Ronnie O'Sullivan has always been pretty open about his leftish leanings. He's been honest when asked but never tried to make it part of his image for personal gain. He's also been vocal in campaigning for better prize money for the lower paid snooker pros. So. It isn't really a celebrity endorsement. More a yeah, of course, that's Ronnie. He's doesn't shirk from his beliefs, but neither does he parade them front and centre. Most snooker fans probably wouldn't know. Good on him I say.
I'm surprised he's a leftie, given how many reds he pots.
I was musing on the frequent reports on here of Lib Dem posters appearing everywhere and being much more common than Labour or Conservative posters. My musing led me to the hypothesis that this is simply because of a general perception that Lib Dems are totally inoffensive and public display of support for them is unlikely to have any negative ramifications. Labour and Tory support, by contrast, excites more emotion and a higher risk of opprobrium, which could even manifest in graffiti or criminal damage. In short: I don't read much into the proliferation of Lib Dem posters.
It's simply a good tactic for raising the profile in target seats and establishing a meme that it is the LDs that are the challenger. We'll see how well it works in 3 weeks.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Used to think she’d be pretty good. Articulate and passionate. But increasingly of the view that outside of her culture war topics she isn’t really interested, and demonstrates a frightening lack of awareness. Do I think she could oppose a government pretty well, superficially? Yes. Do I think she can build an opposition movement to challenge for power? Very sceptical.
I see her a bit like Hague in that respect. She’d land blows, I can’t see it really doing her a tremendous amount of good though.
The Conservative candidate for Dudley North - the former MP Marco Longhi - has highlighted and underlined the name (ethnicity) of his Labour opponent "Sonia KUMAR" in a letter specifically targetting voters of British Pakistani/Kashmiri heritage in the constituency."
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
I thought you were going to say that Ed Vaizey had endorsed Starmer. And still that wouldn't have been that big of a shock news story.
Can someone explain the appeal of Badenoch? She is a wooden performer, and has been largely invisible as a minister. Is there anything to recommend her candidacy whatsoever? If so, what is it?
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
I am an atheist. I do not believe in God. I also strongly support the rights of religious people of all kinds to practice their religion and to not be discriminated against on the basis of their religion. The limitations exist where their beliefs or actions infringe on the rights of others.
I am gender critical. I do not believe in gender distinct from sex. I also strongly support the rights of people of all kinds to practice their own gender and to not be discriminated against on the basis of their gender identity. The limitations exist where their beliefs or actions infringe on the rights of others.
If you're interested in tickets for the final day at Lords, (possibly the GOAT's final appearance if the match is still going on by then), tickets are now available for £25.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Used to think she’d be pretty good. Articulate and passionate. But increasingly of the view that outside of her culture war topics she isn’t really interested, and demonstrates a frightening lack of awareness. Do I think she could oppose a government pretty well, superficially? Yes. Do I think she can build an opposition movement to challenge for power? Very sceptical.
I see her a bit like Hague in that respect. She’d land blows, I can’t see it really doing her a tremendous amount of good though.
What blow has she landed? She’s been almost entirely invisible as a minister, unless I have somehow missed her making an impact?
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Apologies, I see you have made the same point.
No need to apologise. It's a point which bears repeating often.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Used to think she’d be pretty good. Articulate and passionate. But increasingly of the view that outside of her culture war topics she isn’t really interested, and demonstrates a frightening lack of awareness. Do I think she could oppose a government pretty well, superficially? Yes. Do I think she can build an opposition movement to challenge for power? Very sceptical.
I see her a bit like Hague in that respect. She’d land blows, I can’t see it really doing her a tremendous amount of good though.
What blow has she landed? She’s been almost entirely invisible as a minister, unless I have somehow missed her making an impact?
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Apologies, I see you have made the same point.
No need to apologise. It's a point which bears repeating often.
Yes, it’s one of the great unexplained mysteries of modern politics, along with The 4 July Election Call and the D-Day Departure.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
The most effective Leader of the Opposition to a Starmer government on today's manifesto launch would arguably be Nigel Farage. However I suspect it will be neither him nor Badenoch but Steve Barclay. Badenoch doesn't have the MPs votes to get to the membership with whom she is most popular
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Apologies, I see you have made the same point.
No need to apologise. It's a point which bears repeating often.
Yes, it’s one of the great unexplained mysteries of modern politics, along with The 4 July Election Call and the D-Day Departure.
It's not that inexplicable- everyone else has obvious massive flaws. Tugendhat: too centrist, Mordaunt: too woke, Barclay: too boring, Braverman: too mad. You get the idea.
Meanwhile, Badenoch can tell an attractive (and only somewhat misleading) story about herself (there's more generic globetrotting global elite there than she tends to let on). She can talk for hours about the evils of woke or the opportunities of Brexit. In short, she makes core Conservatives feel good about themselves.
Is she up to the job of LotO? Probably not, but who is, and what else is she going to do? And, I'd it comes down to a battle of the B's, better her than Braverman.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Apologies, I see you have made the same point.
No need to apologise. It's a point which bears repeating often.
Yes, it’s one of the great unexplained mysteries of modern politics, along with The 4 July Election Call and the D-Day Departure.
It's not that inexplicable- everyone else has obvious massive flaws. Tugendhat: too centrist, Mordaunt: too woke, Barclay: too boring, Braverman: too mad. You get the idea.
Meanwhile, Badenoch can tell an attractive (and only somewhat misleading) story about herself (there's more generic globetrotting global elite there than she tends to let on). She can talk for hours about the evils of woke or the opportunities of Brexit. In short, she makes core Conservatives feel good about themselves.
Is she up to the job of LotO? Probably not, but who is, and what else is she going to do? And, I'd it comes down to a battle of the B's, better her than Braverman.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
The most effective Leader of the Opposition to a Starmer government on today's manifesto launch would arguably be Nigel Farage. However I suspect it will be neither him nor Badenoch but Steve Barclay. Badenoch doesn't have the MPs votes to get to the membership with whom she is most popular
We don't yet know the number or composition of Conservative MPs after the election. So we cannot tell in advance who will be LOTO. Although I do take your point.
Ronnie O'Sullivan has always been pretty open about his leftish leanings. He's been honest when asked but never tried to make it part of his image for personal gain. He's also been vocal in campaigning for better prize money for the lower paid snooker pros. So. It isn't really a celebrity endorsement. More a yeah, of course, that's Ronnie. He's doesn't shirk from his beliefs, but neither does he parade them front and centre. Most snooker fans probably wouldn't know. Good on him I say.
