Some of us did say quite consistently that Sunak was a dud, and strongly advised the wibbly wibbly Tory MPs who are now losing their jobs to ditch him whilst they could.
He's doing better than Liz would'a done.
Your girl was that bad.
Thanks for that parallel universe prediction Mystic Meg. I think we can file that thought in the same bin with Sunak's political credibility, when even wet-as-an-otter's-pocket Matthew Parris is calling for him to go.
I invented that phrase. “Wet as an otter’s pocket”. True story - I invented it writing for a lad mag I’m about 2000
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 10m Tory HQ desperately shovelling out the entire manifesto tonight to try and move the agenda on from D-Day is a further example of the chaos inside the campaign.
Yet no proposed IHT cut, despite Reform now raising the IHT threshold to £2 million?
A Stamp Duty cut for a few first time buyers isn't going to make any significant difference to Tory voteshare.
If that is all Sunak and Hunt have bring back Theresa May I say, at least she managed to write a manifesto that got the Tories over 40% and over 300 seats not heading for near wipeout!
There are a lot of people who are also Tory voters, me for example (ok I can’t vote) who have issues about inheritance tax being cut.
A lot of Tory voters, or target voters, have worked their bollocks off but also mixed with people who haven’t, their friends and associates have pocketed money without any effort. They see very very stupid friends walking out with millions without any skills or brains and there is a British, and Danish, thing where people aren’t happy with people flashing it without earning it.
I have many friends who’ve inherited serious millions, some have worked hard to prove themselves worthy, some have been determined to use the money as a platform to outperform, some have used the money to do good, some are lazy fuckers who have no clue - and every time the ones who are the latter are the ones who treat waiters terribly, are entitled, have no direction or fear of what comes next.
There has to be an inheritance tax so nobody can just not contribute. Some wise soul said, I want to leave them enough to do something but not enough to do nothing.
A lot of people don’t understand that without a successful society arounfpd them, a stable society, their properties would be worthless, their shares worthless etc.
It’s not money the inheritors strived for and it was on the back of millions of people who struggled but accepted an unequal society. There needs to be a balance otherwise the ones who have nothing stop tolerating the others.
I am not saying there should be not inheritance tax at all, though 55% say it should be abolished completely but certainly the threshold should be raised to £2million+ in my view so only the very richest pay that.
65% of voters and 77% of Tory voters back raising the threshold above £325k
A rate of 20 or 25% with a lower exempt amount would quite possibly bring in more than IHT currently does.
At £2m or so they're already evading or avoiding IHT so HYUFD's suggestion is about as useful as a chocolate welding torch.
Property tends to be the big crunch for going over thresholds and people get attached to family homes. So I tend to think that there should be a relatively high rate, low threshold but with a carve out for one property. Provided you live in it for five years. Sell it within that time and the taxman comes knocking.
No good; that merely pampers Tory voters in the Home Counties as opposed to Labour voters in Sedgefield and drives up the hotspot around London*. I'm coming round to the idea of abolishing IHT and imposing CGT on all inheritances - everyone has an allowance, and so on.
*Which is why HYUFD loves it, not entirely irrationally for him.
Abolish Inheritance Tax altogether and simply tax all inheritances as income.
Anyone working for a living shouldn't be taxed at a higher rate than someone inheriting one.
They aren't, the IHT rate of 40% over £325k inherited is the same as the higher rate of income tax and higher than the basic rate of income tax.
Only the additional rate of tax for those earning over £125k (ie effectively the top 1% of earners) is above that at 45%
I don't think you understand this very well.
If you inherit £30k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £30k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £100k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £100k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £325k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £325k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £1mn, what tax do you pay? If you earn £1mn, what tax do you pay?
Working for your income shouldn't be taxed more than getting your income through other means, yet we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k.
We need to tax income less, and unearned incomes more.
No we don't as if you earn £32k you pay the basic rate of income tax of 20% whereas if you inherit £325k+ you pay 40% on that (unless you benefit from the Osborne exemption as your inheritance was from your parents who were married and their family home was less than £1 million)
0/10 completely wrong.
If you earn £32,500 you pay £5,580 in tax on that (not even including employers NI levied on it).
If you inherit £325,000 you pay £0.00 in tax.
£5,580 > £0.00
I said 325k+, if you inherit £500,000 you pay £70,000 in inheritance tax ie almost 15 times what you pay in income tax on £32.5k
I was quite explicit in saying we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k - not over those figures, those figures.
Why should someone who earns £32.5k by going to work every day pay more in taxation than someone who inherits ten times that amount?
Changing the figures doesn't change the disparity. If you earn £500k you pay far more in tax than you do from inheriting it too.
I bet the American visitors to this site are surprised (or would be surprised to find) that so many UK election candidates are seemingly happy to give their hope addresses on the public nomination documents. (Although to be fair the number who aren't is steadily going up at each election, which isn't surprising).
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
You have no idea how moving from the big house to the dower house changes your character and she managed to convey those incredibly subtle differences in a way no other actress could bother.
I had a colleague around the time of the Brexit vote who was stunned that their parents, who came over from North Africa in the 60s, were voting for Brexit largely due to the influx of Polish people in the area.
Have we discussed the Conservative Party's failure to field a candidate in Rotherham? They were never going to win it, of course, but this is good news for Reform there (to a greater extent than the reverse might be). I still expect Labour to win it, but you can get 13-1 on Reform in Rotherham with Bet365 which I think is good value. DYOR, of course.
The Conservative candidate was supposed to be the current councillor for Lancaster Gate in Kensington & Chelsea, Laila Cunningham. It'll be interesting to find out why she pulled out at such a late stage that the Tories didn't have time to replace her with another candidate.
Have we discussed the Conservative Party's failure to field a candidate in Rotherham? They were never going to win it, of course, but this is good news for Reform there (to a greater extent than the reverse might be). I still expect Labour to win it, but you can get 13-1 on Reform in Rotherham with Bet365 which I think is good value. DYOR, of course.
The Conservative candidate was supposed to be the current councillor for Lancaster Gate in Kensington & Chelsea, Laila Cunningham. It'll be interesting to find out why she pulled out at such a late stage that the Tories didn't have time to replace her with another candidate.
Hang on. Has this all been a 9,000 dimensional chess game engineered by Dom? A Seldon crisis upon which he will reappear to resolve it necessarily in favour of the Conservative Party?
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on for "I love the eighties" clip shows.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
Is that not an age thing? The period when you're growing up always has the best culture (and music etc)
TTOI, Peep Show, Not Going Out (early seasons), Inbetweeners, IT Crowd, Outnumbered, G&S, The Office, Black Books, Bluestone 42, Extras, Fresh Meat, Alan Partridge, Friday Night Dinner all stand out as 'top' sitcoms in the late naughts when I was young.
Admittedly now there's a real paucity - Ghosts (would be mid tier at best for me), Derry Girls, Motherland, Extraordinary are the only ones that come to mind as being good.
Interesting article in the Times about "olfactory heritage".
Anyone who has grown up near a steelworks, a brewery or the sea understands the time-travelling power of smell. The power of a sudden and unexpected whiff of the past to recreate instantly a scene from childhood: football on a rutted field in the shadow of some belching factory, or for seaside dwellers the sulphurous odour of decomposing seaweed during a shoreline amble for flotsam. Brains are repositories for smells long banished from daily life by progress: the leather interior of a Morris Minor, the chemical intensity of a typewriter ribbon or the golden fullness of pies made freshly on the premises.
For me the two places where I think of smell more than anything else is Bridgwater and the old cellophane factory and Warrington and the smell of soap from Lever Brothers. Does anyone else have any now lost evocative smells?
The smell of the Smiths crisps factory in Brislington near my school, particularly when playing rugby.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
I had a colleague around the time of the Brexit vote who was stunned that their parents, who came over from North Africa in the 60s, were voting for Brexit largely due to the influx of Polish people in the area.
Nothing will top the Turkish bloke on the US border.
As an aside - Turkish people generally are astoundingly anti-migrant. I work at a professional service firm and for the first time in my (short) career had to step in on one of the trainees going on a properly anti-migrant rant in broken English (as he had just arrived and started learning the language 3 years ago).
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
I'm now imagining someone in 2060 binging Mrs Brown's Boys.
Some of us did say quite consistently that Sunak was a dud, and strongly advised the wibbly wibbly Tory MPs who are now losing their jobs to ditch him whilst they could.
For who? None of the alternatives in parliament would likely be doing much better.
They had a once in a generation charismatic general election winner in Boris, they ditched him and Tory MPs who did so will now likely mostly lose their seats as a result.
Much as once Labour ditched their once in a generation charismatic election winner in Blair it took them a generation to get a general election winning leader again (and even now Starmer is no Blair charisma wise)
Boris wouldn’t be winning this election, and who knows what other moral failures he would have been exposed as having been party to had he stayed. Tories were well shot, their problem was the messy way they had to get rid of a liability and then screwing the leadership election
Boris would be getting 200 seats plus at least and Reform would not be polling 15%.
Most of Boris' voters now voting Reform didn't give a toss about partygate anyway anymore than most Trump voters couldn't give a toss about the Stormy Daniels case
You may well be right, however political leaders shouldn’t misguidedly follow voters into a morally bankrupt position. It’s their duty to uphold a minimum standard. The world will be a terrible place if we insist on having a high standard for anyone we disagree with and a lower standard for anyone on our side.
I am in no position to judge you, and you might be the exception, but in my experience most people have a somewhat flexible view on leaders’ moral failings if they are otherwise delivering what they want. Equally they are quick to find serious moral failings in leaders they dislike anyway.
