Howdy, Stranger!

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

Humza Yousaf? More like Humza Useless – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,215
edited October 2023 in General
Humza Yousaf? More like Humza Useless – politicalbetting.com

We asked 1,000 Scots to give us one word to describe Humza Yousaf.#SNP23 pic.twitter.com/jvEYy6fHLR

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • First.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,740
    Somewhere, Kate Forbes is laughing.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    England win the toss and will field first.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,590
    FPT
    malcolmg said:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    It was reformed in 2015 for those who are still working.

    For those who are claiming a final salary pension, nothing was done.

    Changing a contract after the fact is not reasonable, but applying tax on a final salary pension at the same rate as the tax applied on those who are working is eminently reasonable.
    You just cannot be as thick as you make out. Explain how anyone on a final salary pension pays less tax than anyone else on the same income you absolute bellend. Clue you cannot use your usual NI mince on someone who is not working. The contract was to pay NI for a period like every other person in the country. I wonder if you have ever paid it myself.
    Why should NI only be attached to work - easier solution would be to split it into 2 - 1 for pension / JSA that is paid on employment, 1 for NHS which is paid on everything.

    And the chance to stop such a plan has already failed - it was part of Rishi's 2021 budget and Truss killed it off... Chances are it will return...
  • TresTres Posts: 2,724
    edited October 2023
    ydoethur said:

    Somewhere, Kate Forbes is laughing.

    Now that's a word cloud I'd like to see. Having 'good' and 'ok' so prominent for Yusaf (after useless) means it actually looks a bit better than I'd have expected.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,838
    From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:
  • From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:

    George Osborne CH.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,740
    geoffw said:

    "Useless" is an epithet we should use less

    Especially when talking about the DfE, because it just doesn't do justice to how awful they are.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,020
    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,128
    All these word clouds are very dispiriting derogatory and cynical. There seems very little positivity about our country any more, as demonstrated by these opinions of all our leaders.

    There used to be a time when we believed in the future, but those optimistic days are gone.
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860

    From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:

    No way Boris would write something anonymously.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,771
    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    "Useless" is an epithet we should use less

    Especially when talking about the DfE, because it just doesn't do justice to how awful they are.
    You're the only one talking about the DfE afaicmo

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,740
    geoffw said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    "Useless" is an epithet we should use less

    Especially when talking about the DfE, because it just doesn't do justice to how awful they are.
    You're the only one talking about the DfE afaicmo

    Check out @Malmesbury
  • Super sporting Saturday.

    England v. South Africa in the cricket world cup at 9.30am

    Merseyside derby at 12.30pm

    Chelsea v Arsenal at 5.30pm

    England v South Africa in the rugby world cup semi final at 8pm.

    F1 Sprint Race at 11pm.

    So that's 4 events I am heavily obsessed with and I might very grumpy if they all lose.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,128

    From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:

    Too well written for either of those.
  • From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:

    Gove?

    Just the right balance of civility, sympathy and rudeness.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,740
    Incidentally speaking of the DfE (sorry @geoffw ) they've screwed up again:

    https://www.tes.com/magazine/news/general/heads-deflated-after-dfe-funding-email-error

    What baffles me is how Susan Acland-Hood is still in post.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 49,128

    Super sporting Saturday.

    England v. South Africa in the cricket world cup at 9.30am

    Merseyside derby at 12.30pm

    Chelsea v Arsenal at 5.30pm

    England v South Africa in the rugby world cup semi final at 8pm.

    F1 Sprint Race at 11pm.

    So that's 4 events I am heavily obsessed with and I might very grumpy if they all lose.

    Wot no Strictly?

  • Foxy said:

    Super sporting Saturday.

    England v. South Africa in the cricket world cup at 9.30am

    Merseyside derby at 12.30pm

    Chelsea v Arsenal at 5.30pm

    England v South Africa in the rugby world cup semi final at 8pm.

    F1 Sprint Race at 11pm.

    So that's 4 events I am heavily obsessed with and I might very grumpy if they all lose.

    Wot no Strictly?

    I've kinda fallen out of love with Strictly, this year has a lot of z list people on it.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004

    Super sporting Saturday.

    England v. South Africa in the cricket world cup at 9.30am

    Merseyside derby at 12.30pm

    Chelsea v Arsenal at 5.30pm

    England v South Africa in the rugby world cup semi final at 8pm.

    F1 Sprint Race at 11pm.

    So that's 4 events I am heavily obsessed with and I might very grumpy if they all lose.

    I think I might be slightly tipsy by the time of the F1 Spint.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,059
    DavidL said:

    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.

    Agreed, but the SNP had a chance to change after Sturgeon’s resignation, and chose the continuity candidate. I wonder how many of the remaining members are staffers or HYUFD type party loyalists, who support whatever the leadership tell them to support?
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,639

    Foxy said:

    Super sporting Saturday.

    England v. South Africa in the cricket world cup at 9.30am

    Merseyside derby at 12.30pm

    Chelsea v Arsenal at 5.30pm

    England v South Africa in the rugby world cup semi final at 8pm.

    F1 Sprint Race at 11pm.

    So that's 4 events I am heavily obsessed with and I might very grumpy if they all lose.

    Wot no Strictly?

    I've kinda fallen out of love with Strictly, this year has a lot of z list people on it.
    I think Strictly reached its sell by date several years ago.

    Also is anyone watching the revived Big Brother. It was huge in 2004 when there was a 4 page BB supplement in the Sun every day. Even by 2010 though I think general interest had gone.

    The discontinuance of X Factor caused a lot of debate at the time but was clearly the right move.

    Some of these shows are allowed to persist for far too long.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,838

    From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:

    Gove?

    Just the right balance of civility, sympathy and rudeness.
    :lol:

    I don't think it's anyone in the Cabinet - if I had to pick one it sounds like it would be Kemi Badenoch.