I'm surprised he's a leftie, given how many reds he pots.
I...what? I don't know how to process that. They would lose over 200 mps. The Prime Minister is hiding. I keep thinking I should say "Computer, end program". This is weird.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Apologies, I see you have made the same point.
No need to apologise. It's a point which bears repeating often.
Yes, it’s one of the great unexplained mysteries of modern politics, along with The 4 July Election Call and the D-Day Departure.
It's not that inexplicable- everyone else has obvious massive flaws. Tugendhat: too centrist, Mordaunt: too woke, Barclay: too boring, Braverman: too mad. You get the idea.
Meanwhile, Badenoch can tell an attractive (and only somewhat misleading) story about herself (there's more generic globetrotting global elite there than she tends to let on). She can talk for hours about the evils of woke or the opportunities of Brexit. In short, she makes core Conservatives feel good about themselves.
Is she up to the job of LotO? Probably not, but who is, and what else is she going to do? And, I'd it comes down to a battle of the B's, better her than Braverman.
My greatest fear is that Braverman or Patel get the LOTO gig and then Starmer crashes and burns. In 5 years time we are faced withe prospect of either of the Mad Haters (a typo but I like it) as PM.
I hate trans bs !! A small few are obsessed with it and it distracts from real iasues. Not clear there’s any real harm imo ! Let people do what they want
All parties will increase taxes AND will look for the least unpopular way to do it so no change to Iincme tax/ni/vat/inheritance tax. Which is why people talk about pension limits and reducing isa limits. Not sure it was intended that people put ALL their salary in pensions so feels like adding a limit is closing a loop hole. Not THAT uncommon so prob Raise more than you might think
🔴 EXCLUSIVE: Boris Johnson is being drafted in by the Tories to play a more active role in the election campaign as the party seeks to counter the threat from Reform
Ronnie O'Sullivan has always been pretty open about his leftish leanings. He's been honest when asked but never tried to make it part of his image for personal gain. He's also been vocal in campaigning for better prize money for the lower paid snooker pros. So. It isn't really a celebrity endorsement. More a yeah, of course, that's Ronnie. He's doesn't shirk from his beliefs, but neither does he parade them front and centre. Most snooker fans probably wouldn't know. Good on him I say.
I'm surprised he's a leftie, given how many reds he pots.
Was gonna take that. Not necessarily cause it's value (although I think it is) but cause it's marginal value AND a handy hedge in terms of my book and rather out of line with the market. Then I saw there was £2 available.... I'll leave it to some of the bigger hitters I think.
Labour has not explicitly ruled out a window tax. Or a beard tax.
You can only be sure with the Conservatives.
Kinda daft not to expect CGT to go up, that's basically signalled from the lack of denial. I'm in line for at least two CGT windfalls in the next few years. The first one I might get away with as it's hopefully happening before October (although I'm not holding my breath on that). The second one - far larger - no chance, still at least a couple of years away. And may not happen. Depends on us continuing to expand and do very well at whatever it is we do well, whoever us might be. Now atm it would be subject to entrepeneur's relief. But no guarantee that would exist with Labour either.
But kicking the tories in the face remains far more important to me. Even if @kyf_100 doesn't, others will think like me too. I'm nowhere near as bothered about balance sheet as I am about cashflow. And tories have had every fucking chance, EVERY FUCKING CHANCE to sort out the various cliff edges in our taxation system which as a young father are far more important to me every day. I trust Labour to either do that (unlikely) or provide a better system for my kid+upcoming kids (more likely). If it costs me a seven or (if very lucky) eight figure sum a couple of years down the line so be it. It's for the good of the country.
Couldn't agree more on the subject of giving the Conservatives a good kicking this time round, for so many reasons.
If Labour do decide to tax CGT as income, though, it will give me the difficult choice of going elsewhere to avoid a very large tax bill, or simply holding on to my current portfolio, which may be worth nothing in five years time, but that's the risk I'll have to take.
But the really annoying thing? The really, really annoying thing? I doubt I'm in the top 10% of PB'ers by wealth, and given the demographics on here, wouldn't even bet on being in the top 25%. However many on here will be boomers sitting on £1m+ in gains through their primary residences, which will attract a CGT bill of nothing, compared to my investment activity that actually generates economic activity. I'm prepared to pay the 20%, as I said the other day, but taxing my gains at 40-45% while boomer property market gains continue to attract a 0% rate really sticks in the craw.
Most CGT rates around the world tend to be between 15% and 25%, so as not to scare off investors and harm economic activity, so 40-45% would be one of the world's highest rates, and capital flight would be inevitable. 45% of nothing is still nothing.
The type of people a 'CGT as income tax' would really hurt are small business owners who have spent their entire lives building a business and are now looking to make a one time sale to fund their retirement. People like me will either defer the tax by not selling assets (and not investing), or by leaving. Small business owners will be hit. Why should entrepreneurship be penalised?
Canada is currently going through exactly the same process, and the incoming government is looking at reversing the decision post-haste.
I fully understand this. I suspect I'm roughly your age. But the real villains - as always! - are the boomers. Bastards the lot of them.
Don't forget small business owners will usually have entrepeneurs relief, at least under the current regime, if they've been sensible. Similarly people like me who although not the actual owner, as a founding employee are on an EMI scheme. Always subject to change by Labour of course.
If your assets are reasonably liquid you can always sell them and rebuy now right? (not financial advice)
There's a simple trick for solving those "to William and me" puzzles. Just leave out the first person and say the sentence without it. For most of us it will be easy to see that "It really has made the world of difference to I." is wrong.
(Dunno why those puzzles trap so many, but I admit they sometimes trapped me, until I discovered that simple trick.)
I...what? I don't know how to process that. They would lose over 200 mps. The Prime Minister is hiding. I keep thinking I should say "Computer, end program". This is weird.
Losing only 200 MPs feels like an optimistic outcome for them right now.
That may not pan out, but it should terrify them that it feels that way.
🔴 EXCLUSIVE: Boris Johnson is being drafted in by the Tories to play a more active role in the election campaign as the party seeks to counter the threat from Reform
Too late. If he had wanted to do that he could have been doing it already without being asked, and if they thought it would help they would have asked by now no matter the relationship between Rishi and Boris.
Boris wanted the party punished, I have no doubt, but I do think he did not want it to be at this level.