In any event, people act like we have a noble tradition of morally pure PMs when actually many of the ones from years past who we now venerate as great make Boris look like a saint. Lloyd-George, who won us a war and invented the welfare state, sold peerages for example.
Was getting a bit worried when you didn't post for several hours.
I weirdly fell asleep early evening for several hours. No idea why. Stress? I had two small glasses of wine
Now I can’t sleep and all I can hear is the muffled explosions from the port. And the odd car alarm. The city is almost entirely blacked out and the curfew is in place
Odesa right now must be one of the strangest places on the planet
Interesting article in the Times about "olfactory heritage".
Anyone who has grown up near a steelworks, a brewery or the sea understands the time-travelling power of smell. The power of a sudden and unexpected whiff of the past to recreate instantly a scene from childhood: football on a rutted field in the shadow of some belching factory, or for seaside dwellers the sulphurous odour of decomposing seaweed during a shoreline amble for flotsam. Brains are repositories for smells long banished from daily life by progress: the leather interior of a Morris Minor, the chemical intensity of a typewriter ribbon or the golden fullness of pies made freshly on the premises.
For me the two places where I think of smell more than anything else is Bridgwater and the old cellophane factory and Warrington and the smell of soap from Lever Brothers. Does anyone else have any now lost evocative smells?
I used to live a few doors away from Banks Brewery in Wolverhampton. A lovely sweet smell when they were malting. A great brewery tap pub too.
That does seem more appealing than the cellophane factory.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
You never see The Goodies repeated, despite it being massive in the Seventies. I loved it as a kid but it really isn't funny now.
I thought Stephen Flynn came across best. Though it was like watching a lightbulb with too much lipstick on. Flynn and Mourdant were the only two from that debate you could trust to run a government department, even then you would watch them closely, all the others came across out of their depth.
What’s the actual point of the debate format, that’s so much better than interviews, or the question time format? Educate the electorate on issues and help them decide who to vote for? Did that actually happen? Why not just election question times extended to 90 minutes.
Farage may have sucked even more voters from Conservatives based on his assured performance, but also it’s his 110% confident black and white position on issues and policy, which no one else on the panel or in UK politics at all shares, except perhaps Penny shares some of it with him. Knife crime? Stop and search. Net zero, there’s a cost to our bills and economy for not even reducing carbon, just exporting it. NHS? failed model, too expensive, not delivering, copy the superior French one. Etc etc. in between sharing each answer with you, you can imagine him ordering another pint of speckled hen and a packet of crisps.
When Prof Curtice kept saying the very last thing the Conservatives need is Farage to return to the Front Line, i really didn’t get it at all, but I’m beginning to understand it now. And with this last paragraph i am very much on topic.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
Is that not an age thing? The period when you're growing up always has the best culture (and music etc)
TTOI, Peep Show, Not Going Out (early seasons), Inbetweeners, IT Crowd, Outnumbered, G&S, The Office, Black Books, Bluestone 42, Extras, Fresh Meat, Alan Partridge, Friday Night Dinner all stand out as 'top' sitcoms in the late naughts when I was young.
Admittedly now there's a real paucity - Ghosts (would be mid tier at best for me), Derry Girls, Motherland are the only ones that come to mind as being good.
It can get a bit fuzzy. I grew up watching things like Friends, and I have fond memories of it but even thoughI own the complete series I never seem to end up going back to it anymore.
Whereas I've watched Porridge multiple times this year alone, and it came out more than a decade before I was born. I'm sure there were repeats, but in the 90s it still wasn't easy to get hold of older stuff compared to now, so I don't recall how much I could have seen it growing up.
And as a child of the 90s I'm not looking forward the imminent nostalgia wave for the decade. It's already hit in video games, with some success in fairness.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
I recently tried to watch Jon Pertwee in “Ambassadors of Death”.
Interesting article in the Times about "olfactory heritage".
Anyone who has grown up near a steelworks, a brewery or the sea understands the time-travelling power of smell. The power of a sudden and unexpected whiff of the past to recreate instantly a scene from childhood: football on a rutted field in the shadow of some belching factory, or for seaside dwellers the sulphurous odour of decomposing seaweed during a shoreline amble for flotsam. Brains are repositories for smells long banished from daily life by progress: the leather interior of a Morris Minor, the chemical intensity of a typewriter ribbon or the golden fullness of pies made freshly on the premises.
For me the two places where I think of smell more than anything else is Bridgwater and the old cellophane factory and Warrington and the smell of soap from Lever Brothers. Does anyone else have any now lost evocative smells?
The aromas in Burton-on-Trent certainly haven't passed into history yet. 😊
I spent a year in a flat just off Station Street where there was a constant aroma from the microwave curry factory opposite. I got fed up with that pretty quickly and moved onto a boat in the shadow of the Marstons Brewery. Still pungent, but much more pleasant.
(My office at the time was the old Bass brewmaster's house... you can't really escape the beer in Burton.)
Was getting a bit worried when you didn't post for several hours.
I weirdly fell asleep early evening for several hours. No idea why. Stress? I had two small glasses of wine
Now I can’t sleep and all I can hear is the muffled explosions from the port. And the odd car alarm. The city is almost entirely blacked out and the curfew is in place
Odesa right now must be one of the strangest places on the planet
Back to that bombproof bathroom for another blitz-wank?
I thought Stephen Flynn came across best. Though it was like watching a lightbulb with too much lipstick on. Flynn and Mourdant were the only two from that debate you could trust to run a government department, even then you would watch them closely, all the others came across out of their depth.
What’s the actual point of the debate format, that’s so much better than interviews, or the question time format? Educate the electorate on issues and help them decide who to vote for? Did that actually happen? Why not just election question times extended to 90 minutes.
Farage may have sucked even more voters from Conservatives based on his assured performance, but also it’s his 110% confident black and white position on issues and policy, which no one else on the panel or in UK politics at all shares, except perhaps Penny shares some of it with him. Knife crime? Stop and search. Net zero, there’s a cost to our bills and economy for not even reducing carbon, just exporting it. NHS? failed model, too expensive, not delivering, copy the superior French one. Etc etc. in between sharing each answer with you, you can imagine him ordering another pint of speckled hen and a packet of crisps.
When Prof Curtice kept saying the very last thing the Conservatives need is Farage to return to the Front Line, i really didn’t get it at all, but I’m beginning to understand it now. And with this last paragraph i am very much on topic.
A couple of bits of election anecdata. I was at a meeting today discussing health economics. One of the speakers said that the sums he was used were based on assumptions, but that these were better evidenced than Sunaks £2000 tax claim. Lots of knowing chuckling from the audience. The idea that Sunak is untrustworthy has cut through, you were right on this.
At the WI BBQ in the evening several older folk still very angry that they stuck to the Covid rules and couldn't see dying relatives while Number 10 partied. It is still a live issue.
This bloke called Nathan Curtis was supposed to be standing for RefUK in East Grinstead & Uckfield, but for some reason he didn't turn up on the nominations statement.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's not the kind of quoteable, and thus clippable, comedy like Porridge and Blackadder (I'm lukewarm at best when it comes to 'Allo 'Allo), so perhaps it has not aged as well.
To the Manor Born, which I watched recently on YouTube, shouldn't work because it's yet another story of landed gentry on their uppers clashing with the nouveau riche, oozes humour and charm and doesn't take anything seriously except the developing relationship between the two main characters, who show just enough vulnerability you wish them well despite their obnoxious stereotypes
This bloke called Nathan Curtis was supposed to be standing for RefUK in East Grinstead & Uckfield, but for some reason he didn't turn up on the nominations statement.
This bloke called Nathan Curtis was supposed to be standing for RefUK in East Grinstead & Uckfield, but for some reason he didn't turn up on the nominations statement.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 10m Tory HQ desperately shovelling out the entire manifesto tonight to try and move the agenda on from D-Day is a further example of the chaos inside the campaign.
Yet no proposed IHT cut, despite Reform now raising the IHT threshold to £2 million?
A Stamp Duty cut for a few first time buyers isn't going to make any significant difference to Tory voteshare.
If that is all Sunak and Hunt have bring back Theresa May I say, at least she managed to write a manifesto that got the Tories over 40% and over 300 seats not heading for near wipeout!
There are a lot of people who are also Tory voters, me for example (ok I can’t vote) who have issues about inheritance tax being cut.
A lot of Tory voters, or target voters, have worked their bollocks off but also mixed with people who haven’t, their friends and associates have pocketed money without any effort. They see very very stupid friends walking out with millions without any skills or brains and there is a British, and Danish, thing where people aren’t happy with people flashing it without earning it.
I have many friends who’ve inherited serious millions, some have worked hard to prove themselves worthy, some have been determined to use the money as a platform to outperform, some have used the money to do good, some are lazy fuckers who have no clue - and every time the ones who are the latter are the ones who treat waiters terribly, are entitled, have no direction or fear of what comes next.
There has to be an inheritance tax so nobody can just not contribute. Some wise soul said, I want to leave them enough to do something but not enough to do nothing.
A lot of people don’t understand that without a successful society arounfpd them, a stable society, their properties would be worthless, their shares worthless etc.
It’s not money the inheritors strived for and it was on the back of millions of people who struggled but accepted an unequal society. There needs to be a balance otherwise the ones who have nothing stop tolerating the others.
I am not saying there should be not inheritance tax at all, though 55% say it should be abolished completely but certainly the threshold should be raised to £2million+ in my view so only the very richest pay that.
65% of voters and 77% of Tory voters back raising the threshold above £325k
A rate of 20 or 25% with a lower exempt amount would quite possibly bring in more than IHT currently does.