    I'm still going with Frost I think, though if you read it in the style of Ann Widdecombe it also works.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,740

    From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:

    Gove?

    Just the right balance of civility, sympathy and rudeness.
    :lol:

    I don't think it's anyone in the Cabinet - if I had to pick one it sounds like it would be Kemi Badenoch.

    I'm still going with Frost I think, though if you read it in the style of Ann Widdecombe it also works.
    Aaaand we're back to Strictly.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,838

    From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:

    Gove?

    Just the right balance of civility, sympathy and rudeness.
    There's civility and sympathy?
  • Foxy said:

    Super sporting Saturday.

    England v. South Africa in the cricket world cup at 9.30am

    Merseyside derby at 12.30pm

    Chelsea v Arsenal at 5.30pm

    England v South Africa in the rugby world cup semi final at 8pm.

    F1 Sprint Race at 11pm.

    So that's 4 events I am heavily obsessed with and I might very grumpy if they all lose.

    Wot no Strictly?

    I've kinda fallen out of love with Strictly, this year has a lot of z list people on it.
    Nah, that is most unfair, one of the competitors learning to dance has been the lead dancer in several West End musicals from the age of 13 onwards......
  • FPT:

    Of course the 2 state solution is dead. There are not two states to do a deal. Israel has occupied and chopped up the West Bank - partly for justified security reasons, partly for religious nut job reasons. And Gaza is a terrorist enclave.

    Is not the simple truth that the 2 state solution was never on because the Muslim crazies cannot sanction the Jewish state, and the Jewish crazies are happy to replicate terror with terror of their own.

    The crank left repeat the end game: from the river to the sea. A one state solution- the creation for the first time of a Palestinian nation state where Israel now is. So park holier-than-thou we are the oppressed the Jew uniquely is Bad no that isn’t anti-Semitic cos the Jeremy wasn’t how dare you bullshit from the crank left. They don’t want 2 states, they want to remove Israel from existence.

    Worse for Israel, remove them from the map is the policy of Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Hamas, Hesbollah, Islamic Jihad etc etc etc. the idea that Israel is the aggressor doesn’t stand up to logic or sanity.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    A bit early to have de Kock out!
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Lol ultraedge shows a pattern consistent with the bat hitting the ground and decision given
  • eekeek Posts: 28,590

    Foxy said:

    Super sporting Saturday.

    England v. South Africa in the cricket world cup at 9.30am

    Merseyside derby at 12.30pm

    Chelsea v Arsenal at 5.30pm

    England v South Africa in the rugby world cup semi final at 8pm.

    F1 Sprint Race at 11pm.

    So that's 4 events I am heavily obsessed with and I might very grumpy if they all lose.

    Wot no Strictly?

    I've kinda fallen out of love with Strictly, this year has a lot of z list people on it.
    Nah, that is most unfair, one of the competitors learning to dance has been the lead dancer in several West End musicals from the age of 13 onwards......
    Yep he really, really, really shouldn't be in it and at best will end up being in last spot come the final. I suspect however he will be gone at the quarter to Semi-final stage.
  • DavidL said:

    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.

    The SNP government are decaying into the gag end of self-indulgent introspection as all decaying governments do. Despite that - and I know some of you don’t want to hear it - Scotland has been run better than the UK. It’s better living in Scotland than England. Better services, quicker access, giving a fuck.

    You might say “none of that is true” - but when you compare what we have here with what they have, it is true. It’s not good, but it’s not as bad as they get.
  • Wulfrun_PhilWulfrun_Phil Posts: 4,780
    Yousless.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,740



    FM Regan(lol) explaining why Alex Salmond was photographed entering the tradesman's entrance of Bute House on 14 occasions.

    Errrrr...is that a euphemism?
  • Pulpstar said:

    Lol ultraedge shows a pattern consistent with the bat hitting the ground and decision given

    But the pictures showed the bat wasn't near the ground when we got the spike.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    Sandpit said:

    A bit early to have de Kock out!

    I don't think he hit it tbh
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,989

    Super sporting Saturday.

    England v. South Africa in the cricket world cup at 9.30am

    Merseyside derby at 12.30pm

    Chelsea v Arsenal at 5.30pm

    England v South Africa in the rugby world cup semi final at 8pm.

    F1 Sprint Race at 11pm.

    So that's 4 events I am heavily obsessed with and I might very grumpy if they all lose.

    I'm sorry - what about Champions Day at Ascot? Far more important than any of the above.
  • ydoethur said:

    From the Huffington Post article - I wonder who this is having fun using Sunak as a chew toy:

    “Sunak inherited a toxic and fractured party in which he was not the first preference for the job. He spent a large amount of the last 12 months not saying much and then suddenly woke up before conference and decided to become presidential.

    “His conference speech was full of ‘I’ and ‘me’ not “‘we’ or ‘the party’. His wife did a First Lady impression by giving a speech and telling us how nice her hubby is. None of us particularly want nice, we would settle for competent -which he isn’t.”

    It says senior Tory, not MP. Wonder if it's Lord Frost. Or Boris. :lol:

    Gove?

    Just the right balance of civility, sympathy and rudeness.
    :lol:

    I don't think it's anyone in the Cabinet - if I had to pick one it sounds like it would be Kemi Badenoch.

    I'm still going with Frost I think, though if you read it in the style of Ann Widdecombe it also works.
    Aaaand we're back to Strictly.
    Thirteen years on and I still haven't recovered from Ann Widdecombe's Paso Doble.

    2 minutes in

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zk9iEEpLAvE
  • ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    I just told my wife that England got de Kock out in the first over, and she looked at me as if I’d told her that aliens had landed!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,740

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    Lost bet, she's had her chance and failed.
  • ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    I am doing a thread on that this weekend.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,126
    Extraordinary interview with Hamas. "Hamas does not kill civilians on purpose".