Important are the things parties do not say as well as what they do say. It can show what is too difficult to solve.
None of the main parties mentioned the shortfall in Send budgets directly in their manifestos.
The Conservatives said they would deliver on a promise of 15 more special schools, while Labour promised to increase early intervention and support in mainstream schools.
Local Government has little it can do directly to reduce SEND spending, yet many are now at major risk if they cannot figure out a way. The level of EHCPs is probably unsustainable.
The 19 seats the Tories would hold with the latest poll using Electoral Calculus.
Berwickshire Brecon Herefordshire N Droitwich Kingswinford / Staffs S Witney Melksham Dorset M Dorset N Dorset W New Forest W Romsey Hampshire E Arundel East Grinstead Weald of Kent Brentwood Maidenhead Beaconsfield
Important are the things parties do not say as well as what they do say. It can show what is too difficult to solve.
None of the main parties mentioned the shortfall in Send budgets directly in their manifestos.
The Conservatives said they would deliver on a promise of 15 more special schools, while Labour promised to increase early intervention and support in mainstream schools.
Local Government has little it can do directly to reduce SEND spending, yet many are now at major risk if they cannot figure out a way. The level of EHCPs is probably unsustainable.
So they are simultaneously inadequate for the need out there, and unsustainable at current levels ?
A classic hard problem which the current government (along with much else) deferred fir the next administration to deal with: ...Under a special agreement in place with all councils in England until 2026, that deficit is added to what is called a “negative reserve”. Cllr Sam Corcoran, the Labour leader of the council, describes this as hiding the problem, and says it’s part of a “broken system” that isn’t working for councils or families. “It means that in 2026 we have a huge problem," he says. "It's a bit like we've put the money on a credit card, and that credit card has to be paid back in two years' time.”..
Gillian Keegan has indeed done a "fucking good job".
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
Still struggling to discern what particular skill Kemi Badenoch possesses that would qualify her as LOTO. If the Tories are lucky enough to be in such an august role.
Apologies, I see you have made the same point.
No need to apologise. It's a point which bears repeating often.
Yes, it’s one of the great unexplained mysteries of modern politics, along with The 4 July Election Call and the D-Day Departure.
It's not that inexplicable- everyone else has obvious massive flaws. Tugendhat: too centrist, Mordaunt: too woke, Barclay: too boring, Braverman: too mad. You get the idea.
Meanwhile, Badenoch can tell an attractive (and only somewhat misleading) story about herself (there's more generic globetrotting global elite there than she tends to let on). She can talk for hours about the evils of woke or the opportunities of Brexit. In short, she makes core Conservatives feel good about themselves.
Is she up to the job of LotO? Probably not, but who is, and what else is she going to do? And, I'd it comes down to a battle of the B's, better her than Braverman.
My greatest fear is that Braverman or Patel get the LOTO gig and then Starmer crashes and burns. In 5 years time we are faced withe prospect of either of the Mad Haters (a typo but I like it) as PM.
A good, and disturbing, point. We will have Trumped ourselves.
Is it time for Lord Cameron take over from Rishi for the rest of the campaign?
Impractical, but it does beg the question as to why Cameron wasn't chosen for the multi-candidates' debates, rather than the spectacularly hopeless Penny Moredaunt.
He towers above the rest as a performer and safe pair of hands. But he's a Blair - top quality in every way except for the crucial errors: the failure to get a deal from the EU, the dire Remain campaign, the failure to plan for both possible results and, most of all, resigning at the very moment when prior preparation and continuity was essential.
One tax change that has not been ruled out by Labour is reform of pension tax relief.
The general suggestion is that tax relief on higher rate tax be ended and it limited to essentially a credit of 20% against tax liability or even 25% so that lower paid workers get a boost.
There is something quite seismic about this that buy to let landlords are well aware of. Such a change would end the tax exempt status of pensions.
Sure, a tax credit of 20% against tax on pension contributions would on the face of it mean anyone on basic rate tax paid no more, but it dosent.
Currently Pension contributions are not taxable income. So they don't count towards means testing on Universal Credit, they don't tip you over the higher rate tax threshold, they don't count towards the student loan repayment threshold, or parental means test, they don't count towards tipping you over the £100k childcare payment limit etc.
Change it to a 20% credit and every penny of those pension contributions becomes taxable income.
So, for example, someone earning £55k and paying £6k pension is now earning £56k taxable income. So they get a 20% credit on that £6k but as it is in the 40% band they still pay 20% tax on it (£1,200) and lose the marriage allowance.
It is worse than that though. That £5k is probably matched by an employer £5k contribution, if that is now taxable income with a 20% credit then he pays another £1,200 tax for the benefit in kind from his employer.
Plus he has two children. His income is now £62,000, so 10% of the families child benefit is clawed back.
It is a similar story for the family on £33,000 who pay £3,000 towards pension and get £3,000 matching payment from employer. Both are "refunded" by the new 20% tax credit but the taxable income has gone up from £30k to £36k.
So income £6k higher for Universal Credit means test. Universal credit taper rate is 55%. So £3,300 hit.
Gets worse though. He has a student loan. So 9% repayments on that £6,000 too. Another £540 gone.
So the end of salary sacrifice for pension contributions ?
People on the right have been talking about this for the past few weeks as if it's a certainty, but it's never been mentioned within Labour circles as far as I can see, certainly not since Starmer bedded in as leader.
Has anyone actually got any form of a source for this, or is it just doomcasting?
It's a bit like the CGT talk the other day, or CGT on main residence, part paranoia and part mischief.
Yes. For what it’s worth, I think Labour will raise taxes. Because they’ll have to. I suspect that will be CGT (not on first houses though) and I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see income tax go up for higher earners (exactly how high TBC).
But a lot of this stuff reads like pie in the sky doom-mongering and I see little evidence of it being attractive to an incoming government. Disincentivising pension saving and lumbering homeowners with a sales tax are going to be fundamentally unpopular to huge chunks of the electorate. I just can’t see it.
Taxing someone when they sell a house, and have a huge dollop of cash landing in their lap, makes more sense than taxing someone when they buy a house, and need to borrow money to pay the tax.
You need to have rollover relief - ie if you purchase a new primary residence that element of the proceeds is not taxed. Otherwise anyone selling a house will only be able to afford a less expensive one if the government is taking a slice of the proceeds. As a result no one will sell unless they have to.
I know today has been St Nigel's Day, but has anyone seen or heard from Rishi?