At £2m or so they're already evading or avoiding IHT so HYUFD's suggestion is about as useful as a chocolate welding torch.
Property tends to be the big crunch for going over thresholds and people get attached to family homes. So I tend to think that there should be a relatively high rate, low threshold but with a carve out for one property. Provided you live in it for five years. Sell it within that time and the taxman comes knocking.
No good; that merely pampers Tory voters in the Home Counties as opposed to Labour voters in Sedgefield and drives up the hotspot around London*. I'm coming round to the idea of abolishing IHT and imposing CGT on all inheritances - everyone has an allowance, and so on.
*Which is why HYUFD loves it, not entirely irrationally for him.
Abolish Inheritance Tax altogether and simply tax all inheritances as income.
Anyone working for a living shouldn't be taxed at a higher rate than someone inheriting one.
They aren't, the IHT rate of 40% over £325k inherited is the same as the higher rate of income tax and higher than the basic rate of income tax.
Only the additional rate of tax for those earning over £125k (ie effectively the top 1% of earners) is above that at 45%
I don't think you understand this very well.
If you inherit £30k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £30k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £100k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £100k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £325k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £325k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £1mn, what tax do you pay? If you earn £1mn, what tax do you pay?
Working for your income shouldn't be taxed more than getting your income through other means, yet we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k.
We need to tax income less, and unearned incomes more.
I find you one of the most infuriating posters on this site.
9/10 of your posts are complete IEA-fantasy-deregulate-the-fuck-out-of-everything bullshit
And then 1/10 times, you manage to completely nail it.
This is one of those posts.
It's so bloody obvious - and so easy to implement.
If you were standing as my elected representative with that as your signature policy, I'd find it genuinely hard not to vote for you.
Although you'd have to tax gifts as well to make it consistent.
Lucy Kellaway did an excellent piece on this in the FT about a decade ago: inheritance and gifts are unearned income, and it is unconscionable that they taxed at, essentially, zero. While work - something that actually generates wealth - is heavily taxed.
Still in Odessa? I thought the plan was to get the hell out of Dodge?
I’m torn. Odessa is compelling and beautiful and magical. It is also maddening (the fucking generators!) and frustrating and scary. The weather is divine and the bombing at night is… unique
It’s hard to quantify the danger. It’s probably no worse than staying in a dodgy Latin American city
However it FEELS worse because in the back of your mind is the thought: someone is shooting missiles at me, any minute now: wham. I won’t have any warning
The fact a chunk of smoking drone/missile fell on my road 2 days ago adds to the disquiet
But then in the day I wander around, my knapping done, and I drink good coffee in beautiful green Italianate squares
Maybe it is inspiring me, deep in my subconscious. I just don’t know yet
I had the urge to write a poem yesterday
Thinking of my Dad in Odessa
I rarely get the urge to write poems. Didn’t actually write one. But he loved Pushkin and Pushkin lived here
This bloke called Nathan Curtis was supposed to be standing for RefUK in East Grinstead & Uckfield, but for some reason he didn't turn up on the nominations statement.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
I'm now imagining someone in 2060 binging Mrs Brown's Boys.
Probably the oldest thing I've ever seen is Monkey Business, the 1931 Marx Brothers film (though it has been 25 years since I have done so). Still, it still getting seen by people alive 93 years later has to be impressive.
Some of us did say quite consistently that Sunak was a dud, and strongly advised the wibbly wibbly Tory MPs who are now losing their jobs to ditch him whilst they could.
He's doing better than Liz would'a done.
Your girl was that bad.
Thanks for that parallel universe prediction Mystic Meg. I think we can file that thought in the same bin with Sunak's political credibility, when even wet-as-an-otter's-pocket Matthew Parris is calling for him to go.
I invented that phrase. “Wet as an otter’s pocket”. True story - I invented it writing for a lad mag I’m about 2000
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 10m Tory HQ desperately shovelling out the entire manifesto tonight to try and move the agenda on from D-Day is a further example of the chaos inside the campaign.
Yet no proposed IHT cut, despite Reform now raising the IHT threshold to £2 million?
A Stamp Duty cut for a few first time buyers isn't going to make any significant difference to Tory voteshare.
If that is all Sunak and Hunt have bring back Theresa May I say, at least she managed to write a manifesto that got the Tories over 40% and over 300 seats not heading for near wipeout!
There are a lot of people who are also Tory voters, me for example (ok I can’t vote) who have issues about inheritance tax being cut.
A lot of Tory voters, or target voters, have worked their bollocks off but also mixed with people who haven’t, their friends and associates have pocketed money without any effort. They see very very stupid friends walking out with millions without any skills or brains and there is a British, and Danish, thing where people aren’t happy with people flashing it without earning it.
I have many friends who’ve inherited serious millions, some have worked hard to prove themselves worthy, some have been determined to use the money as a platform to outperform, some have used the money to do good, some are lazy fuckers who have no clue - and every time the ones who are the latter are the ones who treat waiters terribly, are entitled, have no direction or fear of what comes next.
There has to be an inheritance tax so nobody can just not contribute. Some wise soul said, I want to leave them enough to do something but not enough to do nothing.
A lot of people don’t understand that without a successful society arounfpd them, a stable society, their properties would be worthless, their shares worthless etc.
It’s not money the inheritors strived for and it was on the back of millions of people who struggled but accepted an unequal society. There needs to be a balance otherwise the ones who have nothing stop tolerating the others.
I am not saying there should be not inheritance tax at all, though 55% say it should be abolished completely but certainly the threshold should be raised to £2million+ in my view so only the very richest pay that.
65% of voters and 77% of Tory voters back raising the threshold above £325k
A rate of 20 or 25% with a lower exempt amount would quite possibly bring in more than IHT currently does.
At £2m or so they're already evading or avoiding IHT so HYUFD's suggestion is about as useful as a chocolate welding torch.
Property tends to be the big crunch for going over thresholds and people get attached to family homes. So I tend to think that there should be a relatively high rate, low threshold but with a carve out for one property. Provided you live in it for five years. Sell it within that time and the taxman comes knocking.
No good; that merely pampers Tory voters in the Home Counties as opposed to Labour voters in Sedgefield and drives up the hotspot around London*. I'm coming round to the idea of abolishing IHT and imposing CGT on all inheritances - everyone has an allowance, and so on.
*Which is why HYUFD loves it, not entirely irrationally for him.
Abolish Inheritance Tax altogether and simply tax all inheritances as income.
Anyone working for a living shouldn't be taxed at a higher rate than someone inheriting one.
They aren't, the IHT rate of 40% over £325k inherited is the same as the higher rate of income tax and higher than the basic rate of income tax.
Only the additional rate of tax for those earning over £125k (ie effectively the top 1% of earners) is above that at 45%
I don't think you understand this very well.
If you inherit £30k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £30k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £100k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £100k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £325k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £325k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £1mn, what tax do you pay? If you earn £1mn, what tax do you pay?
Working for your income shouldn't be taxed more than getting your income through other means, yet we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k.
We need to tax income less, and unearned incomes more.
I find you one of the most infuriating posters on this site.
9/10 of your posts are complete IEA-fantasy-deregulate-the-fuck-out-of-everything bullshit
And then 1/10 times, you manage to completely nail it.
This is one of those posts.
It's so bloody obvious - and so easy to implement.
If you were standing as my elected representative with that as your signature policy, I'd find it genuinely hard not to vote for you.
Although you'd have to tax gifts as well to make it consistent.
Lucy Kellaway did an excellent piece on this in the FT about a decade ago: inheritance and gifts are unearned income, and it is unconscionable that they taxed at, essentially, zero. While work - something that actually generates wealth - is heavily taxed.
RAYNER - absolute quality on the modern era TV debate. Doesn’t give a crap about the rules, changes the subject wherever it suits her, lands her blows consistently, looks the part.
More heat than light? Without a doubt. But she’s a great TV star that rallies Labour morale whenever she shows up.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
I recently tried to watch Jon Pertwee in “Ambassadors of Death”.
Absolute shite.
The Avengers (in colour) is still quite charming. An episode with Linda Thorson (the forgotten sidekick) I saw recently predicted ai.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 10m Tory HQ desperately shovelling out the entire manifesto tonight to try and move the agenda on from D-Day is a further example of the chaos inside the campaign.
Yet no proposed IHT cut, despite Reform now raising the IHT threshold to £2 million?
A Stamp Duty cut for a few first time buyers isn't going to make any significant difference to Tory voteshare.
If that is all Sunak and Hunt have bring back Theresa May I say, at least she managed to write a manifesto that got the Tories over 40% and over 300 seats not heading for near wipeout!
There are a lot of people who are also Tory voters, me for example (ok I can’t vote) who have issues about inheritance tax being cut.
A lot of Tory voters, or target voters, have worked their bollocks off but also mixed with people who haven’t, their friends and associates have pocketed money without any effort. They see very very stupid friends walking out with millions without any skills or brains and there is a British, and Danish, thing where people aren’t happy with people flashing it without earning it.
I have many friends who’ve inherited serious millions, some have worked hard to prove themselves worthy, some have been determined to use the money as a platform to outperform, some have used the money to do good, some are lazy fuckers who have no clue - and every time the ones who are the latter are the ones who treat waiters terribly, are entitled, have no direction or fear of what comes next.
There has to be an inheritance tax so nobody can just not contribute. Some wise soul said, I want to leave them enough to do something but not enough to do nothing.
A lot of people don’t understand that without a successful society arounfpd them, a stable society, their properties would be worthless, their shares worthless etc.
It’s not money the inheritors strived for and it was on the back of millions of people who struggled but accepted an unequal society. There needs to be a balance otherwise the ones who have nothing stop tolerating the others.