    Derek Thompson
    @DKThomp
    ·
    18h
    This is a really interesting and compelling interview, in that it treats Hamas seriously, as a legitimate political actor, one with agency and purposeful strategy, and asks the next question: What *was* the logical end goal of luridly killing so many Israeli civilians?

    https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/1715375403848843276
  • ENISA (the EU cybersecurity agency; the acronym is probably French or something) obviously reads the Knappers Gazette as it warns against AI-enabled interference in elections.
    https://www.enisa.europa.eu/news/eu-elections-at-risk-with-rise-of-ai-enabled-information-manipulation
  • ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    I am doing a thread on that this weekend.
    I’ve been saying January 2025 for ages. Yes it will look deeper. He is desperate. Major was desperate. He also went to the absolute legal limit. As Sunak will.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    Isn't a major problem for Yousaf that the SNP supporters never wanted Sturgeon to go in the first plac?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,866

    DavidL said:

    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.

    Agreed, but the SNP had a chance to change after Sturgeon’s resignation, and chose the continuity candidate. I wonder how many of the remaining members are staffers or HYUFD type party loyalists, who support whatever the leadership tell them to support?
    The membership is the membership, the angry old redfaces that left can hardly complain about how it votes.

    Altrernative history:

    FM Forbes gives 117th interview on how believing that gay marriage is a sin has no effect on her ability to govern, and that the SNP's dip in the polls is down to folk discriminating against her because of her religion.

    FM Regan(lol) explaining why Alex Salmond was photographed entering the tradesman's entrance of Bute House on 14 occasions.
    Just wondering how it is that the sport of badger baiting evangelicals about their beliefs is so prevalent that it affects careers of generally decent people (eg Farron, Forbes, Lisa Cameron) and makes them wonder of they can be in politics at all, while Roman Catholics who hold many more unfashionable beliefs, many of whom are very prominent in politics don't get the same treatment.

    (I am neither of the above and usually disagree with them, though not always).
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,908
    Morning all.

    I had to ask Alexa what the date was, when I saw the word cloud. :smile:
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704
    To some extent, he's unlucky: his surname just makes the morphology just far too easy.

    But, worse, he actually is Useless. So it sticks.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004

    Extraordinary interview with Hamas. "Hamas does not kill civilians on purpose".


    Derek Thompson
    @DKThomp
    ·
    18h
    This is a really interesting and compelling interview, in that it treats Hamas seriously, as a legitimate political actor, one with agency and purposeful strategy, and asks the next question: What *was* the logical end goal of luridly killing so many Israeli civilians?

    https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/1715375403848843276

    They’re not killing civilians, just Jews.
  • Sandpit said:

    I just told my wife that England got de Kock out in the first over, and she looked at me as if I’d told her that aliens had landed!

    Wasn't there a match where Wood was caught De Kock bowled Philander?

    We could have had today

    De Kock c Wood b Willey
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    I am doing a thread on that this weekend.
    I’ve been saying January 2025 for ages. Yes it will look deeper. He is desperate. Major was desperate. He also went to the absolute legal limit. As Sunak will.
    That would be very desperate indeed.

    On the other hand, if they are set for a hammering anyway, which they appear to be, would January 2025 really be that much worse than October 2024 in terms of outcome?

    If people have made up their minds about the government needing to be changed, it's probably only the difference of a handful of seats.

    Oh well, 14 years 7 months is a good run by any measure.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,475

    FPT:

    Of course the 2 state solution is dead. There are not two states to do a deal. Israel has occupied and chopped up the West Bank - partly for justified security reasons, partly for religious nut job reasons. And Gaza is a terrorist enclave.

    Is not the simple truth that the 2 state solution was never on because the Muslim crazies cannot sanction the Jewish state, and the Jewish crazies are happy to replicate terror with terror of their own.

    The crank left repeat the end game: from the river to the sea. A one state solution- the creation for the first time of a Palestinian nation state where Israel now is. So park holier-than-thou we are the oppressed the Jew uniquely is Bad no that isn’t anti-Semitic cos the Jeremy wasn’t how dare you bullshit from the crank left. They don’t want 2 states, they want to remove Israel from existence.

    Worse for Israel, remove them from the map is the policy of Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Hamas, Hesbollah, Islamic Jihad etc etc etc. the idea that Israel is the aggressor doesn’t stand up to logic or sanity.

    No, and I don’t think this sort of dismissive simplification helps.

    We have been much closer to a working 2-state solution in the past. I don’t see the evidence that is was “never on”. Whether it is feasible now after years of continued Israeli settlements in the West Bank is a harder question.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,125
    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    ydoethur said:

    geoffw said:

    "Useless" is an epithet we should use less

    Especially when talking about the DfE, because it just doesn't do justice to how awful they are.
    You're the only one talking about the DfE afaicmo

    Check out @Malmesbury
    I think we should send the DfE in as peacekeepers into Gaza.

    Armed with blunt kiwi fruit.

    This will -

    1) probably reduce deaths among valuable humans
    2) improve U.K. education

    What’s not to like?
  • TresTres Posts: 2,724
    algarkirk said:

    DavidL said:

    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.

    Agreed, but the SNP had a chance to change after Sturgeon’s resignation, and chose the continuity candidate. I wonder how many of the remaining members are staffers or HYUFD type party loyalists, who support whatever the leadership tell them to support?
    The membership is the membership, the angry old redfaces that left can hardly complain about how it votes.

    Altrernative history:

    FM Forbes gives 117th interview on how believing that gay marriage is a sin has no effect on her ability to govern, and that the SNP's dip in the polls is down to folk discriminating against her because of her religion.

    FM Regan(lol) explaining why Alex Salmond was photographed entering the tradesman's entrance of Bute House on 14 occasions.
    Just wondering how it is that the sport of badger baiting evangelicals about their beliefs is so prevalent that it affects careers of generally decent people (eg Farron, Forbes, Lisa Cameron) and makes them wonder of they can be in politics at all, while Roman Catholics who hold many more unfashionable beliefs, many of whom are very prominent in politics don't get the same treatment.