The Tories seem to have gone from President Hyperactive Rishi to hiding him away. No idea why.
I have an idea why.
And who knows, maybe a few days of calm will work for them. The next debate isn't until the 26th, and the football will provide plenty of competition for people's attention until then.
There's clearly been a decision made to avoid an all-out attack on Refuk. I suspect that's wise - they want the Faragasm to dissipate, and boredom is probably the best way to encourage that.
It’s more that it is very a populist to hit back with an emotive attack.
“Your numbers are stupid and don’t add up” “Yes but you [comment on the NHS, immigration, whatever]
The 19 seats the Tories would hold with the latest poll using Electoral Calculus.
Berwickshire Brecon Herefordshire N Droitwich Kingswinford / Staffs S Witney Melksham Dorset M Dorset N Dorset W New Forest W Romsey Hampshire E Arundel East Grinstead Weald of Kent Brentwood Maidenhead Beaconsfield
The 19 seats the Tories would hold with the latest poll using Electoral Calculus.
Berwickshire Brecon Herefordshire N Droitwich Kingswinford / Staffs S Witney Melksham Dorset M Dorset N Dorset W New Forest W Romsey Hampshire E Arundel East Grinstead Weald of Kent Brentwood Maidenhead Beaconsfield
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
Labour has not explicitly ruled out a window tax. Or a beard tax.
You can only be sure with the Conservatives.
The Conservatives will guarantee there will not be a Badly Fitting Blonde Wig Tax, as long a Michael Fabricant exists.
On topic(ish): it would be a Badly Fitting Blond Wig Tax unless Fabricant has transitioned?
Yebbut if you really, like, knew a totally, you know, trans person you would like totally know what a totally like bad joke that is, man. 0/10.
It’s not a joke. Simply proper grammar.
Not even that because blond/e governs the wig not the wearer of it
I argue it does not. He is blond. She is blonde. Michael has a right for his hairpiece to be considered his hair, I submit.
You do know the french for vagina is le vagin? I don't think linguistic gender works like you think
We don't have grammatical gender in English. We use blonde when referring to woman and blond when referring to men by convention, but it's not a fast rule. When used in the adjectival form, as it appears to be in this case, either is acceptable. I personally would have used "blond" here, but I don't think it's wrong either way.
But no grammatical rule is hard and fast then. So what's the point of it all!
A grammatical rule not being hard and fast does not mean that no grammatical rule is hard and fast.
That is the logical outworking of picking a grammatical convention and declaring it optional in good written English. Perhaps we should all just communicate in grunts.
Grunt...mumble....gnfff*...grunt....
(Which roughly translates to "Many of us already do Lucky guy, especially at six in the morning")
It is not possible for the integer representing my care on this subject to be negative. Therefore the zero integer entered represents the minimum care possible. There is no lesser amount of caring i can offer. Is rather pithy i think
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
What severe property crash?
Indeed. It's more that the surging house prices since then has seen property prices crowd out investment.
And frustratingly property prices have surged because investment in property is so restricted so pre-existing properties get the price growth rather than productively constructing new ones.
Ronnie O'Sullivan has always been pretty open about his leftish leanings. He's been honest when asked but never tried to make it part of his image for personal gain. He's also been vocal in campaigning for better prize money for the lower paid snooker pros. So. It isn't really a celebrity endorsement. More a yeah, of course, that's Ronnie. He's doesn't shirk from his beliefs, but neither does he parade them front and centre. Most snooker fans probably wouldn't know. Good on him I say.
I'm surprised he's a leftie, given how many reds he pots.
He'll be "snookering" you tonight
Give it a rest....
Yes please, before the site goes completely to pot.
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
What severe property crash?
In 1998, I bought a property for the price it was built for in 1988. Same number of pounds.
So in real terms, a fall. That “crash” was the last time prices went down noticeably in the U.K.
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
I think @Gardenwalker put it well when he said we seem to have an allergy to capital investment in this country.
It's like we look down our noses at it or something and see it as a waste of money.
Tory wet Ed Vaizey pretty much endorses Kemi Badenoch for next Tory leader on Newsnight, despite her being not exactly on the left of the party. Interesting.
The death wish goes on. Badenoch has no qualities that will appeal to the wider British electorate. It’s almost as if some Tories just think they have some diversity boxes to tick and it’ll all be fixed.
The Tories now resorting to some guff about a socialist state . The print media are overwhelmingly against Labour. The Times seems to print relentless anti Labour articles on its front page, it used to be a bit more fair with its coverage . It’s a wonder Labour are that far ahead given the right wing bias and constant daily attacks .
As a male, I have some sympathy for the proponents of trans rights, but only some. I treat them as I would someone in the early stages of dementia. They keep saying the same silly thing over and over again. But you can't blame them - they can't help it.
Any blame should be assigned to politicians and anyone in power who pretends to believe them for political advantage. As a scientist, they can be amusing, even though I try not to laugh. As a male, it doesn't affect me much. If they want to go around saying unscientific garbage, I can ignore them. Surely, no one takes it seriously?
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
I think @Gardenwalker put it well when he said we seem to have an allergy to capital investment in this country.
It's like we look down our noses at it or something and see it as a waste of money.
It's why the HS2 decision was such a terrible one. We need public investment to attract private sector investment and to create productive jobs. But this also means that we have yet more pressure to reduce current expenditure to create room for it. When you are already borrowing almost £100bn a year to meet current expenditure it is inevitable that capital investment is cut.
Labour has not explicitly ruled out a window tax. Or a beard tax.
You can only be sure with the Conservatives.
The Conservatives will guarantee there will not be a Badly Fitting Blonde Wig Tax, as long a Michael Fabricant exists.
On topic(ish): it would be a Badly Fitting Blond Wig Tax unless Fabricant has transitioned?
Yebbut if you really, like, knew a totally, you know, trans person you would like totally know what a totally like bad joke that is, man. 0/10.
It’s not a joke. Simply proper grammar.
Not even that because blond/e governs the wig not the wearer of it
I argue it does not. He is blond. She is blonde. Michael has a right for his hairpiece to be considered his hair, I submit.
You do know the french for vagina is le vagin? I don't think linguistic gender works like you think
We don't have grammatical gender in English. We use blonde when referring to woman and blond when referring to men by convention, but it's not a fast rule. When used in the adjectival form, as it appears to be in this case, either is acceptable. I personally would have used "blond" here, but I don't think it's wrong either way.