I am not saying there should be not inheritance tax at all, though 55% say it should be abolished completely but certainly the threshold should be raised to £2million+ in my view so only the very richest pay that.
65% of voters and 77% of Tory voters back raising the threshold above £325k
A rate of 20 or 25% with a lower exempt amount would quite possibly bring in more than IHT currently does.
At £2m or so they're already evading or avoiding IHT so HYUFD's suggestion is about as useful as a chocolate welding torch.
Property tends to be the big crunch for going over thresholds and people get attached to family homes. So I tend to think that there should be a relatively high rate, low threshold but with a carve out for one property. Provided you live in it for five years. Sell it within that time and the taxman comes knocking.
No good; that merely pampers Tory voters in the Home Counties as opposed to Labour voters in Sedgefield and drives up the hotspot around London*. I'm coming round to the idea of abolishing IHT and imposing CGT on all inheritances - everyone has an allowance, and so on.
*Which is why HYUFD loves it, not entirely irrationally for him.
Abolish Inheritance Tax altogether and simply tax all inheritances as income.
Anyone working for a living shouldn't be taxed at a higher rate than someone inheriting one.
They aren't, the IHT rate of 40% over £325k inherited is the same as the higher rate of income tax and higher than the basic rate of income tax.
Only the additional rate of tax for those earning over £125k (ie effectively the top 1% of earners) is above that at 45%
I don't think you understand this very well.
If you inherit £30k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £30k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £100k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £100k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £325k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £325k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £1mn, what tax do you pay? If you earn £1mn, what tax do you pay?
Working for your income shouldn't be taxed more than getting your income through other means, yet we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k.
We need to tax income less, and unearned incomes more.
I find you one of the most infuriating posters on this site.
9/10 of your posts are complete IEA-fantasy-deregulate-the-fuck-out-of-everything bullshit
And then 1/10 times, you manage to completely nail it.
This is one of those posts.
It's so bloody obvious - and so easy to implement.
If you were standing as my elected representative with that as your signature policy, I'd find it genuinely hard not to vote for you.
Although you'd have to tax gifts as well to make it consistent.
Lucy Kellaway did an excellent piece on this in the FT about a decade ago: inheritance and gifts are unearned income, and it is unconscionable that they taxed at, essentially, zero. While work - something that actually generates wealth - is heavily taxed.
Absolutely!
Shouldn't the aim be to tax both sources of income as little as possible?
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
I recently tried to watch Jon Pertwee in “Ambassadors of Death”.
Absolute shite.
I've been rewatching Morse. Thaw's just superior throughout, even in the lesser episodes. But that's 80s/90s.
RAYNER - absolute quality on the modern era TV debate. Doesn’t give a crap about the rules, changes the subject wherever it suits her, lands her blows consistently, looks the part.
More heat than light? Without a doubt. But she’s a great TV star that rallies Labour morale whenever she shows up.
Class act.
I think Rayner would be a better Labour leader than Starmer.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
These are the 12 seats I'm aware of so far where RefUK aren't standing.
Sheffield (5): Brightside & Hillsborough, Central, Hallam, Heeley, South East Earley & Woodley Cheltenham East Grinstead & Uckfield Stone, Great Wyrley & Penkridge Maidenhead Epping Forest Oxford East
Hexham, Mid Dorset and Poole North, West Dorset, Bristol East, brighton Kemptown, Donny North, Chorley of course, Leeds South. Standing i think in 611/631 GB
Some of us did say quite consistently that Sunak was a dud, and strongly advised the wibbly wibbly Tory MPs who are now losing their jobs to ditch him whilst they could.
He's doing better than Liz would'a done.
Your girl was that bad.
Thanks for that parallel universe prediction Mystic Meg. I think we can file that thought in the same bin with Sunak's political credibility, when even wet-as-an-otter's-pocket Matthew Parris is calling for him to go.
I invented that phrase. “Wet as an otter’s pocket”. True story - I invented it writing for a lad mag I’m about 2000
Did you really? I've used it in the past. But in my head I'm always quoting someone with a North Eastern accent (I won't say Geordie, because Teesside would work just as well). It works well with the staccato rhythm of the North East accents. But I suppose it also works well with the slow burr of the West Country.
These are the 12 seats I'm aware of so far where RefUK aren't standing.
Sheffield (5): Brightside & Hillsborough, Central, Hallam, Heeley, South East Earley & Woodley Cheltenham East Grinstead & Uckfield Stone, Great Wyrley & Penkridge Maidenhead Epping Forest Oxford East
Hexham, Mid Dorset and Poole North, West Dorset, Bristol East, brighton Kemptown, Donny North, Chorley of course, Leeds South. Standing i think in 611/631 GB
And Reform have apparently withdrawm support from 2 others Edit - Horsham and Leeds West/Pudsey
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 10m Tory HQ desperately shovelling out the entire manifesto tonight to try and move the agenda on from D-Day is a further example of the chaos inside the campaign.
Yet no proposed IHT cut, despite Reform now raising the IHT threshold to £2 million?
A Stamp Duty cut for a few first time buyers isn't going to make any significant difference to Tory voteshare.
If that is all Sunak and Hunt have bring back Theresa May I say, at least she managed to write a manifesto that got the Tories over 40% and over 300 seats not heading for near wipeout!
There are a lot of people who are also Tory voters, me for example (ok I can’t vote) who have issues about inheritance tax being cut.
A lot of Tory voters, or target voters, have worked their bollocks off but also mixed with people who haven’t, their friends and associates have pocketed money without any effort. They see very very stupid friends walking out with millions without any skills or brains and there is a British, and Danish, thing where people aren’t happy with people flashing it without earning it.
I have many friends who’ve inherited serious millions, some have worked hard to prove themselves worthy, some have been determined to use the money as a platform to outperform, some have used the money to do good, some are lazy fuckers who have no clue - and every time the ones who are the latter are the ones who treat waiters terribly, are entitled, have no direction or fear of what comes next.
There has to be an inheritance tax so nobody can just not contribute. Some wise soul said, I want to leave them enough to do something but not enough to do nothing.
A lot of people don’t understand that without a successful society arounfpd them, a stable society, their properties would be worthless, their shares worthless etc.
It’s not money the inheritors strived for and it was on the back of millions of people who struggled but accepted an unequal society. There needs to be a balance otherwise the ones who have nothing stop tolerating the others.
I am not saying there should be not inheritance tax at all, though 55% say it should be abolished completely but certainly the threshold should be raised to £2million+ in my view so only the very richest pay that.
65% of voters and 77% of Tory voters back raising the threshold above £325k
A rate of 20 or 25% with a lower exempt amount would quite possibly bring in more than IHT currently does.
At £2m or so they're already evading or avoiding IHT so HYUFD's suggestion is about as useful as a chocolate welding torch.
Property tends to be the big crunch for going over thresholds and people get attached to family homes. So I tend to think that there should be a relatively high rate, low threshold but with a carve out for one property. Provided you live in it for five years. Sell it within that time and the taxman comes knocking.
No good; that merely pampers Tory voters in the Home Counties as opposed to Labour voters in Sedgefield and drives up the hotspot around London*. I'm coming round to the idea of abolishing IHT and imposing CGT on all inheritances - everyone has an allowance, and so on.
*Which is why HYUFD loves it, not entirely irrationally for him.
Abolish Inheritance Tax altogether and simply tax all inheritances as income.
Anyone working for a living shouldn't be taxed at a higher rate than someone inheriting one.
They aren't, the IHT rate of 40% over £325k inherited is the same as the higher rate of income tax and higher than the basic rate of income tax.
Only the additional rate of tax for those earning over £125k (ie effectively the top 1% of earners) is above that at 45%
I don't think you understand this very well.
If you inherit £30k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £30k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £100k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £100k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £325k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £325k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £1mn, what tax do you pay? If you earn £1mn, what tax do you pay?
Working for your income shouldn't be taxed more than getting your income through other means, yet we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k.
We need to tax income less, and unearned incomes more.
I find you one of the most infuriating posters on this site.
9/10 of your posts are complete IEA-fantasy-deregulate-the-fuck-out-of-everything bullshit
And then 1/10 times, you manage to completely nail it.
This is one of those posts.
It's so bloody obvious - and so easy to implement.
If you were standing as my elected representative with that as your signature policy, I'd find it genuinely hard not to vote for you.
Although you'd have to tax gifts as well to make it consistent.
Lucy Kellaway did an excellent piece on this in the FT about a decade ago: inheritance and gifts are unearned income, and it is unconscionable that they taxed at, essentially, zero. While work - something that actually generates wealth - is heavily taxed.
Absolutely!
Shouldn't the aim be to tax both sources of income as little as possible?
Of course it should be, yes.
But they should both be taxed the same. Instead we overtax income and undertax unearned incomes.
Some of us did say quite consistently that Sunak was a dud, and strongly advised the wibbly wibbly Tory MPs who are now losing their jobs to ditch him whilst they could.
He's doing better than Liz would'a done.
Your girl was that bad.
Thanks for that parallel universe prediction Mystic Meg. I think we can file that thought in the same bin with Sunak's political credibility, when even wet-as-an-otter's-pocket Matthew Parris is calling for him to go.
I invented that phrase. “Wet as an otter’s pocket”. True story - I invented it writing for a lad mag I’m about 2000
Well it's extremely good work - well done.
Thankyou. I actually checked this with the editors of the Viz Profanisaurus, and they went back searching and sure enough the earliest reference is mine and all the others appear thereafter. Of course I meant it in a sweary way - “she’s as wet as an otter’s pocket”
But now you see it everywhere and people use it innocently, unaware of the original obscene context. Eg name for a holiday home!