    (I am neither of the above and usually disagree with them, though not always).
    Catholics are better liars.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    Sandpit said:

    I just told my wife that England got de Kock out in the first over, and she looked at me as if I’d told her that aliens had landed!

    Bit of a flop of a comment I suppose.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,347
    algarkirk said:

    DavidL said:

    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.

    Agreed, but the SNP had a chance to change after Sturgeon’s resignation, and chose the continuity candidate. I wonder how many of the remaining members are staffers or HYUFD type party loyalists, who support whatever the leadership tell them to support?
    The membership is the membership, the angry old redfaces that left can hardly complain about how it votes.

    Altrernative history:

    FM Forbes gives 117th interview on how believing that gay marriage is a sin has no effect on her ability to govern, and that the SNP's dip in the polls is down to folk discriminating against her because of her religion.

    FM Regan(lol) explaining why Alex Salmond was photographed entering the tradesman's entrance of Bute House on 14 occasions.
    Just wondering how it is that the sport of badger baiting evangelicals about their beliefs is so prevalent that it affects careers of generally decent people (eg Farron, Forbes, Lisa Cameron) and makes them wonder of they can be in politics at all, while Roman Catholics who hold many more unfashionable beliefs, many of whom are very prominent in politics don't get the same treatment.

    (I am neither of the above and usually disagree with them, though not always).
    I suspect it might well be because evangelicals have historically been middle class. As well as inclined to rock the boat (slavery, corn laws, land ownership in Scotland, control of the Kirk in ditto). Whereas in the English elite and aristocracy, RCs have always had a presence, also in Oxford University - Tractarians and High Anglicans merging into RCs. If one is a social climber like Evelyn Waugh, signing up with the Quakers or the Free Kirk or even the Methodists doesn't help.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,894
    After 16 years of the SNP in power at Holyrood and with Yousaf much less popular with Scots than Salmond and Sturgeon were, there is a real chance for Sarwar to become FM next time
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,972
    Foxy said:

    All these word clouds are very dispiriting derogatory and cynical. There seems very little positivity about our country any more, as demonstrated by these opinions of all our leaders.

    There used to be a time when we believed in the future, but those optimistic days are gone.

    Brexit fractured the country and there's no way of unfracturing it. There is no commonality of purpose anymore. The country is even more split than it was in 2016. I notice that even support for Israel or Palestine divided most clearly down Leavers and Remainers.
  • MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,866

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    Two considerations: Legacy. On 25th October 2024 Rishi will complete 2 years as PM, which sounds a lot grander than 1 year and some in the history books. he will want this milestone.

    USA. A January 2025 election would have two features; it runs alongside the 20 January inauguration of the next POTUS. And there is about a 40% chance that this will be Trump. What the effects of this will be are known unknowns.

    There are no good times for Rishi which get him to 2 years as PM.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,201

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    I am doing a thread on that this weekend.
    I’ve been saying January 2025 for ages. Yes it will look deeper. He is desperate. Major was desperate. He also went to the absolute legal limit. As Sunak will.
    Note Sunak referred to this week's by-elections as 'midterm'.
    Which they are not, unless he was referring to his term as PM.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    algarkirk said:

    DavidL said:

    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.

    Agreed, but the SNP had a chance to change after Sturgeon’s resignation, and chose the continuity candidate. I wonder how many of the remaining members are staffers or HYUFD type party loyalists, who support whatever the leadership tell them to support?
    The membership is the membership, the angry old redfaces that left can hardly complain about how it votes.

    Altrernative history:

    FM Forbes gives 117th interview on how believing that gay marriage is a sin has no effect on her ability to govern, and that the SNP's dip in the polls is down to folk discriminating against her because of her religion.

    FM Regan(lol) explaining why Alex Salmond was photographed entering the tradesman's entrance of Bute House on 14 occasions.
    Just wondering how it is that the sport of badger baiting evangelicals about their beliefs is so prevalent that it affects careers of generally decent people (eg Farron, Forbes, Lisa Cameron) and makes them wonder of they can be in politics at all, while Roman Catholics who hold many more unfashionable beliefs, many of whom are very prominent in politics don't get the same treatment.

    (I am neither of the above and usually disagree with them, though not always).
    Interesting question. The Farrons of the world don't help themselves by offering equivocations and then, as later admitted, lies about their beliefs, but if the subject had never come up there'd be no issue, since people will believe all manner of things without us knowing. Did Andrew Bridgen's constituents all know he was a certifiable conspiracist lunatic for example?

    I cannot really recall how either the Farron or Forbes examples came up in the first place, but it seems unlikely to have been by their choice given the storm they will have known it would cause, so your question is fair re those with other beliefs (I think there was some attempt to try it on with Yousaf as well, but IIRC it went nowhere).
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,347
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk

    'The National Infrastructure Commission advised this week, after an exhaustive investigation of the technology, that hydrogen was not suitable for heating homes. The report was unambiguous: “The Commission’s analysis demonstrates that there is no public policy case for hydrogen to be used to heat individual buildings. It should be ruled out as an option to enable an exclusive focus on switching to electrified heat.”

    However, the government indicated to the Guardian that it would continue to push hydrogen for home heating, and the body that represents most of the heating industry also vowed to continue to pursue it.'

    Given how long it took us to find a reliable worker to mend a persistent gas leak in our house discovered after we bought it, no thanks, no hydrogen for me!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,894

    DavidL said:

    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.

    Agreed, but the SNP had a chance to change after Sturgeon’s resignation, and chose the continuity candidate. I wonder how many of the remaining members are staffers or HYUFD type party loyalists, who support whatever the leadership tell them to support?
    The membership is the membership, the angry old redfaces that left can hardly complain about how it votes.

    Altrernative history:

    FM Forbes gives 117th interview on how believing that gay marriage is a sin has no effect on her ability to govern, and that the SNP's dip in the polls is down to folk discriminating against her because of her religion.