But no grammatical rule is hard and fast then. So what's the point of it all!
A grammatical rule not being hard and fast does not mean that no grammatical rule is hard and fast.
That is the logical outworking of picking a grammatical convention and declaring it optional in good written English. Perhaps we should all just communicate in grunts.
Grunt...mumble....gnfff*...grunt....
(Which roughly translates to "Many of us already do Lucky guy, especially at six in the morning")
*Optional in good written English
ETA: Gah I see others got there before me
I would recommend to @Luckyguy1983 the book “The Unfolding of Language” by Guy Deutscher, which discusses exactly this concern that we will all end up communicating in grunts.
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
What severe property crash?
The one of the early nineties. It was very real for a few years. Loads of people stuck in negative equity.
As a male, I have some sympathy for the proponents of trans rights, but only some. I treat them as I would someone in the early stages of dementia. They keep saying the same silly thing over and over again. But you can't blame them - they can't help it.
Any blame should be assigned to politicians and anyone in power who pretends to believe them for political advantage. As a scientist, they can be amusing, even though I try not to laugh. As a male, it doesn't affect me much. If they want to go around saying unscientific garbage, I can ignore them. Surely, no one takes it seriously?
That is quite a post. What proponents of other rights would you treat as someone in the early stages of dementia? Gay rights? Black rights? Religious rights?
It is astounding to me how few people understand the difference between sex, which is biological, and gender, which is cultural. These are well defined terms. Gender concerns a set of socially accepted behaviors and attitudes deemed appropriate or desirable for individuals. Sex is based on the biology of reproductive functions. It isn't difficult. Refusal to accept these conceptual distinctions is causing a lot of misunderstanding on both sides of the argument.
Wot?
Sex is having a dick or not. This "culturally defined" stuff is French hippie nonsense. "We used to think a bathroom was a room with a bath in it until Foucault: published his seminal paper pointing out that it was a social construct based around bourgeois expectations about the likely content of a bathroom."
Are you sure? I thought sex was about mutual genital stimulation, hopefully leading to climax for both parties.
(I realize that sex can involve - on rare occasions - more than two participants.)
(I realize that sex can involve - on rare occasions - more than two participants.)
Who told you that? Nick Palmer?
It may come as a surprise to some PBers that sex can involve two participants.
I disagree. What is the point of the threader? Is it supposed to be about abuse against politicians, in which case it should perhaps mention that this is incredibly more common (as I mentioned in my post below, Duffield isn't the only politician pulling out of hustings).
Or is it yet again another anti-trans diatribe, poorly hidden amongst concern for politicians? Or just one politician, in this case?
Labour has not explicitly ruled out a window tax. Or a beard tax.
You can only be sure with the Conservatives.
The Conservatives will guarantee there will not be a Badly Fitting Blonde Wig Tax, as long a Michael Fabricant exists.
On topic(ish): it would be a Badly Fitting Blond Wig Tax unless Fabricant has transitioned?
Yebbut if you really, like, knew a totally, you know, trans person you would like totally know what a totally like bad joke that is, man. 0/10.
It’s not a joke. Simply proper grammar.
Not even that because blond/e governs the wig not the wearer of it
I argue it does not. He is blond. She is blonde. Michael has a right for his hairpiece to be considered his hair, I submit.
You do know the french for vagina is le vagin? I don't think linguistic gender works like you think
We don't have grammatical gender in English. We use blonde when referring to woman and blond when referring to men by convention, but it's not a fast rule. When used in the adjectival form, as it appears to be in this case, either is acceptable. I personally would have used "blond" here, but I don't think it's wrong either way.
But no grammatical rule is hard and fast then. So what's the point of it all!
A grammatical rule not being hard and fast does not mean that no grammatical rule is hard and fast.
That is the logical outworking of picking a grammatical convention and declaring it optional in good written English. Perhaps we should all just communicate in grunts.
Grunt...mumble....gnfff*...grunt....
(Which roughly translates to "Many of us already do Lucky guy, especially at six in the morning")
*Optional in good written English
ETA: Gah I see others got there before me
I would recommend to @Luckyguy1983 the book “The Unfolding of Language” by Guy Deutscher, which discusses exactly this concern that we will all end up communicating in grunts.
But we won't (which from memory is Deutscher s point). Language develops by adopting errors. Presumably Luckyguy refers to a well know citrus fruit as an orange? Howling error, should be a norange (from Portuguese naranja). And so on.
As a male, I have some sympathy for the proponents of trans rights, but only some. I treat them as I would someone in the early stages of dementia. They keep saying the same silly thing over and over again. But you can't blame them - they can't help it.
Any blame should be assigned to politicians and anyone in power who pretends to believe them for political advantage. As a scientist, they can be amusing, even though I try not to laugh. As a male, it doesn't affect me much. If they want to go around saying unscientific garbage, I can ignore them. Surely, no one takes it seriously?
That is quite a post. What proponents of other rights would you treat as someone in the early stages of dementia? Gay rights? Black rights? Religious rights?
CD is completely right, too many halfwits talking crap about their rights. They should F*** right off all of them, including all your examples. Never happy always whinging that they should be special cases and always large chips on their shoulders.
As a male, I have some sympathy for the proponents of trans rights, but only some. I treat them as I would someone in the early stages of dementia. They keep saying the same silly thing over and over again. But you can't blame them - they can't help it.
Any blame should be assigned to politicians and anyone in power who pretends to believe them for political advantage. As a scientist, they can be amusing, even though I try not to laugh. As a male, it doesn't affect me much. If they want to go around saying unscientific garbage, I can ignore them. Surely, no one takes it seriously?
That is quite a post. What proponents of other rights would you treat as someone in the early stages of dementia? Gay rights? Black rights? Religious rights?
I disagree. What is the point of the threader? Is it supposed to be about abuse against politicians, in which case it should perhaps mention that this is incredibly more common (as I mentioned in my post below, Duffield isn't the only politician pulling out of hustings).
Or is it yet again another anti-trans diatribe, poorly hidden amongst concern for politicians? Or just one politician, in this case?
It is a plea for the need to have civilised and open discourse on any subject. It is a concern that keyboard warriors find it so easy to be so abusive in social media, a concern that I share. It is the fear that this abusive rudeness can spill into the real world with dangerous consequences.
Even on PB, which is largely an island of respectful if vigorous discourse (and puns, of course), we have been seeing an increase in the levels of personal abuse over recent months. It is the nature of the beast and the unfiltered way that people react to it. It is not good for us and @Cyclefree invites us all to agree on at least that. She is right.
