour has re-established a 20-point lead over the Tories in our latest voter intention tracker...
🔴 Lab 47% (+2) 🔵 Con 27% (-1) 🟠 LD 10% (+1) ⚪ Ref 7% (+1) 🟢 Green 5% (-1) 🟡 SNP 3% (NC)
Here's a reliable prediction for you.
Over the next 12 months or so:
(a) Every poll showing Tories up a couple of pp will be greeted with grandiose statements of how Sunak has cracked the formula at last, we all knew Starmer's lead was wide but shallow etc.
(b) Every poll showing Labour up a couple of pp will be greeted with equally grandiose statements of Tory meltdown, Sunak facing a challenge by next Tuesday, Labour heading for a landslide etc.
(c) We'll look back over it all at the end of the period, and basically f*** all will have shifted materially - all noise, no signal to speak of.
(c) is essentially what we've seen since Sunak had taken over. Perhaps Labour down a little, Lib Dems up a bit.
That said, this Parliament hasn't exactly been short of surprises. There's still time for another one.
50:50 abolish minimum wage/national parks I reckon.
The motorist thing has way further to run. Right now, if you make an honest mistake and kill someone when you're driving, or just have a few too many beers before you get behind the wheel, you can end up in big trouble. How is that fair? Why not allow each motorist one pedestrian fatality a year before the police get involved? This is just common sense and British values.
Can children and pensioners please count as half? They pay much less tax. I would hate to think I would go over my allocation by smearing a couple of low-value people.
I pay a hell of a lot of tax so your ideas are a bit wooly.
Well jel of your trip to Korea. I’ve been to Seoul and liked it a lot but never been beyond
Any unexpected highlights? Or indeed expected ones?
짜장면 (jJajangmyeon) as ubiquitous fast food. Love it. Old fashioned food markets - a hangover from before the economy became first world. The guys in the bulgogi restaurants agreeing to prep vegetarian dishes for my wife (after initial bemusement). An AirBnb with roof terrace in Seoul. The cheerful septuagenarians overtaking us on the way up Hallasan. Laundrette ajuma discussing 90s K-folk music with my wife...
Lots of inconsequential stuff that was as interesting as the museums; palaces; temples etc.
"The details of my life are quite inconsequential."
Comments
Russia was expected to overrun Ukraine within days. Indeed, I read somewhere that the Russian military was considered strong enough to get to Warsaw if they wanted.... possibly Berlin but then they would peter out.
They couldn't even get to Kharkhov.
Most of the economic data published seems to come from Russia itself. It's recent budget predicted that the defence (sic) spending would increase by 44%, and be funded by a 55% increase in tax take, with no explanation as to how this would be achieved.
I also recall recently, on this very site, that the UK was predicted by the IMF to be in for a terrible economic year, worst of all in Europe, and that included Russia.
Then I learnt that the IMF simply accepted Russia's growth forecasts without question.
Let's be honest. If I said that Bootle was predicted to have a GDP of $Trillion to the Trillion next year, would that make Bootle the biggest economy in the world? According to the IMF it would, because they'd just accept any old rubbish and believe it.
Russia isn't a weak as hoped, but Russia is suffering massively from the war it can't get out of.
Well jel of your trip to Korea. I’ve been to Seoul and liked it a lot but never been beyond
Any unexpected highlights? Or indeed expected ones? How did you do it? Hire car?
https://www.ft.com/content/f4b89276-efcf-4731-9ed3-7afea3be4c27
https://news.sky.com/story/winter-fuel-allowance-could-be-removed-for-most-pensioners-to-pay-for-triple-lock-12972246
Story from @BethRigby: Rishi Sunak is considering removing the winter fuel allowance from all but the poorest pensioners as a way of clawing back some taxpayer funds from the elderly as he prepares to fight the election on a pledge to keep the triple lock.
Mortgage plus food plus utilities would easily wipe us out on £1500 take home.
My grandson, father of our great-grandson, and his wife have what appears to me to be heavy expenses, even though both he and his wife are reasonably experienced teachers. Holidays are, i believe, short or short-ish visits to friends and relations.
Which is a mess Russia got itself into in the 70s and 80s, with the economic figures totally detached from reality.
I'm also sceptical about China's GDP figures. Reportedly 30% of China's GDP is in real estate and associated businesses (1), and that market's in a real mess at the moment, with the likes of Evergrande and CountryGarden in real trouble (the latter has $194 billion liabilities).
(1): https://www.cfr.org/blog/pboc-props-chinas-housing-market
Includes the Queen of the NIMBYs who is proud to have stopped 37,000:homes being built.
https://x.com/wallaceme/status/1707675496207552900?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
"A teenage boy has been arrested after allegedly killing a family member and streaming it on social media."
https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/2023/09/29/teenager-arrested-after-killing-family-member-in-offaly/
Those China numbers are interesting.