    FM Regan(lol) explaining why Alex Salmond was photographed entering the tradesman's entrance of Bute House on 14 occasions.
    As Tim Farron and Ann Widdecombe found too like Forbes having traditional evangelical or Roman Catholic views on homosexual marriage and abortion is probably a bar to leadership of a mainstream political party in the UK now.

    Same would be true for a more strict Muslim than Yousaf is I expect
  • TresTres Posts: 2,724
    kle4 said:

    algarkirk said:

    DavidL said:

    So what percentage of the panel had to choose the word "useless" to make it that dominant? Must have been a fair few.

    Since it is now on topic I will repeat the link to Wings over Scotland and his brilliant montage to the lyrics "nothing ever happens, nothing happens at all" https://wingsoverscotland.com/now-the-traffic-lights-change/

    This is not in fairness Hamza's fault, it is what he inherited from Sturgeon, but he is bearing the cost of those years and years of delusion.

    Agreed, but the SNP had a chance to change after Sturgeon’s resignation, and chose the continuity candidate. I wonder how many of the remaining members are staffers or HYUFD type party loyalists, who support whatever the leadership tell them to support?
    The membership is the membership, the angry old redfaces that left can hardly complain about how it votes.

    Altrernative history:

    FM Forbes gives 117th interview on how believing that gay marriage is a sin has no effect on her ability to govern, and that the SNP's dip in the polls is down to folk discriminating against her because of her religion.

    FM Regan(lol) explaining why Alex Salmond was photographed entering the tradesman's entrance of Bute House on 14 occasions.
    Just wondering how it is that the sport of badger baiting evangelicals about their beliefs is so prevalent that it affects careers of generally decent people (eg Farron, Forbes, Lisa Cameron) and makes them wonder of they can be in politics at all, while Roman Catholics who hold many more unfashionable beliefs, many of whom are very prominent in politics don't get the same treatment.

    (I am neither of the above and usually disagree with them, though not always).
    Interesting question. The Farrons of the world don't help themselves by offering equivocations and then, as later admitted, lies about their beliefs, but if the subject had never come up there'd be no issue, since people will believe all manner of things without us knowing. Did Andrew Bridgen's constituents all know he was a certifiable conspiracist lunatic for example?

    I cannot really recall how either the Farron or Forbes examples came up in the first place, but it seems unlikely to have been by their choice given the storm they will have known it would cause, so your question is fair re those with other beliefs (I think there was some attempt to try it on with Yousaf as well, but IIRC it went nowhere).
    By leading or hoping to lead a party in favour of gay marriage, whilst being disparaging of gay sex.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,704
    Sandpit said:

    I just told my wife that England got de Kock out in the first over, and she looked at me as if I’d told her that aliens had landed!

    I'll only be worried if you post the same comment in the first half of the rugby, tonight.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,347

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,277
    Western governments seem very quiet on the spiraling violence in the West Bank .

    Palestinians have been killed and forced from their homes by Israeli settlers often using arms provided by the government, many villages have been emptied as Palestinians flee .

    Even worse Israeli military often just look on and fail to intervene .

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578

    ...

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    I don't think there's any point in wasting political capital on most of these. You can ease the pressure on public sector pensions by getting rid of a lot of civil servants. You can offer incentives to use private healthcare to ease the burden on the NHS. You can reduce National Insurance progressively whilst maintaining or increasing Income Tax, more fairly distributing the burden of taxation and increasing tax take. Raising the pension age I agree with.
    I think getting rid of a lot of civil servants saves very little in the grand scheme of things. Even if you halved numbers from c.500k to c.250k you'd only save about £5bn per annum and it'd grind many departments and services to a halt. Done properly you could maybe shave £1-2bn off and a decent headcount number, but I'm looking at savings of £50-100bn+ per annum.

    You don't get those with the low-hanging fruit.
    Quite - it sounds like a quick fix, but it really doesn't achieve as much as people think it will, even if it came without at least short term immediate effects.

    It's related to what I've seen referred to as the 'reform fairy' as a counterpart to the magic money tree of solutions - the idea vague, unspecified, or limited 'reform' will magically resolve some pretty massive issues.

    Smaller, simple reforms can achieve a lot and can be done. But like with cutting spending it doesn't matter all that much if you cut 50% of the Justice budget if you are not touching Health and Welfare at all. If you want to make big savings, the target must be big.
  • FPT:

    Of course the 2 state solution is dead. There are not two states to do a deal. Israel has occupied and chopped up the West Bank - partly for justified security reasons, partly for religious nut job reasons. And Gaza is a terrorist enclave.

    Is not the simple truth that the 2 state solution was never on because the Muslim crazies cannot sanction the Jewish state, and the Jewish crazies are happy to replicate terror with terror of their own.

    The crank left repeat the end game: from the river to the sea. A one state solution- the creation for the first time of a Palestinian nation state where Israel now is. So park holier-than-thou we are the oppressed the Jew uniquely is Bad no that isn’t anti-Semitic cos the Jeremy wasn’t how dare you bullshit from the crank left. They don’t want 2 states, they want to remove Israel from existence.

    Worse for Israel, remove them from the map is the policy of Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Hamas, Hesbollah, Islamic Jihad etc etc etc. the idea that Israel is the aggressor doesn’t stand up to logic or sanity.

    No, and I don’t think this sort of dismissive simplification helps.

    We have been much closer to a working 2-state solution in the past. I don’t see the evidence that is was “never on”. Whether it is feasible now after years of continued Israeli settlements in the West Bank is a harder question.
    Happy to debate it! My “never on” point was that even back in 2000, the proposed Palestinian state wasn’t acceptable to the Palestinians who preferred war to compromise. The risk to Israel from the Palestinians was the driver of the Israeli demands for compromise, as then demonstrated by the Palestinian switch from peace negotiations to war.