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
I think @Gardenwalker put it well when he said we seem to have an allergy to capital investment in this country.
It's like we look down our noses at it or something and see it as a waste of money.
It's why the HS2 decision was such a terrible one. We need public investment to attract private sector investment and to create productive jobs. But this also means that we have yet more pressure to reduce current expenditure to create room for it. When you are already borrowing almost £100bn a year to meet current expenditure it is inevitable that capital investment is cut.
The Tories now resorting to some guff about a socialist state . The print media are overwhelmingly against Labour. The Times seems to print relentless anti Labour articles on its front page, it used to be a bit more fair with its coverage . It’s a wonder Labour are that far ahead given the right wing bias and constant daily attacks .
It's ok. When you're in power you'll be able to change the law to regulate the press so they all tow the line.
As a male, I have some sympathy for the proponents of trans rights, but only some. I treat them as I would someone in the early stages of dementia. They keep saying the same silly thing over and over again. But you can't blame them - they can't help it.
Any blame should be assigned to politicians and anyone in power who pretends to believe them for political advantage. As a scientist, they can be amusing, even though I try not to laugh. As a male, it doesn't affect me much. If they want to go around saying unscientific garbage, I can ignore them. Surely, no one takes it seriously?
That is quite a post. What proponents of other rights would you treat as someone in the early stages of dementia? Gay rights? Black rights? Religious rights?
CD is completely right, too many halfwits talking crap about their rights. They should F*** right off all of them, including all your examples. Never happy always whinging that they should be special cases and always large chips on their shoulders.
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
I think @Gardenwalker put it well when he said we seem to have an allergy to capital investment in this country.
It's like we look down our noses at it or something and see it as a waste of money.
It's why the HS2 decision was such a terrible one. We need public investment to attract private sector investment and to create productive jobs. But this also means that we have yet more pressure to reduce current expenditure to create room for it. When you are already borrowing almost £100bn a year to meet current expenditure it is inevitable that capital investment is cut.
But I am cautious as to whether Labour will be willing to make the hard decisions necessary to free the capacity to make that investment.
See also 40 new hospitals. We invest in the people but don’t give them the right facilities and wonder why they are unproductive.
But if you go back to the Gordon Brown era, when money was relatively plentiful on the back of the finance boom, schools and hospitals were all we did invest in (and even then we did it by PFI hiding the costs off book). We needed to invest in roads, rail, infrastructure, the National Grid, water resources, and all the constraints on new development that we face now.
All our politicians of all stripes say they want growth but they think that the wish is the deed. It requires tough decisions.
Morning all! Have banned the first (of many) cybernat off my Facebook page. Debate is one thing. Abuse is another. Seeya lad. I block and move on. You will always be that angry. Dear oh dear what must that be like...
The Tories now resorting to some guff about a socialist state . The print media are overwhelmingly against Labour. The Times seems to print relentless anti Labour articles on its front page, it used to be a bit more fair with its coverage . It’s a wonder Labour are that far ahead given the right wing bias and constant daily attacks .
Quite. As for the Telegraph, its bias is laughable, literally an insult to the intelligence of the reader. No wonder the readership of the newspapers has collapsed. I don't need some callow teenage scribbler or unthinking Tory loyalist (looking at you Sarah Vine) giving me a load of tripe over my morning Bran Flakes.
Ukraine will apparently receive this newly developed anti-drone turret, fitted to a Leopard 1 hull. If it's effective it could do a lot to help the success of an armoured assault.
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
I think @Gardenwalker put it well when he said we seem to have an allergy to capital investment in this country.
It's like we look down our noses at it or something and see it as a waste of money.
It's why the HS2 decision was such a terrible one. We need public investment to attract private sector investment and to create productive jobs. But this also means that we have yet more pressure to reduce current expenditure to create room for it. When you are already borrowing almost £100bn a year to meet current expenditure it is inevitable that capital investment is cut.
Not much difference by age group, though older people do slightly better. Tories do worst. LDs and Londoners do best. No group does well. Ten years of compulsory Latin from age 8 should sort it.
Just had a tip for the LDs in the new constituency of Hampshire North East. You can get 16/1 with B365, and that's way out of line. The source is genuine but I don't know the local area so am reluctant to put it up as a bet.
We must have moles in the region. Off to walk the dogs now. I expect to have answers when I return.
Labour has not explicitly ruled out a window tax. Or a beard tax.
You can only be sure with the Conservatives.
Kinda daft not to expect CGT to go up, that's basically signalled from the lack of denial. I'm in line for at least two CGT windfalls in the next few years. The first one I might get away with as it's hopefully happening before October (although I'm not holding my breath on that). The second one - far larger - no chance, still at least a couple of years away. And may not happen. Depends on us continuing to expand and do very well at whatever it is we do well, whoever us might be. Now atm it would be subject to entrepeneur's relief. But no guarantee that would exist with Labour either.
But kicking the tories in the face remains far more important to me. Even if @kyf_100 doesn't, others will think like me too. I'm nowhere near as bothered about balance sheet as I am about cashflow. And tories have had every fucking chance, EVERY FUCKING CHANCE to sort out the various cliff edges in our taxation system which as a young father are far more important to me every day. I trust Labour to either do that (unlikely) or provide a better system for my kid+upcoming kids (more likely). If it costs me a seven or (if very lucky) eight figure sum a couple of years down the line so be it. It's for the good of the country.
Couldn't agree more on the subject of giving the Conservatives a good kicking this time round, for so many reasons.
If Labour do decide to tax CGT as income, though, it will give me the difficult choice of going elsewhere to avoid a very large tax bill, or simply holding on to my current portfolio, which may be worth nothing in five years time, but that's the risk I'll have to take.
But the really annoying thing? The really, really annoying thing? I doubt I'm in the top 10% of PB'ers by wealth, and given the demographics on here, wouldn't even bet on being in the top 25%. However many on here will be boomers sitting on £1m+ in gains through their primary residences, which will attract a CGT bill of nothing, compared to my investment activity that actually generates economic activity. I'm prepared to pay the 20%, as I said the other day, but taxing my gains at 40-45% while boomer property market gains continue to attract a 0% rate really sticks in the craw.
Most CGT rates around the world tend to be between 15% and 25%, so as not to scare off investors and harm economic activity, so 40-45% would be one of the world's highest rates, and capital flight would be inevitable. 45% of nothing is still nothing.