These are the 12 seats I'm aware of so far where RefUK aren't standing.
Sheffield (5): Brightside & Hillsborough, Central, Hallam, Heeley, South East Earley & Woodley Cheltenham East Grinstead & Uckfield Stone, Great Wyrley & Penkridge Maidenhead Epping Forest Oxford East
Hexham, Mid Dorset and Poole North, West Dorset, Bristol East, brighton Kemptown, Donny North, Chorley of course, Leeds South. Standing i think in 611/631 GB
RAYNER - absolute quality on the modern era TV debate. Doesn’t give a crap about the rules, changes the subject wherever it suits her, lands her blows consistently, looks the part.
More heat than light? Without a doubt. But she’s a great TV star that rallies Labour morale whenever she shows up.
Class act.
I think Rayner would be a better Labour leader than Starmer.
Disagree. She is the Prescott to Starmer’s Blair. But, she is Old Labour through and through, which I like.
So they’re two cheeks of the same arse, performatively disagreeing in public while being friends in practice?
No matter for whom you vote, the government always gets elected.
I just don't understand this interpretation of 'performatively disagreeing'.
Maybe they're friends, maybe they're just capable of being friendly, neither would mean they are incapable of deeply disagreeing with the other on politics.
Frankly I find it one step up from a conspiracy theory to regard two people acquainted with one other able to share a laugh as indicating their professional disagreements are an act.
People can be nice to political opponents. Why would we see a photo of them seemingly being just civil as sinister?
And if you think they acted, maybe the civility afterward was an act?
These are the 12 seats I'm aware of so far where RefUK aren't standing.
Sheffield (5): Brightside & Hillsborough, Central, Hallam, Heeley, South East Earley & Woodley Cheltenham East Grinstead & Uckfield Stone, Great Wyrley & Penkridge Maidenhead Epping Forest Oxford East
Hexham, Mid Dorset and Poole North, West Dorset, Bristol East, brighton Kemptown, Donny North, Chorley of course, Leeds South. Standing i think in 611/631 GB
Some of us did say quite consistently that Sunak was a dud, and strongly advised the wibbly wibbly Tory MPs who are now losing their jobs to ditch him whilst they could.
For who? None of the alternatives in parliament would likely be doing much better.
They had a once in a generation charismatic general election winner in Boris, they ditched him and Tory MPs who did so will now likely mostly lose their seats as a result.
Much as once Labour ditched their once in a generation charismatic election winner in Blair it took them over a decade to get a general election winning leader again (and even now Starmer is no Blair charisma wise)
Yup. Boris would have at least forced a Hung Parliament. Even after Covid.
I don't doubt Boris would be doing better than Sunak: I think he would have largely prevented the rise of Reform.
But don't forget that he was losing very safe seats in by-elections at the end, and his habit of lying* had become an increasing liability.
* Or perhaps a more charitable term is that he would in any circumstances say whatever would cause him the least pain at that particular moment... Irrespective of whether or not it was actually true.
So they’re two cheeks of the same arse, performatively disagreeing in public while being friends in practice?
No matter for whom you vote, the government always gets elected.
This implies that people who have different political viewpoints can’t be friends or friendly to one another. I disagree with the implication that political opponents must be hostile to each other all the time.
Some of us did say quite consistently that Sunak was a dud, and strongly advised the wibbly wibbly Tory MPs who are now losing their jobs to ditch him whilst they could.
For who? None of the alternatives in parliament would likely be doing much better.
They had a once in a generation charismatic general election winner in Boris, they ditched him and Tory MPs who did so will now likely mostly lose their seats as a result.
Much as once Labour ditched their once in a generation charismatic election winner in Blair it took them a generation to get a general election winning leader again (and even now Starmer is no Blair charisma wise)
Boris wouldn’t be winning this election, and who knows what other moral failures he would have been exposed as having been party to had he stayed. Tories were well shot, their problem was the messy way they had to get rid of a liability and then screwing the leadership election
Boris would be getting 200 seats plus at least and Reform would not be polling 15%.
Most of Boris' voters now voting Reform didn't give a toss about partygate anyway anymore than most Trump voters couldn't give a toss about the Stormy Daniels case
I don't think Boris would be getting 200 seats... But I didn't think anyone would be worrying about an ELE.
Some of us did say quite consistently that Sunak was a dud, and strongly advised the wibbly wibbly Tory MPs who are now losing their jobs to ditch him whilst they could.
He's doing better than Liz would'a done.
Your girl was that bad.
Thanks for that parallel universe prediction Mystic Meg. I think we can file that thought in the same bin with Sunak's political credibility, when even wet-as-an-otter's-pocket Matthew Parris is calling for him to go.
I invented that phrase. “Wet as an otter’s pocket”. True story - I invented it writing for a lad mag I’m about 2000
Did you really? I've used it in the past. But in my head I'm always quoting someone with a North Eastern accent (I won't say Geordie, because Teesside would work just as well). It works well with the staccato rhythm of the North East accents. But I suppose it also works well with the slow burr of the West Country.
I really did. I can actually remember the moment I came up with it. In the FHM office circa 1999 when I’d been called in to jazz up a special “100 hottest women” edition
I was running out of ways to say “she’s really sexy” or “she’s got great tits” or “she looks like a goer”or “she’d be great fun in bed” but then in a DIVINE flash of inspiration I came up with “she’s as wet as as an otter’s pocket”
I was particularly pleased with it, because, of course, an otter would use his pocket for storing fish
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 10m Tory HQ desperately shovelling out the entire manifesto tonight to try and move the agenda on from D-Day is a further example of the chaos inside the campaign.
Yet no proposed IHT cut, despite Reform now raising the IHT threshold to £2 million?
A Stamp Duty cut for a few first time buyers isn't going to make any significant difference to Tory voteshare.
If that is all Sunak and Hunt have bring back Theresa May I say, at least she managed to write a manifesto that got the Tories over 40% and over 300 seats not heading for near wipeout!
There are a lot of people who are also Tory voters, me for example (ok I can’t vote) who have issues about inheritance tax being cut.
A lot of Tory voters, or target voters, have worked their bollocks off but also mixed with people who haven’t, their friends and associates have pocketed money without any effort. They see very very stupid friends walking out with millions without any skills or brains and there is a British, and Danish, thing where people aren’t happy with people flashing it without earning it.
I have many friends who’ve inherited serious millions, some have worked hard to prove themselves worthy, some have been determined to use the money as a platform to outperform, some have used the money to do good, some are lazy fuckers who have no clue - and every time the ones who are the latter are the ones who treat waiters terribly, are entitled, have no direction or fear of what comes next.
There has to be an inheritance tax so nobody can just not contribute. Some wise soul said, I want to leave them enough to do something but not enough to do nothing.
A lot of people don’t understand that without a successful society arounfpd them, a stable society, their properties would be worthless, their shares worthless etc.
It’s not money the inheritors strived for and it was on the back of millions of people who struggled but accepted an unequal society. There needs to be a balance otherwise the ones who have nothing stop tolerating the others.
I am not saying there should be not inheritance tax at all, though 55% say it should be abolished completely but certainly the threshold should be raised to £2million+ in my view so only the very richest pay that.
65% of voters and 77% of Tory voters back raising the threshold above £325k
A rate of 20 or 25% with a lower exempt amount would quite possibly bring in more than IHT currently does.
At £2m or so they're already evading or avoiding IHT so HYUFD's suggestion is about as useful as a chocolate welding torch.
Property tends to be the big crunch for going over thresholds and people get attached to family homes. So I tend to think that there should be a relatively high rate, low threshold but with a carve out for one property. Provided you live in it for five years. Sell it within that time and the taxman comes knocking.
No good; that merely pampers Tory voters in the Home Counties as opposed to Labour voters in Sedgefield and drives up the hotspot around London*. I'm coming round to the idea of abolishing IHT and imposing CGT on all inheritances - everyone has an allowance, and so on.
*Which is why HYUFD loves it, not entirely irrationally for him.
Abolish Inheritance Tax altogether and simply tax all inheritances as income.
Anyone working for a living shouldn't be taxed at a higher rate than someone inheriting one.
They aren't, the IHT rate of 40% over £325k inherited is the same as the higher rate of income tax and higher than the basic rate of income tax.
Only the additional rate of tax for those earning over £125k (ie effectively the top 1% of earners) is above that at 45%
I don't think you understand this very well.
If you inherit £30k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £30k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £100k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £100k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £325k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £325k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £1mn, what tax do you pay? If you earn £1mn, what tax do you pay?
Working for your income shouldn't be taxed more than getting your income through other means, yet we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k.
We need to tax income less, and unearned incomes more.
No we don't as if you earn £32k you pay the basic rate of income tax of 20% whereas if you inherit £325k+ you pay 40% on that (unless you benefit from the Osborne exemption as your inheritance was from your parents who were married and their family home was less than £1 million)
0/10 completely wrong.
If you earn £32,500 you pay £5,580 in tax on that (not even including employers NI levied on it).
If you inherit £325,000 you pay £0.00 in tax.
£5,580 > £0.00
I said 325k+, if you inherit £500,000 you pay £70,000 in inheritance tax ie almost 15 times what you pay in income tax on £32.5k
Point of order, it's perfectly possible to inherit millions of pounds tax free, even without tax planning or Trusts.
Remember that it is the estate that is taxed, not the recipient.
But if we pretend that isn't the case, all you have to do is ensure you are the beneficiary of lots of wills of moderately well of people.