    If a viable state couldn’t be founded then, I can’t see how it would be founded now. And again, it is difficult to do so when the elected government is pledged to the destruction of the other state, a position shared by surrounding countries like Iran.

    We can’t just give the Israeli governments permission do what they like - some of their acts have been wilfully criminal. But I can understand their position better when most of their neighbours and the counterparty in a 2 state negotiation are pledged to their destruction
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,944

    Sandpit said:

    I just told my wife that England got de Kock out in the first over, and she looked at me as if I’d told her that aliens had landed!

    Wasn't there a match where Wood was caught De Kock bowled Philander?

    We could have had today

    De Kock c Wood b Willey
    would this be in the morning?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538
    Foxy said:

    All these word clouds are very dispiriting derogatory and cynical. There seems very little positivity about our country any more, as demonstrated by these opinions of all our leaders.

    There used to be a time when we believed in the future, but those optimistic days are gone.

    If there was ever such a time, it’s before I was born.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,201
    France ramps up production of howitzers used by the Ukrainian army

    Along with a tripling of the production capacity of Caesar self-propelled howitzers, the delivery time was reduced from 30 to 15 months.

    https://twitter.com/EuromaidanPress/status/1715571609988440442
  • algarkirk said:

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    Two considerations: Legacy. On 25th October 2024 Rishi will complete 2 years as PM, which sounds a lot grander than 1 year and some in the history books. he will want this milestone.

    USA. A January 2025 election would have two features; it runs alongside the 20 January inauguration of the next POTUS. And there is about a 40% chance that this will be Trump. What the effects of this will be are known unknowns.

    There are no good times for Rishi which get him to 2 years as PM.
    1. He wants his 2 years as you say
    2. Legally there is no reason to call an early election which you’re going to lose badly
    3. The US election and civil war offer exactly the kind of black swan Hail Mary event they need to avoid demolition

    Think about it. Monday 22nd January. PM appears in Downing Street. Crest on the lectern. Announcing that due to the terrible events in the US over the weekend and the massive cyber attacks on the US, UK and others, he has been advised by the security services that Thursdays General Election is not safe to be held. Campaigning will be suspended and parliament recalled. It is not possible to name a new date. An order in council will be passed to extend the life of the current parliament.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538
    Cyclefree said:

    57 years ago today the collapse of tip no 7 at Aberfan happened.

    If only we'd learnt the lessons.....

    But no.

    We continue to put the interests of institutions above those they are meant to serve and treat the victims with callousness and indifference. See the Post Office, Grenfell, blood contamination, Hillsborough etc.,

    I wrote about it here - https://www.cyclefree.co.uk/the-price-of-indifference/. It is what I am proudest of writing. It personal because that lack of human empathy and indifference is what so often goes wrong - not just in the events leading up to the tragedy - but in the investigations afterwards and in how we treat those affected. Empathy and emotional intelligence are key to any good investigation and to trying to ensure that we try to avoid the same problems recurring. They are so often lacking, indeed regarded as inessential. And it is why the same problems happen over and over and over again.

    Aberfan and its aftermath taught us that.

    If you have time please read.

    As I’ve said before, the same old scandals coming up again and again, refute the idea that we’ve become kinder.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,866
    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    There is nothing new about any of this. Fiscal drag + wealthier pensioners mean more have to deal with it. (Lots of interest payments on deposits are also paid gross). All state pensioners know that the state pension is paid gross but is taxable. It makes life a bit simpler for a few million poorer pensioners who don't have to interact with HMRC to get back tax they should not have paid in the first place.

    On fiscal drag, BTW, this means that millions of FT workers only on minimum wage are paying thousands in IT/NI, which is nuts.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538
    Although I think Mr. Yousaf’s political record is a poor one, I have immense sympathy for the awful predicament he is in, right now. A real black swan event.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    Another good reason to significantly raise the basic personal allowance to the equivalent of working full time at minimum wage.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,201
    A reminder that the past wasn't that great.
    The “Tariff for Torture” issued by the Archbishopric of Cologne in 1757 setting out levels of remuneration for various methods of torture and execution.
    And combinations thereof.

    https://twitter.com/curiouswavefn/status/1715531816223002653
  • Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    Why is it unexpected? The rules are pretty clear.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,133
    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    Another good reason to significantly raise the basic personal allowance to the equivalent of working full time at minimum wage.
    I usualy agree with you, but don't this time. We should be cutting rates, not raising thresholds, especially not the lowest income tax one. The last thing this country needs is yet more freeloaders with no incentive to reduce tax, but a big incentive to demand more spending.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,201
    edited October 2023
    Carnyx said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/oct/21/hydrogen-boiler-home-heating-uk

    'The National Infrastructure Commission advised this week, after an exhaustive investigation of the technology, that hydrogen was not suitable for heating homes. The report was unambiguous: “The Commission’s analysis demonstrates that there is no public policy case for hydrogen to be used to heat individual buildings. It should be ruled out as an option to enable an exclusive focus on switching to electrified heat.”

    However, the government indicated to the Guardian that it would continue to push hydrogen for home heating, and the body that represents most of the heating industry also vowed to continue to pursue it.'

    Given how long it took us to find a reliable worker to mend a persistent gas leak in our house discovered after we bought it, no thanks, no hydrogen for me!

    Like the stupid carbon capture scheme we're spending £20bn plus on, a complete waste of money.

    At least HS2 had an economic value, misconceived whether it was or not.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,020
    Sandpit said:

    England win the toss and will field first.

    Looking for revenge for the rugby?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,661
    Foxy said:

    All these word clouds are very dispiriting derogatory and cynical. There seems very little positivity about our country any more, as demonstrated by these opinions of all our leaders.

    There used to be a time when we believed in the future, but those optimistic days are gone.

    Slagging off of non tory politicians is overdone imo. Most are ok to good. And with this one isn't he 'useless' mainly because it sounds like Yousaf? - although it doesn't really, you have to totally change the 2nd syllable and there are only 2 syllables.