The type of people a 'CGT as income tax' would really hurt are small business owners who have spent their entire lives building a business and are now looking to make a one time sale to fund their retirement. People like me will either defer the tax by not selling assets (and not investing), or by leaving. Small business owners will be hit. Why should entrepreneurship be penalised?
Canada is currently going through exactly the same process, and the incoming government is looking at reversing the decision post-haste.
You are getting very annoyed at something that is NOT an announced Labour policy. I don’t quite see the point of inventing a problem and then panicking about it.
You'll be pleased to know that the Olympic torch has just been delivered from Athens to Villefranche harbour in a fairly spectacular display and then to the Citadel and then onto Paris. This place hasn't had crowds like this since Michael Caine nearly drowned Steve Martin.........
Not much difference by age group, though older people do slightly better. Tories do worst. LDs and Londoners do best. No group does well. Ten years of compulsory Latin from age 8 should sort it.
The joke is that this all arises out of pedantic disdain for non standard English. Me and William are going to the football is the "error" which generations of school teachers have tried to correct, and their pupils have overcompensated.
Me is actually fine as a nominative. Who let the dogs out? Not me. Saying Not I marks you out as a dweeb.
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
I think @Gardenwalker put it well when he said we seem to have an allergy to capital investment in this country.
It's like we look down our noses at it or something and see it as a waste of money.
It's why the HS2 decision was such a terrible one. We need public investment to attract private sector investment and to create productive jobs. But this also means that we have yet more pressure to reduce current expenditure to create room for it. When you are already borrowing almost £100bn a year to meet current expenditure it is inevitable that capital investment is cut.
But I am cautious as to whether Labour will be willing to make the hard decisions necessary to free the capacity to make that investment.
See also 40 new hospitals. We invest in the people but don’t give them the right facilities and wonder why they are unproductive.
But if you go back to the Gordon Brown era, when money was relatively plentiful on the back of the finance boom, schools and hospitals were all we did invest in (and even then we did it by PFI hiding the costs off book). We needed to invest in roads, rail, infrastructure, the National Grid, water resources, and all the constraints on new development that we face now.
All our politicians of all stripes say they want growth but they think that the wish is the deed. It requires tough decisions.
True, though I'm not sure the voters get off the hook here. When chunky long-term investments are proposed, plenty of us are more than happy to quibble and carp, because we'd rather have tax cuts/more nurses/Bobbies on the Beat. Similarly, any new infrastructure mustn't inconvenience anyone at all, ever. In the medium term, countries tend to get the politics they deserve.
As for us, I'm not convinced that Labour are going to do the necessary in full. But after the grotesque chaos of the last few years, it seems like our best chance.
The Tories now resorting to some guff about a socialist state . The print media are overwhelmingly against Labour. The Times seems to print relentless anti Labour articles on its front page, it used to be a bit more fair with its coverage . It’s a wonder Labour are that far ahead given the right wing bias and constant daily attacks .
Quite. As for the Telegraph, its bias is laughable, literally an insult to the intelligence of the reader. No wonder the readership of the newspapers has collapsed. I don't need some callow teenage scribbler or unthinking Tory loyalist (looking at you Sarah Vine) giving me a load of tripe over my morning Bran Flakes.
The decline of the Telegraph really saddens me. I remember getting my Dad to switch (from the Express!) when I was a teenager and it was a genuinely informative, well written paper. Obviously of the right but dealing with the real world. And great cricket and racing coverage.
How far it has fallen, from the Tory paper of record to become a daily howl at the modern world, is a great shame. Some of the columnists are simply not existing in reality.
As a male, I have some sympathy for the proponents of trans rights, but only some. I treat them as I would someone in the early stages of dementia. They keep saying the same silly thing over and over again. But you can't blame them - they can't help it.
Any blame should be assigned to politicians and anyone in power who pretends to believe them for political advantage. As a scientist, they can be amusing, even though I try not to laugh. As a male, it doesn't affect me much. If they want to go around saying unscientific garbage, I can ignore them. Surely, no one takes it seriously?
That is quite a post. What proponents of other rights would you treat as someone in the early stages of dementia? Gay rights? Black rights? Religious rights?
CD is completely right, too many halfwits talking crap about their rights. They should F*** right off all of them, including all your examples. Never happy always whinging that they should be special cases and always large chips on their shoulders.
Unlike you malc, of course.
No chips here Nigel, I am happy if people get on with their lives and stop whining and whinging about imagined slights etc. I enjoy my life and don't expect anybody to change for me, give m especial rights, etc. Country is full of snowflakes nowadays , useless whinging softies who are unable to get on with their lives without whining that someon ehas something they want.
Comments
I see her a bit like Hague in that respect. She’d land blows, I can’t see it really doing her a tremendous amount of good though.
The dearMoon project has been cancelled. Tim Dodds is not going to the moon. The Angry Astronaut is...well, angry.
@sundersays
The Conservative candidate for Dudley North - the former MP Marco Longhi - has highlighted and underlined the name (ethnicity) of his Labour opponent "Sonia KUMAR" in a letter specifically targetting voters of British Pakistani/Kashmiri heritage in the constituency."
https://x.com/sundersays/status/1802686751657365553
I am an atheist. I do not believe in God. I also strongly support the rights of religious people of all kinds to practice their religion and to not be discriminated against on the basis of their religion. The limitations exist where their beliefs or actions infringe on the rights of others.
I am gender critical. I do not believe in gender distinct from sex. I also strongly support the rights of people of all kinds to practice their own gender and to not be discriminated against on the basis of their gender identity. The limitations exist where their beliefs or actions infringe on the rights of others.
If you're interested in tickets for the final day at Lords, (possibly the GOAT's final appearance if the match is still going on by then), tickets are now available for £25.
https://tickets.lords.org/en-GB/categories/WestIndies
It's a point which bears repeating often.
Meanwhile, Badenoch can tell an attractive (and only somewhat misleading) story about herself (there's more generic globetrotting global elite there than she tends to let on). She can talk for hours about the evils of woke or the opportunities of Brexit. In short, she makes core Conservatives feel good about themselves.
Is she up to the job of LotO? Probably not, but who is, and what else is she going to do? And, I'd it comes down to a battle of the B's, better her than Braverman.
One from Wes
Two from pro-Gaza indy
One from Tories
Astonishing territory we are now in.