Ten people who die with £250k estates, and leave them all to you, results in £2.5m of tax free gains. It remains utterly insane to me that it is the estate that is taxed, and not the recipient.
Interesting article in the Times about "olfactory heritage".
Anyone who has grown up near a steelworks, a brewery or the sea understands the time-travelling power of smell. The power of a sudden and unexpected whiff of the past to recreate instantly a scene from childhood: football on a rutted field in the shadow of some belching factory, or for seaside dwellers the sulphurous odour of decomposing seaweed during a shoreline amble for flotsam. Brains are repositories for smells long banished from daily life by progress: the leather interior of a Morris Minor, the chemical intensity of a typewriter ribbon or the golden fullness of pies made freshly on the premises.
For me the two places where I think of smell more than anything else is Bridgwater and the old cellophane factory and Warrington and the smell of soap from Lever Brothers. Does anyone else have any now lost evocative smells?
The smell of the Smiths crisps factory in Brislington near my school, particularly when playing rugby.
The HP sauce factory in Aston. Smell of the Villa.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 10m Tory HQ desperately shovelling out the entire manifesto tonight to try and move the agenda on from D-Day is a further example of the chaos inside the campaign.
Yet no proposed IHT cut, despite Reform now raising the IHT threshold to £2 million?
A Stamp Duty cut for a few first time buyers isn't going to make any significant difference to Tory voteshare.
If that is all Sunak and Hunt have bring back Theresa May I say, at least she managed to write a manifesto that got the Tories over 40% and over 300 seats not heading for near wipeout!
There are a lot of people who are also Tory voters, me for example (ok I can’t vote) who have issues about inheritance tax being cut.
A lot of Tory voters, or target voters, have worked their bollocks off but also mixed with people who haven’t, their friends and associates have pocketed money without any effort. They see very very stupid friends walking out with millions without any skills or brains and there is a British, and Danish, thing where people aren’t happy with people flashing it without earning it.
I have many friends who’ve inherited serious millions, some have worked hard to prove themselves worthy, some have been determined to use the money as a platform to outperform, some have used the money to do good, some are lazy fuckers who have no clue - and every time the ones who are the latter are the ones who treat waiters terribly, are entitled, have no direction or fear of what comes next.
There has to be an inheritance tax so nobody can just not contribute. Some wise soul said, I want to leave them enough to do something but not enough to do nothing.
A lot of people don’t understand that without a successful society arounfpd them, a stable society, their properties would be worthless, their shares worthless etc.
It’s not money the inheritors strived for and it was on the back of millions of people who struggled but accepted an unequal society. There needs to be a balance otherwise the ones who have nothing stop tolerating the others.
I am not saying there should be not inheritance tax at all, though 55% say it should be abolished completely but certainly the threshold should be raised to £2million+ in my view so only the very richest pay that.
65% of voters and 77% of Tory voters back raising the threshold above £325k
A rate of 20 or 25% with a lower exempt amount would quite possibly bring in more than IHT currently does.
At £2m or so they're already evading or avoiding IHT so HYUFD's suggestion is about as useful as a chocolate welding torch.
Property tends to be the big crunch for going over thresholds and people get attached to family homes. So I tend to think that there should be a relatively high rate, low threshold but with a carve out for one property. Provided you live in it for five years. Sell it within that time and the taxman comes knocking.
No good; that merely pampers Tory voters in the Home Counties as opposed to Labour voters in Sedgefield and drives up the hotspot around London*. I'm coming round to the idea of abolishing IHT and imposing CGT on all inheritances - everyone has an allowance, and so on.
*Which is why HYUFD loves it, not entirely irrationally for him.
Abolish Inheritance Tax altogether and simply tax all inheritances as income.
Anyone working for a living shouldn't be taxed at a higher rate than someone inheriting one.
They aren't, the IHT rate of 40% over £325k inherited is the same as the higher rate of income tax and higher than the basic rate of income tax.
Only the additional rate of tax for those earning over £125k (ie effectively the top 1% of earners) is above that at 45%
I don't think you understand this very well.
If you inherit £30k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £30k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £100k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £100k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £325k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £325k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £1mn, what tax do you pay? If you earn £1mn, what tax do you pay?
Working for your income shouldn't be taxed more than getting your income through other means, yet we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k.
We need to tax income less, and unearned incomes more.
I find you one of the most infuriating posters on this site.
9/10 of your posts are complete IEA-fantasy-deregulate-the-fuck-out-of-everything bullshit
And then 1/10 times, you manage to completely nail it.
This is one of those posts.
It's so bloody obvious - and so easy to implement.
If you were standing as my elected representative with that as your signature policy, I'd find it genuinely hard not to vote for you.
Although you'd have to tax gifts as well to make it consistent.
Lucy Kellaway did an excellent piece on this in the FT about a decade ago: inheritance and gifts are unearned income, and it is unconscionable that they taxed at, essentially, zero. While work - something that actually generates wealth - is heavily taxed.
Absolutely!
Shouldn't the aim be to tax both sources of income as little as possible?
Of course it should be, yes.
But they should both be taxed the same. Instead we overtax income and undertax unearned incomes.
We should balance it out more evenly instead.
Yes - even if you increase taxes overall, as long as you cut NICs at the same time you can spin it as a cutting taxes for working people/work. Kind of the whole of point of Labour.
But strictly post-election as a defence line. If they say that now all the pensioners will lose it.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
If Penny accused me of what she accused Angie of then I would have needed a long while to calm down, but maybe that's just me.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
I have passionate arguments with friends - including about politics - which can get quite heated. We are still good friends. Its a sign of maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
So Mordaunt surprised on the downside? Is that the consensus?
She was largely invisible. But I felt sorry for her being stationed next to Angela, who dominated as you would expect.
Nigel and Angela streets ahead of the rest. The format favours the bolshy, the bullish and the insouciant: hence Nigel and Angela won easily.
The stage seemed too small for seven of them. In the early US primary debates with lots of candidates, they are always spaced quite far away from each other to give them some breathing room.
This bloke called Nathan Curtis was supposed to be standing for RefUK in East Grinstead & Uckfield, but for some reason he didn't turn up on the nominations statement.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
I'm now imagining someone in 2060 binging Mrs Brown's Boys.
All together now: "he's married to his daughter, you know"
(narrator: the actress who plays his daughter is his wife)
So they’re two cheeks of the same arse, performatively disagreeing in public while being friends in practice?
No matter for whom you vote, the government always gets elected.
I just don't understand this interpretation of 'performatively disagreeing'.
Maybe they're friends, maybe they're just capable of being friendly, neither would mean they are incapable of deeply disagreeing with the other on politics.
Frankly I find it one step up from a conspiracy theory to regard two people acquainted with one other able to share a laugh as indicating their professional disagreements are an act.
People can be nice to political opponents. Why would we see a photo of them seemingly being just civil as sinister?
And if you think they acted, maybe the civility afterward was an act?
Mrs Thatcher and Barbara Castle were personally very friendly, despite being politically polar opposites.
I think we all do better when we remember our political opponents are humans too.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 10m Tory HQ desperately shovelling out the entire manifesto tonight to try and move the agenda on from D-Day is a further example of the chaos inside the campaign.
Yet no proposed IHT cut, despite Reform now raising the IHT threshold to £2 million?
A Stamp Duty cut for a few first time buyers isn't going to make any significant difference to Tory voteshare.
If that is all Sunak and Hunt have bring back Theresa May I say, at least she managed to write a manifesto that got the Tories over 40% and over 300 seats not heading for near wipeout!
There are a lot of people who are also Tory voters, me for example (ok I can’t vote) who have issues about inheritance tax being cut.
A lot of Tory voters, or target voters, have worked their bollocks off but also mixed with people who haven’t, their friends and associates have pocketed money without any effort. They see very very stupid friends walking out with millions without any skills or brains and there is a British, and Danish, thing where people aren’t happy with people flashing it without earning it.
I have many friends who’ve inherited serious millions, some have worked hard to prove themselves worthy, some have been determined to use the money as a platform to outperform, some have used the money to do good, some are lazy fuckers who have no clue - and every time the ones who are the latter are the ones who treat waiters terribly, are entitled, have no direction or fear of what comes next.
There has to be an inheritance tax so nobody can just not contribute. Some wise soul said, I want to leave them enough to do something but not enough to do nothing.
A lot of people don’t understand that without a successful society arounfpd them, a stable society, their properties would be worthless, their shares worthless etc.
It’s not money the inheritors strived for and it was on the back of millions of people who struggled but accepted an unequal society. There needs to be a balance otherwise the ones who have nothing stop tolerating the others.
I am not saying there should be not inheritance tax at all, though 55% say it should be abolished completely but certainly the threshold should be raised to £2million+ in my view so only the very richest pay that.
65% of voters and 77% of Tory voters back raising the threshold above £325k
A rate of 20 or 25% with a lower exempt amount would quite possibly bring in more than IHT currently does.
At £2m or so they're already evading or avoiding IHT so HYUFD's suggestion is about as useful as a chocolate welding torch.
Property tends to be the big crunch for going over thresholds and people get attached to family homes. So I tend to think that there should be a relatively high rate, low threshold but with a carve out for one property. Provided you live in it for five years. Sell it within that time and the taxman comes knocking.
No good; that merely pampers Tory voters in the Home Counties as opposed to Labour voters in Sedgefield and drives up the hotspot around London*. I'm coming round to the idea of abolishing IHT and imposing CGT on all inheritances - everyone has an allowance, and so on.
*Which is why HYUFD loves it, not entirely irrationally for him.
Abolish Inheritance Tax altogether and simply tax all inheritances as income.
Anyone working for a living shouldn't be taxed at a higher rate than someone inheriting one.