    My point is it's more a nickname (like he'd maybe have got at school, kids being what they are) than a qualitative assessment of the man himself. Nicknames can stick. Mine was Chimp. Originally due to prowess at climbing things but after a while most of the people calling me it didn't know that. Same going on here (to some extent) with the Scottish First Minister. Lots of the people calling him useless actually probably like him or don't have an opinion either way.

    A thought experiment to prove my point: Imagine his name was Humza Robinson. One can't say what word would dominate his word cloud then but no way would it be 'useless'. QED.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,866
    edited October 2023

    algarkirk said:

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    Two considerations: Legacy. On 25th October 2024 Rishi will complete 2 years as PM, which sounds a lot grander than 1 year and some in the history books. he will want this milestone.

    USA. A January 2025 election would have two features; it runs alongside the 20 January inauguration of the next POTUS. And there is about a 40% chance that this will be Trump. What the effects of this will be are known unknowns.

    There are no good times for Rishi which get him to 2 years as PM.
    1. He wants his 2 years as you say
    2. Legally there is no reason to call an early election which you’re going to lose badly
    3. The US election and civil war offer exactly the kind of black swan Hail Mary event they need to avoid demolition

    Think about it. Monday 22nd January. PM appears in Downing Street. Crest on the lectern. Announcing that due to the terrible events in the US over the weekend and the massive cyber attacks on the US, UK and others, he has been advised by the security services that Thursdays General Election is not safe to be held. Campaigning will be suspended and parliament recalled. It is not possible to name a new date. An order in council will be passed to extend the life of the current parliament.
    What a jolly scenario. In this particular counterfactual the great UK public, the courts (remember Lady Hale) and, more to the point HM King Charles and his loyal armed forces, would only accept such a situation on the basis of a government of national unity. Your particular example is, I hope, fanciful but the general possibility feels more real all the time.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,347

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    Why is it unexpected? The rules are pretty clear.
    Lots of people not clued up. The problem is that HMRC is not warning them *now*, as the piece explains.
  • kinabalu said:

    Foxy said:

    All these word clouds are very dispiriting derogatory and cynical. There seems very little positivity about our country any more, as demonstrated by these opinions of all our leaders.

    There used to be a time when we believed in the future, but those optimistic days are gone.

    Slagging off of non tory politicians is overdone imo. Most are ok to good. And with this one isn't he 'useless' mainly because it sounds like Yousaf? - although it doesn't really, you have to totally change the 2nd syllable and there are only 2 syllables.

    My point is it's more a nickname (like he'd maybe have got at school, kids being what they are) than a qualitative assessment of the man himself. Nicknames can stick. Mine was Chimp. Originally due to prowess at climbing things but after a while most of the people calling me it didn't know that. Same going on here (to some extent) with the Scottish First Minister. Lots of the people calling him useless actually probably like him or don't have an opinion either way.

    A thought experiment to prove my point: Imagine his name was Humza Robinson. One can't say what word would dominate his word cloud then but no way would it be 'useless'. QED.
    Crusoe? Squash? Jackie?
  • Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    All these word clouds are very dispiriting derogatory and cynical. There seems very little positivity about our country any more, as demonstrated by these opinions of all our leaders.

    There used to be a time when we believed in the future, but those optimistic days are gone.

    If there was ever such a time, it’s before I was born.
    The mid to late 90s were pretty optimistic with the 'end of history' and the promising IT developments.

    Bill Clinton seems to have had the optimum governing period and Tony Blair the optimum time to become PM.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,347
    algarkirk said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    There is nothing new about any of this. Fiscal drag + wealthier pensioners mean more have to deal with it. (Lots of interest payments on deposits are also paid gross). All state pensioners know that the state pension is paid gross but is taxable. It makes life a bit simpler for a few million poorer pensioners who don't have to interact with HMRC to get back tax they should not have paid in the first place.

    On fiscal drag, BTW, this means that millions of FT workers only on minimum wage are paying thousands in IT/NI, which is nuts.
    Sure but lots of people don't know that. That's part of the problem.

    On the minimum wage: quite so.
  • Fishing said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    Another good reason to significantly raise the basic personal allowance to the equivalent of working full time at minimum wage.
    I usualy agree with you, but don't this time. We should be cutting rates, not raising thresholds, especially not the lowest income tax one. The last thing this country needs is yet more freeloaders with no incentive to reduce tax, but a big incentive to demand more spending.
    Its NI which should be cut not income tax.
  • ICYMI (and too lazy to plough through the last 400 posts on yesterday's megathread) because there are betting implications:-

    Don’t call a UK general election in November 2024: Rishi Sunak told to avoid poll clash with US
    ...
    The insider said: “There are huge security and market implications if two Five Eyes countries are holding elections at once. It could potentially open up two countries to cyberwarfare and electoral manipulation from hostile states and if a security threat were to arise during a campaign it would leave western countries exposed.”

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/url-uk-general-election-us-presidential-security-risks-2024-7q8zstbth

    Although if you read the whole thing, they also seem to be warning against a January election so it is probably just spin from someone who has bet on May, as the Labour Party is said to have done.

    I am doing a thread on that this weekend.
    I’ve been saying January 2025 for ages. Yes it will look deeper. He is desperate. Major was desperate. He also went to the absolute legal limit. As Sunak will.
    Sunak referred to the by-election losses this week as "mid term" - maybe he plans to break the 5-year limit?
    A Trump victory in November 2024 might cause enough chaos to give him an excuse.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,963
    edited October 2023
    Sean_F said:

    FPT:

    Of course the 2 state solution is dead. There are not two states to do a deal. Israel has occupied and chopped up the West Bank - partly for justified security reasons, partly for religious nut job reasons. And Gaza is a terrorist enclave.

    Is not the simple truth that the 2 state solution was never on because the Muslim crazies cannot sanction the Jewish state, and the Jewish crazies are happy to replicate terror with terror of their own.