All parties will increase taxes AND will look for the least unpopular way to do it so no change to Iincme tax/ni/vat/inheritance tax. Which is why people talk about pension limits and reducing isa limits. Not sure it was intended that people put ALL their salary in pensions so feels like adding a limit is closing a loop hole. Not THAT uncommon so prob
Raise more than you might think
https://x.com/Telegraph/status/1802808774572363861
"The Telegraph
@Telegraph
🔴 EXCLUSIVE: Boris Johnson is being drafted in by the Tories to play a more active role in the election campaign as the party seeks to counter the threat from Reform
Read this front page story here👇
https://telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/17/tories-turn-to-boris-johnson-counter-reform-election-threat/"
https://x.com/yougov/status/1802743296277569818
Don't forget small business owners will usually have entrepeneurs relief, at least under the current regime, if they've been sensible. Similarly people like me who although not the actual owner, as a founding employee are on an EMI scheme. Always subject to change by Labour of course.
If your assets are reasonably liquid you can always sell them and rebuy now right? (not financial advice)
Jordan Bardella is poised, social-media savvy and enigmatic"
https://www.economist.com/europe/2024/06/17/a-hard-right-28-year-old-could-soon-be-frances-pm
(Dunno why those puzzles trap so many, but I admit they sometimes trapped me, until I discovered that simple trick.)
That may not pan out, but it should terrify them that it feels that way.
Boris wanted the party punished, I have no doubt, but I do think he did not want it to be at this level.
None of the main parties mentioned the shortfall in Send budgets directly in their manifestos.
The Conservatives said they would deliver on a promise of 15 more special schools, while Labour promised to increase early intervention and support in mainstream schools.
The Lib Dems, Greens and Reform UK did not mention Send at all.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ceqq46x068xo
Local Government has little it can do directly to reduce SEND spending, yet many are now at major risk if they cannot figure out a way. The level of EHCPs is probably unsustainable.
A classic hard problem which the current government (along with much else) deferred fir the next administration to deal with:
...Under a special agreement in place with all councils in England until 2026, that deficit is added to what is called a “negative reserve”.
Cllr Sam Corcoran, the Labour leader of the council, describes this as hiding the problem, and says it’s part of a “broken system” that isn’t working for councils or families.
“It means that in 2026 we have a huge problem," he says. "It's a bit like we've put the money on a credit card, and that credit card has to be paid back in two years' time.”..
Gillian Keegan has indeed done a "fucking good job".
“Your numbers are stupid and don’t add up”
“Yes but you [comment on the NHS, immigration, whatever]
- it has made the world of difference to [] I
- It has made the world of difference to [] me
The second is clearly correct
Will the blues finally gub a + score in a poll today??
Investment in UK has trailed other G7 countries since mid-1990s, IPPR says
Institute for Public Policy Research urges Labour and Conservatives to reverse planned cuts
https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/jun/18/investment-in-uk-has-trailed-other-g7-countries-since-mid-1990s-ippr-says
Investment in the UK has trailed other G7 countries including the US and Germany since the mid-1990s, according to a report that urges Labour and the Conservatives to reverse planned cuts to investment or risk long-term damage to economic growth.
The Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) thinktank found the UK was bottom of the G7 league for investment in 24 out of the last 30 years, using figures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)...
...The figures show the turning point was the period after the early 1990s recession, which was followed by a severe property crash and Black Wednesday, when Britain was forced to hurriedly exit from the EU’s exchange rate mechanism. Ever since, growth in private sector investment has tracked below all the G7 countries except in three of the 24 years...
(Which roughly translates to "Many of us already do Lucky guy, especially at six in the morning")
*Optional in good written English
ETA: Gah I see others got there before me
Is rather pithy i think
And frustratingly property prices have surged because investment in property is so restricted so pre-existing properties get the price growth rather than productively constructing new ones.
So in real terms, a fall. That “crash” was the last time prices went down noticeably in the U.K.
It's like we look down our noses at it or something and see it as a waste of money.
As a male, I have some sympathy for the proponents of trans rights, but only some. I treat them as I would someone in the early stages of dementia. They keep saying the same silly thing over and over again. But you can't blame them - they can't help it.
Any blame should be assigned to politicians and anyone in power who pretends to believe them for political advantage. As a scientist, they can be amusing, even though I try not to laugh. As a male, it doesn't affect me much. If they want to go around saying unscientific garbage, I can ignore them. Surely, no one takes it seriously?
I think Reeves gets the importance of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjXlqAKCei0
But I am cautious as to whether Labour will be willing to make the hard decisions necessary to free the capacity to make that investment.
Or is it yet again another anti-trans diatribe, poorly hidden amongst concern for politicians? Or just one politician, in this case?
"I feel like I'm a woman, therefore I am a woman." Hmm ... I've referreed scientific papers but that one lacks the credibility test.
Even on PB, which is largely an island of respectful if vigorous discourse (and puns, of course), we have been seeing an increase in the levels of personal abuse over recent months. It is the nature of the beast and the unfiltered way that people react to it. It is not good for us and @Cyclefree invites us all to agree on at least that. She is right.
Not long now.
My reaction to someone with dementia is sadness. It's a horrible disease and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
All our politicians of all stripes say they want growth but they think that the wish is the deed. It requires tough decisions.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyranger_30
They'd see it as wasted money that could be spent on their pension, tax cuts or the NHS etc.
To overcome that, politicians need to lead and make brave arguments, as you say.
Just had a tip for the LDs in the new constituency of Hampshire North East. You can get 16/1 with B365, and that's way out of line. The source is genuine but I don't know the local area so am reluctant to put it up as a bet.
We must have moles in the region. Off to walk the dogs now. I expect to have answers when I return.
NEW THREAD
You'll be pleased to know that the Olympic torch has just been delivered from Athens to Villefranche harbour in a fairly spectacular display and then to the Citadel and then onto Paris. This place hasn't had crowds like this since Michael Caine nearly drowned Steve Martin.........
Me is actually fine as a nominative. Who let the dogs out? Not me. Saying Not I marks you out as a dweeb.
As for us, I'm not convinced that Labour are going to do the necessary in full. But after the grotesque chaos of the last few years, it seems like our best chance.
How far it has fallen, from the Tory paper of record to become a daily howl at the modern world, is a great shame. Some of the columnists are simply not existing in reality.
Country is full of snowflakes nowadays , useless whinging softies who are unable to get on with their lives without whining that someon ehas something they want.