They aren't, the IHT rate of 40% over £325k inherited is the same as the higher rate of income tax and higher than the basic rate of income tax.
Only the additional rate of tax for those earning over £125k (ie effectively the top 1% of earners) is above that at 45%
I don't think you understand this very well.
If you inherit £30k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £30k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £100k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £100k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £325k, what tax do you pay? If you earn £325k, what tax do you pay?
If you inherit £1mn, what tax do you pay? If you earn £1mn, what tax do you pay?
Working for your income shouldn't be taxed more than getting your income through other means, yet we tax someone who earns £32.5k more than we tax someone who inherits £325k.
We need to tax income less, and unearned incomes more.
I find you one of the most infuriating posters on this site.
9/10 of your posts are complete IEA-fantasy-deregulate-the-fuck-out-of-everything bullshit
And then 1/10 times, you manage to completely nail it.
This is one of those posts.
It's so bloody obvious - and so easy to implement.
If you were standing as my elected representative with that as your signature policy, I'd find it genuinely hard not to vote for you.
Although you'd have to tax gifts as well to make it consistent.
Lucy Kellaway did an excellent piece on this in the FT about a decade ago: inheritance and gifts are unearned income, and it is unconscionable that they taxed at, essentially, zero. While work - something that actually generates wealth - is heavily taxed.
Absolutely!
Shouldn't the aim be to tax both sources of income as little as possible?
Absolutely not. Government destroys money with tax and creates it by providing services.
If it wasn’t destroyed we would be drowning in the stuff.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
I have passionate arguments with friends - including about politics - which can get quite heated. We are still good friends. Its a sign of maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
This is not true. The fact is that Millennials are unusually left wing, which leaves the impression that they exclude people on the right. But right wing millennials are far and few between.
This bloke called Nathan Curtis was supposed to be standing for RefUK in East Grinstead & Uckfield, but for some reason he didn't turn up on the nominations statement.
Lots of candidates in Licester South including rival Pro Gaza independents, Communist and OMRLP. Fox Jr is spoilt for choice.
Leicester East a difficult one, with Vaz, Webbe and a full slate of others but no pro Gaza independent so Labour hold IMO.
Actually I think there is a pro Gaza independent in Leicester East, and a renegade Hindu former Conservative councillor running too so the crazy politics there might have a further act.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
I have passionate arguments with friends - including about politics - which can get quite heated. We are still good friends. Its a sign of maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
This is not true. The fact is that Millennials are unusually left wing, which leaves the impression that they exclude people on the right. But right wing millennials are far and few between.
I think what @Leon is saying is that young women refuse to be friends with him because of his views.
FWIW I'm in my 20s, but love old british sitcoms ('Allo 'Allo, Porridge, Blackadder) and have never heard of To The Manor Born.
It's OK. Not top tier imo. Penelope Keith basically reprises her role as Nargot Leadbetter, reimagined as an aristocrat forced to move into the Dower House.
We used to have so many good sitcoms that even the second tier ones were worth watching and sometimes had more charm.
It's easy to forget the rubbish ones, and there were plenty of those.
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on on "I love the eighties" clip shows.
Yes, I'm at that age where I'm starting to get tired of trying out the 'new' shows, as it feels like the ones I come across are not as good as my old faves, but even with less content saturation back in the day most shows were crap and cancelled early, and even many of the ones that lasted a long time were bad, and the ones that are remembered as classics are rarities.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
I recently tried to watch Jon Pertwee in “Ambassadors of Death”.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
I have passionate arguments with friends - including about politics - which can get quite heated. We are still good friends. Its a sign of maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
This is not true. The fact is that Millennials are unusually left wing, which leaves the impression that they exclude people on the right. But right wing millennials are far and few between.
I think what @Leon is saying is that young women refuse to be friends with him because of his views.
These are the 12 seats I'm aware of so far where RefUK aren't standing.
Sheffield (5): Brightside & Hillsborough, Central, Hallam, Heeley, South East Earley & Woodley Cheltenham East Grinstead & Uckfield Stone, Great Wyrley & Penkridge Maidenhead Epping Forest Oxford East
Hexham, Mid Dorset and Poole North, West Dorset, Bristol East, brighton Kemptown, Donny North, Chorley of course, Leeds South. Standing i think in 611/631 GB
And Reform have apparently withdrawm support from 2 others Edit - Horsham and Leeds West/Pudsey
This is a curious selection. Must be some stories there. The most obvious immediate one - what's going on in Sheffield?
This bloke called Nathan Curtis was supposed to be standing for RefUK in East Grinstead & Uckfield, but for some reason he didn't turn up on the nominations statement.
Lots of candidates in Licester South including rival Pro Gaza independents, Communist and OMRLP. Fox Jr is spoilt for choice.
Leicester East a difficult one, with Vaz, Webbe and a full slate of others but no pro Gaza independent so Labour hold IMO.
Actually I think there is a pro Gaza independent in Leicester East, so the crazy politics there might have afurther act.
Leicester East will be a comfortable Labour hold. There are idiot egotists in many seats up and down the land. They will make little difference anywhere.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
I have passionate arguments with friends - including about politics - which can get quite heated. We are still good friends. Its a sign of maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
This is not true. The fact is that Millennials are unusually left wing, which leaves the impression that they exclude people on the right. But right wing millennials are far and few between.
I think what @Leon is saying is that young women refuse to be friends with him because of his views.
I'm not sure that's the reason.
What will frighten Leon is that I am significantly to the right of all my friends. I'm grateful that they indulged a passionate tirade against rent controls and continue to invite me along to brunches, yoga and cycling trips.
So going through the various candidates in my constituency I come across one standing for the Social Democratic Party. Are these related to the original SDP of the 80s?
Looking at their website this is a strange combinatin of views and policies. They say they are "a patriotic, economically left-leaning and culturally traditional party". Policies include:
Ending mass immigration by "promoting a generation long ‘mass immigration pause’ in the interests of integration and social cohesion" and "withdrawing from the 1951 UN refugee convention, the ECHR and all other international instruments which deny UK border sovereignty".
Renationalising railways, power supply and transmission and other utilituies
Funding the Construction of 100,000 social homes per year.
Re-establishing Grammar schools across the country
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
I have passionate arguments with friends - including about politics - which can get quite heated. We are still good friends. Its a sign of maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
This is not true. The fact is that Millennials are unusually left wing, which leaves the impression that they exclude people on the right. But right wing millennials are far and few between.
I think what @Leon is saying is that young women refuse to be friends with him because of his views.
lol. As you well know that’s not true. Indeed the opposite
Corbynite young women, it turns out, have a serious kink for much older, slightly dominant right wing men
So they’re two cheeks of the same arse, performatively disagreeing in public while being friends in practice?
No matter for whom you vote, the government always gets elected.
I just don't understand this interpretation of 'performatively disagreeing'.
Maybe they're friends, maybe they're just capable of being friendly, neither would mean they are incapable of deeply disagreeing with the other on politics.
Frankly I find it one step up from a conspiracy theory to regard two people acquainted with one other able to share a laugh as indicating their professional disagreements are an act.
People can be nice to political opponents. Why would we see a photo of them seemingly being just civil as sinister?
And if you think they acted, maybe the civility afterward was an act?
Mrs Thatcher and Barbara Castle were personally very friendly, despite being politically polar opposites.
I think we all do better when we remember our political opponents are humans too.
One of Margaret Thatcher's closest friends was the late, great Frank Field.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
I have passionate arguments with friends - including about politics - which can get quite heated. We are still good friends. Its a sign of maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
This is not true. The fact is that Millennials are unusually left wing, which leaves the impression that they exclude people on the right. But right wing millennials are far and few between.
I think what @Leon is saying is that young women refuse to be friends with him because of his views.
lol. As you well know that’s not true. Indeed the opposite
So they’re two cheeks of the same arse, performatively disagreeing in public while being friends in practice?
No matter for whom you vote, the government always gets elected.
I just don't understand this interpretation of 'performatively disagreeing'.
Maybe they're friends, maybe they're just capable of being friendly, neither would mean they are incapable of deeply disagreeing with the other on politics.
Frankly I find it one step up from a conspiracy theory to regard two people acquainted with one other able to share a laugh as indicating their professional disagreements are an act.
People can be nice to political opponents. Why would we see a photo of them seemingly being just civil as sinister?
And if you think they acted, maybe the civility afterward was an act?
Mrs Thatcher and Barbara Castle were personally very friendly, despite being politically polar opposites.
I think we all do better when we remember our political opponents are humans too.
One of Margaret Thatcher's closest friends was the late, great Frank Field.
It was interesting to catch a glimpse of Rayner and Mordaunt having a friendly word afterwards. I know they are both there to do a job, but why the performative anger when they are in reality more friendly towards each other.
One, because a debate is in part a performance, and two, maybe they did get genuinely angry during a heated moment but are capable of letting go of it once the moment passes.
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
I have passionate arguments with friends - including about politics - which can get quite heated. We are still good friends. Its a sign of maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
This is not true. The fact is that Millennials are unusually left wing, which leaves the impression that they exclude people on the right. But right wing millennials are far and few between.
I think what @Leon is saying is that young women refuse to be friends with him because of his views.
lol. As you well know that’s not true. Indeed the opposite
Must suck being in the friendzone
I don't believe it's required, but it is always appreciated.
Liquid checks to be re-introduced at airports which had briefly got rid of them.
Talk about going backwards.
Any reason given? Someone got wind of something?