And where else do you get haggis balls but from the annual sexing and castration of the unwanted males?
https://www.macsween.co.uk/about-us/
Unfortunately, the contents got leaked to the press before anyone got round to checking with experts (who needs them, eh?) the details of what these ideas involved and whether they were, in fact, bad ideas.
Not enough time anywhere, but got a flavour of the country, and ideas for revisiting.
Don't drive in Seoul unless you really have to, but the rest of the country is pretty easy if you have a functioning satnav.
They are very hospitable folk, and a little Korean goes a long way if you make the effort.
Winters there are bitter, so forget it until next spring.
BTW my guess is that if NI seats come into play, the DUP will join their great friends SF in neither supporting nor opposing the Tories or anyone else with their votes. Which would mean the number of seats you are playing with is 650-about 16=634, making a majority 318.
I have to admit they all look like trans haggi with what look like equal length legs.
Some sources have 50 to 60 million properties empty in China, many of them newly built. Other sources have it much, much worse.
https://www.reuters.com/world/china/even-chinas-14-bln-population-cant-fill-all-its-vacant-homes-former-official-2023-09-23/
AIUI, during the Chinese property boom, people would put their life savings into buying a property off-plan. The developers would then use that money to finance other schemes, meaning the whole thing was a massive pyramid scheme that left millions with unbuilt or part-built properties.
Clearly, there are a wide range of possible results within the overall "hung parliament" result, with a wide range of possible outcomes in terms of government formed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq3xY4Q5_nc
Next Tuesday, Channel 4, 9.30pm. That's the penultimate day of the Conservative Party Conference.
if there was ever a true statement, the italicised bit above it it. Bet the farm on its truth.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/280m-for-consultants-on-the-hs2-gravy-train-5d007k5q7 (£££)
No it would not last long. But it would happen.
50-60 million new properties is exactly what we need over here. Wonder how much they'd take for them as a job lot?
Have you been ?
The underground plays a jingle before each train arrives, which sounds a bit like the public announcement music from The Village in The Prisoner.
(The one in Busan consists of a ship's foghorn and seagull cries.)
Sunak says imposing a blanket 20mph limit is not right. The interviewer points out its not blanket. Sunak ignores him & repeats it. The interviewer again says its not a blanket ban. Sunak says thats not quite right. The interviewer points out language is important. Not to Sunak!
https://x.com/IanDunt/status/1707783727412109732?s=20
I am a fully paid up driving gloves and tartan rug motorist, and none of Rishi Rich's old nonsense gels with me. £1 tax reduction per litre on fuel duty and VAT and I'm on side.
So we have:
Weaker NHS with longer queues and striking and resigning staff
Schools closed out of fear of them crumbling down because he didnt want to spend money to repair them
Against the measures for safer streets
More failure on border
Given up on environment
Armed forces?
Levelling up only as far as Birmingham
Opportunities of Brexit......
And that is on his own pledges.
1/ Greetings chums. Straight down to business this week – Labour has re-established a 20-point lead over the Tories in our latest voter intention tracker...
🔴 Lab 47% (+2)
🔵 Con 27% (-1)
🟠 LD 10% (+1)
⚪ Ref 7% (+1)
🟢 Green 5% (-1)
🟡 SNP 3% (NC)
http://www.pendragonpublishing.co.uk/Marshall_Meadows_Berwick.pdf
That WOULD be fun.
Over the next 12 months or so:
(a) Every poll showing Tories up a couple of pp will be greeted with grandiose statements of how Sunak has cracked the formula at last, we all knew Starmer's lead was wide but shallow etc.
(b) Every poll showing Labour up a couple of pp will be greeted with equally grandiose statements of Tory meltdown, Sunak facing a challenge by next Tuesday, Labour heading for a landslide etc.
(c) We'll look back over it all at the end of the period, and basically f*** all will have shifted materially - all noise, no signal to speak of.
And, yes, it’s fab.
20 points behind with 12-15 months to go is bad.
20 points behind with 12 weeks or 12 days to go is really bad.
Old fashioned food markets - a hangover from before the economy became first world.
The guys in the bulgogi restaurants agreeing to prep vegetarian dishes for my wife (after initial bemusement).
An AirBnb with roof terrace in Seoul.
The cheerful septuagenarians overtaking us on the way up Hallasan.
Laundrette ajuma discussing 90s K-folk music with my wife...
Lots of inconsequential stuff that was as interesting as the museums; palaces; temples etc.
That said, this Parliament hasn't exactly been short of surprises. There's still time for another one.