    The crank left repeat the end game: from the river to the sea. A one state solution- the creation for the first time of a Palestinian nation state where Israel now is. So park holier-than-thou we are the oppressed the Jew uniquely is Bad no that isn’t anti-Semitic cos the Jeremy wasn’t how dare you bullshit from the crank left. They don’t want 2 states, they want to remove Israel from existence.

    Worse for Israel, remove them from the map is the policy of Iran, Lebanon, Syria, Hamas, Hesbollah, Islamic Jihad etc etc etc. the idea that Israel is the aggressor doesn’t stand up to logic or sanity.

    No, and I don’t think this sort of dismissive simplification helps.

    We have been much closer to a working 2-state solution in the past. I don’t see the evidence that is was “never on”. Whether it is feasible now after years of continued Israeli settlements in the West Bank is a harder question.
    Happy to debate it! My “never on” point was that even back in 2000, the proposed Palestinian state wasn’t acceptable to the Palestinians who preferred war to compromise. The risk to Israel from the Palestinians was the driver of the Israeli demands for compromise, as then demonstrated by the Palestinian switch from peace negotiations to war.

    If a viable state couldn’t be founded then, I can’t see how it would be founded now. And again, it is difficult to do so when the elected government is pledged to the destruction of the other state, a position shared by surrounding countries like Iran.

    We can’t just give the Israeli governments permission do what they like - some of their acts have been wilfully criminal. But I can understand their position better when most of their neighbours and the counterparty in a 2 state negotiation are pledged to their destruction
    What’s telling is that within hours of news of the attacks by Hamas, well before any Israeli retaliation, large numbers of people were out demonstrating - against Israel.

    That can only be explained by deep-rooted anti-semitism among those protestors.
    "From the River to the Sea". The crank left blame the Jews for violence against Jews. Every pogrom in history is the fault of the victims, the jews bring it on themselves.

    Look at the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign statement when Hamas brought medieval slaughter into Israle. No condemnation of beheading babies, no no, its the Jew's fault, and that the just thing to do is to stand in solidarity with the Hamas beheaders. https://palestinecampaign.org/psc-statement-on-escalation-of-violence/

    If that isn't anti-semitism, what is?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,004
    edited October 2023
    Fishing said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    Another good reason to significantly raise the basic personal allowance to the equivalent of working full time at minimum wage.
    I usualy agree with you, but don't this time. We should be cutting rates, not raising thresholds, especially not the lowest income tax one. The last thing this country needs is yet more freeloaders with no incentive to reduce tax, but a big incentive to demand more spending.
    I think it’s fair that you’re not paying tax if you’re on minimum wage or drawing a state pension. Many of these people will also be on tax credits so are net recipients anyway, and raising PA will take more people out of that regime at the other end, and the 65% marginal tax rates that go along with it.

    The whole tax credits regime, is of course a very expensive mess that subsidizes poorly-paying employers. It’s the sort fo scheme that needs to be very carefully looked at in the context of government saving the serious money that’s required.
  • Fishing said:

    Sandpit said:

    Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    Another good reason to significantly raise the basic personal allowance to the equivalent of working full time at minimum wage.
    I usualy agree with you, but don't this time. We should be cutting rates, not raising thresholds, especially not the lowest income tax one. The last thing this country needs is yet more freeloaders with no incentive to reduce tax, but a big incentive to demand more spending.
    Its NI which should be cut not income tax.
    Merge them.
  • Carnyx said:

    MattW said:

    FPT:

    What should happen is the triple lock should end, the pension age be raised, public sector final salary pensions reformed, and co-funding should be introduced into healthcare, the same way it has now with private pensions.

    Big savings in spending offered by all of those but would require immensely strong political leadership.

    Public sector final salary pensions were reformed in 2015. I can assure you mine was. It is now both heavily contributory and accrues on the basis of earnings.

    But admitting that takes away one of your standard straw men.
    I think all three of Casino's point's are moot, and perhaps verging on the fantastical. Maybe a suitable agenda for around 1994; this is now 2023 :smile: .

    1 - As you say, Public Sector pensions have been heavily reformed. I have a family member working for the health regulators, who has been continually in a cleft stick between a Health Service pension scheme, and a Civil Servant pension scheme because UKHSA is not quite proper Health Service to some - the employer wants the staff on the cheapest one they can of course.

    2 - The UK has been adjusting it's pension age since John Major's time (Pensions Act 1995), and we are now towards the higher end in Europe with a further rise from 66 to 67 in 2026-2028. Plus we have one of the stronger demographic profiles in Western Europe.

    3 - The Triple Lock has added at most a small amount - when I calculated it I made it 5-6% a year over inflationary increases since 2010 or whenever it was. The inchoate political fury this generates is bizarre, as is the weight put on it.

    There may be other appropriate reforms; they are not these imo.

    I'd say that adjustments need to be on the revenue side more than the cost side - perhaps 80:20 or higher. We have have nearly 15 years of salami-slicing, and it is time to reverse ferret - which is why I hope Mr Starmer has some significant rebalancing proposals.
    On 2, stagger the pension age (25% at one age, 50% a couple of years later and so on) to reflect the way people actually retire at quite different ages and also often move through part time in between.

    On 3, if its so bizarre and minimal, supporters of the triple lock will be quite happy to give up such a trivial benefit to do their bit.
    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/oct/21/uk-pensions-warning-dont-get-caught-by-an-out-of-the-blue-tax-bill

    This is interesting re unexpected tax on state pensions, which don't have PAYE deducted because HMG is so useless. And for the sneakily worded denial by HMG. The problem is, as the article makes clear, that a lot of state pensions are above the basic flat rate pension on account of SERPS etc.
    Why is it unexpected? The rules are pretty clear.
    It is unexpected because most people have never had to worry about paying income tax. PAYE magically took care of it.
This discussion has been closed.