IIRC the pilot of dropping the checks involved new-tech scanners, so the assumption would be that the new scanners aren’t as good as the salesman said they were. Presumably spooks ‘mystery shop’ airports with genuine explosives (stored safely) from time to time.
There's an excellent video on YouTube about how the new scanners work, and how they attempt to identify liquids
The conclusion was that the 3D scanning was great for meaning you don't need to remove electronic, but that the methods used to identify liquids where not accurate enough yet. (They work by having XRays at two slightly different wavelengths, and then measure absorption rates of each of the two. By measuring the difference, you can be *reasonably* accurate, but it's far from foolproof currently.)
Far from foolproof indeed, with the likes of TSE conspiring to smuggle highly-suspect shoe care products across international borders.
Comments
Why should someone who earns £32.5k by going to work every day pay more in taxation than someone who inherits ten times that amount?
Changing the figures doesn't change the disparity. If you earn £500k you pay far more in tax than you do from inheriting it too.
https://www.politico.eu/article/dominic-cummings-steps-up-plan-to-replace-tories-with-new-party/
To The Manor Born was a slightly slow wistful comedy of characters rather than one liners, so doesn't get clipped for Z list celebrities to comment on for "I love the eighties" clip shows.
TTOI, Peep Show, Not Going Out (early seasons), Inbetweeners, IT Crowd, Outnumbered, G&S, The Office, Black Books, Bluestone 42, Extras, Fresh Meat, Alan Partridge, Friday Night Dinner all stand out as 'top' sitcoms in the late naughts when I was young.
Admittedly now there's a real paucity - Ghosts (would be mid tier at best for me), Derry Girls, Motherland, Extraordinary are the only ones that come to mind as being good.
Relative of mine tried watching a season of Bonanza recently which they loved as a kid - did not hold up, and that was a mega hit.
As an aside - Turkish people generally are astoundingly anti-migrant. I work at a professional service firm and for the first time in my (short) career had to step in on one of the trainees going on a properly anti-migrant rant in broken English (as he had just arrived and started learning the language 3 years ago).
In any event, people act like we have a noble tradition of morally pure PMs when actually many of the ones from years past who we now venerate as great make Boris look like a saint. Lloyd-George, who won us a war and invented the welfare state, sold peerages for example.
Now I can’t sleep and all I can hear is the muffled explosions from the port. And the odd car alarm. The city is almost entirely blacked out and the curfew is in place
Odesa right now must be one of the strangest places on the planet
What’s the actual point of the debate format, that’s so much better than interviews, or the question time format? Educate the electorate on issues and help them decide who to vote for? Did that actually happen? Why not just election question times extended to 90 minutes.
Farage may have sucked even more voters from Conservatives based on his assured performance, but also it’s his 110% confident black and white position on issues and policy, which no one else on the panel or in UK politics at all shares, except perhaps Penny shares some of it with him. Knife crime? Stop and search. Net zero, there’s a cost to our bills and economy for not even reducing carbon, just exporting it. NHS? failed model, too expensive, not delivering, copy the superior French one. Etc etc. in between sharing each answer with you, you can imagine him ordering another pint of speckled hen and a packet of crisps.
When Prof Curtice kept saying the very last thing the Conservatives need is Farage to return to the Front Line, i really didn’t get it at all, but I’m beginning to understand it now. And with this last paragraph i am very much on topic.
Whereas I've watched Porridge multiple times this year alone, and it came out more than a decade before I was born. I'm sure there were repeats, but in the 90s it still wasn't easy to get hold of older stuff compared to now, so I don't recall how much I could have seen it growing up.
And as a child of the 90s I'm not looking forward the imminent nostalgia wave for the decade. It's already hit in video games, with some success in fairness.
Absolute shite.
(My office at the time was the old Bass brewmaster's house... you can't really escape the beer in Burton.)
At the WI BBQ in the evening several older folk still very angry that they stuck to the Covid rules and couldn't see dying relatives while Number 10 partied. It is still a live issue.
https://www.reformparty.uk/east-grinstead-and-uckfield
https://www.midsussex.gov.uk/media/uxintccw/east-grinstead-and-uckfield-sopn-nop.pdf
Rayner - 19%
None of the above - 14%
Denyer - 11%
Flynn - 10%
Mordaunt - 7%
Cooper - 5%
ap Iowerth - 2%
https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1799203206553080254
Reform's website is curiously out-of-date. No mention that Farage is now the leader. No recent news.
Sheffield (5): Brightside & Hillsborough, Central, Hallam, Heeley, South East
Earley & Woodley
Cheltenham
East Grinstead & Uckfield
Stone, Great Wyrley & Penkridge
Maidenhead
Epping Forest
Oxford East
It’s hard to quantify the danger. It’s probably no worse than staying in a dodgy Latin American city
However it FEELS worse because in the back of your mind is the thought: someone is shooting missiles at me, any minute now: wham. I won’t have any warning
The fact a chunk of smoking drone/missile fell on my road 2 days ago adds to the disquiet
But then in the day I wander around, my knapping done, and I drink good coffee in beautiful green Italianate squares
Maybe it is inspiring me, deep in my subconscious. I just don’t know yet
I had the urge to write a poem yesterday
Thinking of my Dad in Odessa
I rarely get the urge to write poems. Didn’t actually write one. But he loved Pushkin and Pushkin lived here
https://vote-2012.proboards.com/board/226/general-election
https://x.com/elenicourea/status/1799170394848633067?t=GYU6Zu0tB0K4QaU6HWkylQ&s=19
More heat than light? Without a doubt. But she’s a great TV star that rallies Labour morale whenever she shows up.
Class act.
No matter for whom you vote, the government always gets elected.
Edit - Horsham and Leeds West/Pudsey
But they should both be taxed the same. Instead we overtax income and undertax unearned incomes.
We should balance it out more evenly instead.
But now you see it everywhere and people use it innocently, unaware of the original obscene context. Eg name for a holiday home!
https://linskeldfield.co.uk/otters-pocket-holiday-cottage-linskeldfield-farm-holiday-cottages-glamping-pods-campsite/
Maybe they're friends, maybe they're just capable of being friendly, neither would mean they are incapable of deeply disagreeing with the other on politics.
Frankly I find it one step up from a conspiracy theory to regard two people acquainted with one other able to share a laugh as indicating their professional disagreements are an act.
People can be nice to political opponents. Why would we see a photo of them seemingly being just civil as sinister?
And if you think they acted, maybe the civility afterward was an act?
But don't forget that he was losing very safe seats in by-elections at the end, and his habit of lying* had become an increasing liability.
* Or perhaps a more charitable term is that he would in any circumstances say whatever would cause him the least pain at that particular moment... Irrespective of whether or not it was actually true.
I was running out of ways to say “she’s really sexy” or “she’s got great tits” or “she looks like a goer”or “she’d be great fun in bed” but then in a DIVINE flash of inspiration I came up with “she’s as wet as as an otter’s pocket”
I was particularly pleased with it, because, of course, an otter would use his pocket for storing fish
SDP will get about 50,000 votes
Politicians are people, not automatons, they may train themselves and have strategies to employ but they won't be able to control themselves 100%. Has anyone here never gotten mad at a friend or loved one and quickly dialed it back once it was released?
And as i asked Sandpit, if it's thought they were basically acting, why assume the angry part was false rather than the friendly bit being false? The debate was over but a fake smile and friendliness is impossible?
Simplest explanation? They don't agree on many things but are not weirdos.
Remember that it is the estate that is taxed, not the recipient.
But if we pretend that isn't the case, all you have to do is ensure you are the beneficiary of lots of wills of moderately well of people.
Ten people who die with £250k estates, and leave them all to you, results in £2.5m of tax free gains. It remains utterly insane to me that it is the estate that is taxed, and not the recipient.
Nigel and Angela streets ahead of the rest. The format favours the bolshy, the bullish and the insouciant: hence Nigel and Angela won easily.
But strictly post-election as a defence line. If they say that now all the pensioners will lose it.
maturity, not hypocrisy. Friends are incredibly valuable and the best kind last for life; politics comes and goes
The fact Millennials refuse to be friends with anyone they disagree with is a bleak signal of their stupidity, not their noble purity
https://whocanivotefor.co.uk/elections/parl.2024-07-04/uk-parliamentary-general-election/
Lots of candidates in Licester South including rival Pro Gaza independents, Communist and OMRLP. Fox Jr is spoilt for choice.
Leicester East a difficult one, with Vaz, Webbe and a full slate of others but no pro Gaza independent so Labour hold IMO.
(narrator: the actress who plays his daughter is his wife)
I think we all do better when we remember our political opponents are humans too.
If it wasn’t destroyed we would be drowning in the stuff.
Lab 41%
Con 27%
LD 16%
Ref 9%
Grn 7%
But now there's no Reform candidate it may not be such a lost cause for the Tories.
https://www.economist.com/interactive/uk-general-election/forecast
Looking at their website this is a strange combinatin of views and policies. They say they are "a patriotic, economically left-leaning and culturally traditional party". Policies include:
Ending mass immigration by "promoting a generation long ‘mass immigration pause’ in the interests of integration and social cohesion" and "withdrawing from the 1951 UN refugee convention, the ECHR and all other international instruments which deny UK border sovereignty".
Renationalising railways, power supply and transmission and other utilituies
Funding the Construction of 100,000 social homes per year.
Re-establishing Grammar schools across the country
Providing free school meals to all children.
It is a weird mix.
https://sdp.org.uk/
Corbynite young women, it turns out, have a serious kink for much older, slightly dominant right wing men
Freud would recognise the dynamic
What a heel!
https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/15767/retirements-2021?page=89
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MPs_who_stood_down_at_the_2019_United_Kingdom_general_election